PBEM-fans unite!

[Battlefront.com]

The extra swap in CMx1 was an unfortunate side effect of the method used to divide the game up into turns. CMx2 does not have this problem because the engine itself is inherently realtime. This means we can construct PBEM without the need for the extra swap.

Steve

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

The extra swap in CMx1 was an unfortunate side effect of the method used to divide the game up into turns. CMx2 does not have this problem because the engine itself is inherently realtime. This means we can construct PBEM without the need for the extra swap.

Joch was talking about one step further. Trusted mode which only requires half the mails even after eliminating the extra swap. Like TacOps has.

I think trusted mode only is probably a bad idea but the option might be nice.

[Sgt Joch]

regular PBEM goes like this, i.e.:

1. playback, send turn;

2. move, send turn;

3. playback & move, send turn.

PBEM trusted mode goes like this, i.e.:

1. playback + move + playback & move, send turn.

hence, 3 x times as fast.

Steve, are you saying the 3 steps would be cut down to two in CMx2 ?, i.e:

1. playback & move, send turn;

2. playback & move, send turn.

assuming PBEM is in, of course.

I also have a question about turn length which I understand it is now at 1 minute. With the new RT engine, will it be possible for players to set 2 or 3 minute turns? If the TacAI is much improved over CMx1, I could see players using longer turns to speed PBEM games along (assuming it's in, of course ).

[Battlefront.com]

1. playback & move, send turn;

2. playback & move, send turn.

Yes, this is the way we are planning on doing it. This method is not possible for CM because of WeGo:

playback + move + playback & move, send turn.

This reason for that is:

1. Player 1 moves. File *must* go to Player 2

2. Player 2 moves. Playback is now possible and Player 2 can issue Commands again before sending it to Player 1.

3. Player 1 sees Playback and then issues Commands. File *must* go to Player 2.

4. Player 2 sees Playback and then issues Commands. File *must* go to Player 1.

Steps 3 and 4 are repeated until the game is over.

There is no way possible to have a player see two Playbacks with only one file swap.

Turn length is currently set at 1 minute. We may make this adjustable, but we don't think it is wise. The TacAI is not capable of initiative, therefore it is highly unlikely that it will hold up well to longer turn times. It certainly would dramatically alter the game, that's for sure.

Steve

[Sergei]

That'd be fun - an hour long scenario that is divided in two 30 minute turns.

At night in dense fog.

Both sides having 2000 men armed with flamethrowers.

[C'Rogers]

We may make this adjustable, but we don't think it is wise.

I was looking forward to that. Not to the crazy extremes but thought it might be nice to play around in little increments with the turn timer. Hope it is reconsidered .

[aka_tom_w]

yes a 2 or 3 minute turn would be nice for variety

OR even just to try it to find out how much we REALLY don't like it.

I would like to cast me vote for a variable turn timer, nothing outragous but maybe 1 min increments up to 5 mins (and for sure 5 mins might be considered on the "outrageous" side, but some of us would like to try 2-3 min turns maybe)

thanks

-tom w

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Sergei:

That'd be fun - an hour long scenario that is divided in two 30 minute turns.

At night in dense fog.

Both sides having 2000 men armed with flamethrowers.

Almost as good as covering your monitor with a pillow case.

[Sgt Joch]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Turn length is currently set at 1 minute. We may make this adjustable, but we don't think it is wise.

I don't think it would be a bad idea to increase turn length. The TacAI has a pretty simple job to do, i.e.:

1. move forward/sit and wait until it spots an enemy;

2. shoot at it until it's dead.

The TacAI already has limited initiative, it will hunker down/ back up/ sneak away if confronted by a stronger force; it will move forward after killing an enemy, if given a hunt command. It's very limited, but enough for a 2-3 minute turn until the player can intervene.

A longer turn length would also limit the player's god-like command and control, which is a plus in my book.

So I am all in favour of adjustable turn length.

If nothing else, it will generate endless forum threads on "realistic/non-gamey turn lengths" and will create "Time Grogs", which should be good for a laugh.

[aka_tom_w]

"If nothing else, it will generate endless forum threads on "realistic/non-gamey turn lengths" and will create "Time Grogs", which should be good for a laugh. "

AND

Since it has already been pointed out the forum is ACTUALLY the game (and the release of the "actual software" will simply mean we will have more game action to play on the forum) then it stands to reason the forum and the game would be better off with:

"endless forum threads on "realistic/non-gamey turn lengths" and will create "Time Grogs", which should be good for a laugh."

-tom w

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

There is no way possible to have a player see two Playbacks with only one file swap.

Sure there is.

If you are willing to trust your opponent (because he can re-do the plot for turn N-1 after watching the movie for turn N).

In fact, it is what TacOps does, a very game you market.

[Other Means]

Originally posted by Redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

There is no way possible to have a player see two Playbacks with only one file swap.

Sure there is.

If you are willing to trust your opponent (because he can re-do the plot for turn N-1 after watching the movie for turn N).

In fact, it is what TacOps does, a very game you market. </font>

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

Sure there is.

No, there isn't

For a turn to be successfully compiled there needs to be input from BOTH players. Therefore there is no way that you can watch two resolutions with one file swap. You can plot orders twice, certainly, but you can not watch the results of the second one becuse the other person must have his input first.

The following is the most efficient way to swap files, but it involves "trust":

Player 1 - Deploys units, issues Commands. SWAP

Player 2 - Deploys units, issues Commands, Resolution Generated, sees Resolution. SWAP

Player 1 - Sees Resolution, issues Commands. SWAP

Player 2 - issues Commands, Resolution Generated, sees Resolution, issues Commands. SWAP

Player 1 - issues Commands, Resolution Generated, sees Resolution, issues Commands. SWAP

repeat until game is over

Trust is necessary because Resolution is generated and viewed by each player prior to sending it to the other. This means he can redo his Commands and watch the results until he is happy with the results THEN send the file to the other guy. Obviously this is not something that is good for general PBEM use, though as an optional way to play we have no problems with it.

The alternative is not quite as efficient, but it doesn't require trust. It is also better than CMx1:

Player 1 - Deploys units, issues Commands. SWAP

Player 2 - Deploys units, issues Commands. SWAP

Player 1 - Sees Resolution, issues Commands, Resolution Generated. SWAP

Player 2 - Sees Resolution, issues Commands, Resolution Generated. SWAP

Player 1 - Sees Resolution, issues Commands, Resolution Generated. SWAP

repeat until game is over

No trust required because the Resolution is generated on the other guy's system without the ability to view it until after a file swap. That means there is zero chance of cheating.

As for efficiency, in CMx1 3 swaps were required for 1 turn while trusted method does 1.5 turns for 2 swaps. This above method allows each player sees a Resolution and issues Commands each file swap, which means 1 turn is completed every 2 swaps. We are planning on going with this method since we only want to implement a single PBEM system at this time and "trusted" method is not acceptable as the only way of playing.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Other Means,

I'd have thought even the re-doing would be addressable with some sort of counter tagged onto the file whenever the "GO" button was pressed. No need not to keep state with the file.

Doesn't work because all you have to do is make a copy of the PBEM file before using it the first time. You play on copies until you are happy with the result and then you send that file to the other player.

The only way I can think of is to track the files loaded using the bit count and probably a few pieces of info in the file. This way when you load Turn 4 of "Desert for Dessert" CM notes the unique "fingerprint" of the file and will never allow a file matching that unique footprint to be loaded again after the GO! button is hit. This defeats the copy/reload cheat because CM will simply refuse to go through the Commands phase for that file more than once in a lifetime.

In theory the "fingerprint check" prevents cheating. There are ways to work around it, such as loading the PBEM file on one computer and then doing the turn for real on a 2nd computer. However, that is a really cumbersome and determined method of cheating that is not likely to be practical for most people, so the fingerprint check is pretty good. Not foolproof, but probably good enough for most people.

Steve

[Other Means]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Other Means,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I'd have thought even the re-doing would be addressable with some sort of counter tagged onto the file whenever the "GO" button was pressed. No need not to keep state with the file.

Doesn't work because all you have to do is make a copy of the PBEM file before using it the first time. You play on copies until you are happy with the result and then you send that file to the other player.

The only way I can think of is to track the files loaded using the bit count and probably a few pieces of info in the file. This way when you load Turn 4 of "Desert for Dessert" CM notes the unique "fingerprint" of the file and will never allow a file matching that unique footprint to be loaded again after the GO! button is hit. This defeats the copy/reload cheat because CM will simply refuse to go through the Commands phase for that file more than once in a lifetime.

In theory the "fingerprint check" prevents cheating. There are ways to work around it, such as loading the PBEM file on one computer and then doing the turn for real on a 2nd computer. However, that is a really cumbersome and determined method of cheating that is not likely to be practical for most people, so the fingerprint check is pretty good. Not foolproof, but probably good enough for most people.

Steve </font>

[Sergei]

Retina scan?

[Redwolf]

Ok, Steve, so it is 1.5 for the first exchanges with setup in it, fine. Afterwards it's 1.0, which is the 25+ other turns.

What the heck are we arguing here? The very game you market (TacOps) does 1.0 after setup.

On the other hand, you are right that you cannot make that mode "safe" against cheating, not even basically. A PC user would have to be very dumb not to work around the suggested solutions.

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

What the heck are we arguing here?

I said that Sgt.Joch was wrong in it being possible that you can have two Resolutions per swap. That is only possible for traditioanal IGOUGO. You said you disagreed and that it was possible. I guess you didn't know what you were saying

On the other hand, you are right that you cannot make that mode "safe" against cheating, not even basically. A PC user would have to be very dumb not to work around the suggested solutions.

With some effort we could make it quite a bit more difficult to cheat, but it wouldn't be foolproof. Hence why we aren't going that direction.

As for setup specifically... I don't see what the big deal is to get 1.5 turns in just for setup. Seems like a waste of programming time to me.

Steve

[Melnibone]

I use PBEM Helper trusted mode quite a bit and it certainly speeds games up. One downside though is knowing I'm going to need at least a 30 minute slot to run the turn - with normal CM PBEM files I can often fit turns in a lot easier.

[Other Means]

I exclusively play people I trust (plus Elmar) so I'd love to have a trusted option, if it's possible within timeframe.

[Dschugaschwili]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

The only way I can think of is to track the files loaded using the bit count and probably a few pieces of info in the file. This way when you load Turn 4 of "Desert for Dessert" CM notes the unique "fingerprint" of the file and will never allow a file matching that unique footprint to be loaded again after the GO! button is hit. This defeats the copy/reload cheat because CM will simply refuse to go through the Commands phase for that file more than once in a lifetime.

This also means that a single crash at the wrong time can potentially ruin an entire PBEM game. And showing a turn from a previous match to a friend who has never heard of CM before to show him how the game works may not be possible anymore either.

Dschugaschwili

[Sgt Joch]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I said that Sgt.Joch was wrong in it being possible that you can have two Resolutions per swap.

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing. here is an actual example from an ongoing PBEM game. My opponent sends me a PBM file, he has already done the playback/move for turn 16:

-(I see the playback for turn 16, save)+(I do the move for turn 16, save)+(we skip over my opponent's playback for turn 17)+( I do the playback/move for turn 17, save)+ I send the PBM file back to my opponent.

So, in one sitting, I see two playbacks and do two moves.

Of course, you have to trust your opponent, but that is a small price to pay for being able to play games 3x as fast.

If we had the option to do two minute turns, that would be even better.

[Battlefront.com]

I doubt we'll have a Trusted Mode in CM:SF's first release, but I'm sure at some point we will put it in.

Dschugaschwili,

This also means that a single crash at the wrong time can potentially ruin an entire PBEM game.

Not so. The fingerprint would only be stored for that one particular file and only after the GO! button was pressed. No risk there. It also wouldn't prevent showing the resolution part of a turn, it just wouldn't let you back in to the turn's Orders Phase. It's a pretty slick system, but it is not foolproof since there are work arounds. What it does do is eliminate "casual cheating". Only a hardcore cheater would work around the system.

Sgt.Joch,

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing.

Correct You're talking about something that is physically impossible to do in a WeGo game, but is possible for IGOUGO like Steel Panthers. Let me illustrate, again, where the flaw is in your proposal:

(I see the playback for turn 16, save)+(I do the move for turn 16, save)

How can you see the resolution for Turn 16 if you haven't done the orders for Turn 16 yet? In an IGOUGO game this works fine because each resolution involves only one player's input, like Steel Panthers. WeGo requires two players' input before resolution, therefore you can never have two resolutions in one swap. It's physically impossible.

Steve

[J Ruddy]

The only other option that I can see is a turn server.

Not that you're going to waste time developing it, or anyone here would agree to it, but implementing a central server to handle both the routing and processing of turns would be the only really fool-proof system that I can think of. In the game you would provide an email address or other unique identifier for yourself, your opponent and for the scenario.

For example: You would use the game gui to set up a game to play on the server, identifying the game name: "Jim vs Grog - Kabul" and your handle (defaulted from the set up for the game). Maybe you could select your opponent from a list or something. You also need to Deploy your troops as well. At any time, your opponent would then open up his copy of the game, check for outstanding games to play, see your game, and accept it. He would deploy his troops and click 'Ready' or whatever.

The server would let both players know when they have an outstanding turn to play. The players would do their thing and the server would hold the data until both players are complete. Then the server could either process the data or pick a players machine to process it. The players would watch the game play out then play their next turn and so on...

No more email size headaches, no more file hacking, no more problems and yet still an asynchronous system for playing games one turn at a time.

[edit] This would also work for finding TCP/IP opponents, probably as an option when creating the server entry. Once the TCP/IP game commences the server is no longer involved.

[ November 09, 2006, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

WeGo requires two players' input before resolution, therefore you can never have two resolutions in one swap. It's physically impossible.

Steve

It works for some reason. I never got it, but it works.