Confirmation of MP Issues still Outstanding

[LeBlaque]

A friend and I have both purchased the FoF and want to begin a multiplayer game now that we've learned most of the game mechanics using singleplayer. As I've been reading the forums, I believe there remains some outstanding issues relative to MP. I'd like to confirm my understanding relative to this beta patch:

1) Internet TCP/IP functions well with a few noted exceptions related to some LANs dropping packets that has yet to be duplicated.

2) Detailed battles cannot be saved in multiplayer using TCP/IP and as a consequence a "crash/disconnect" will be real aggravating. Further, the detailed battle must be completely played out or auto-resolved before the two players can save the game. I very much hope this save feature will be addressed in a future patch.

3) Currently detailed battles CAN be saved in an e-mail game; however, there is presently an e-mail bug related to how files are synchronized (or some such...) and consequently e-mail does not function properly in the present beta patch.

As a result of all this, it appears the best way to play multiplayer with the current beta patch is TCP/IP with Quick Battles only, is that the consensus?

Thanks for the feedback.

Regards,

LeBlaque

[Erik Rutins]

LeBlaque,

PBEM does not support detailed battles, I shudder to think what that would actually involve in terms of file exchanges alone. All PBEM games are quick battle only, but the new update adds a PBEM replay. I'm running a test PBEM right now and it's quite entertaining, despite the lack of detailed battles. The one synchronization bug in the PBEM system is now fixed in the current internal update, so when this public beta is updated and goes official, PBEM should have no remaining issues.

TCP/IP play does indeed seem to have an extreme sensitivity to packet loss. There was also a separate crash issue related to detailed battles and memory clearing that was fixed in this update. However, from the reports I've seen any packet loss still throws it out of whack. This means that via internet can be quite dicey. My LAN and the Development LAN seem to run it without packet loss and thus have no problems, but others have reported problems on their LANs which keep tracing back to packet loss issues. It uses an older version of Microsoft's DirectPlay to handle that, so the issue of not managing packet loss well is not actually in our code, but in the MS libraries. Eric has spent a good deal of time on this and the conclusion is that the only solution to overcome the packet loss sensitivity may be to write our own packet management code.

As a result, I'd suggest trying TCP/IP with detailed battles (if you have the time) as it may be that your LAN handles it fine. However, if you run into problems, try going to quick battles. My main concern is that if there is any packet loss, it does seem to pretty much cause FOF to go out of whack, so saving every turn is a good idea.

[Gil R.]

#1 and #2 are true. (I think Eric has expressed an interest in finding a way to save detailed battles for networked games, but don't believe that's been done. He'll correct me if I'm wrong.)

As for #3, it appears to be fixed in our in-house beta version, which will be made the public beta in the coming days. Once we have the second round of public beta -- which, by the way, should be much shorter than this first one, since we think we've fixed just about everything that needed fixing -- it would be great to have people playing a few rounds of PBEM to make sure that bug is gone, since it's a serious one.

You can still play a PBEM game, but the Union player has to be on his honor always to play from the regular files or from the replay files, and not to choose the one that shows a better outcome for the last turn. So PBEM is 100% playable, it's just that one player gets a substantial advantage if he's dishonest.

[LeBlaque]

I've been playing PBEM succussfully thus far with the most recent beta patch and having fun. However, I have discovered, and am a bit disappointed to find, that although there is a replay feature for PBEM Quick Battles, the game does NOT allow the PBEM players to set-up the forces, request reinforcements, etc. This is all handled by the AI. As a consequence, the PBEM game is really just the Strategic games, with no tactical layer to speak of. You WATCH QB activity as if it were a movie, but I suspect you might as well just have every battle instantaneously resolved in PBEM....

I believe the above, for multiplayers purchasers such as myself (and I know we are in the minority), is an additional argument for the save-game feature for hex-wars in TCP/IP play. In essence, to have both offerings of FoF-- strategic and tactical gaming-- in multiplay you really must play TCP/IP or LAN games. Consequently, a save game feature for hex-war tactical battles is a must in my opinion. Further, it is a must to fix the dropped packets issue, as tcp/ip must work without a hitch. If you'd like, you might want to move this to the wish list as it is a very BIG wish of mine and my multi-player opponents (many of whom are silent on this forum).

Regards,

LeBlaque

[Gil R.]

Adding the ability to set up your own quick combat grid for PBEM is something that was considered, but we didn't do it because it's an ENORMOUS amount of work and, while it certainly would be a nice feature, it was felt that there were several other features that were more important to add. It's something we'd consider for an expansion pack, but even then it might not make it in because there's little evidence of strong demand, and because adding it would come at the expense of other possible features.