What is still missing in the game - future patches priorities

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
Then use VASSAL if all you want is basic pbem without all the other features that a computer adaptation version provides.

You are confusing Vassal with Cyberboard. Vassal allows for direct live TCP/IP play. Your opponent moves a counter ==> You see it moved on your end immediately.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
But if you want a computer game version, it is important to support the ongoing bug fixes and AI improvements first. There are some PBEM improvements planned and then TCP/IP will eventually get implemented. Be patient.

I was under the impression that TCP/IP would never be considered for this game. Do you think I am wrong ?

[pzgndr]

I was under the impression that TCP/IP would never be considered for this game. Do you think I am wrong ?

You ARE wrong. Game enhancement to add TCP/IP play is ID #91 on the current bug tracking list. Now, take a number and wait your turn.

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr

I was under the impression that TCP/IP would never be considered for this game. Do you think I am wrong ?

You ARE wrong. Game enhancement to add TCP/IP play is ID #91 on the current bug tracking list. Now, take a number and wait your turn.

I am glad I'm wrong.
[:D]

[Soapy Frog]

ORIGINAL: pzgndr
Play hotseat.

Oh god can you imagine playing EiANW hotseat when you could just break out the actual boardgame? Never in a thousand years.

[delatbabel]

If you have an idea for a future patch / enhancement, you can add that to the bug tracker.

The brand new bug tracker is here: http://eiamantis.babel.com.au/

If you have an interest in one of the existing bugs / enhancements then you can make comment on that in the bug tracker, and asked for the priority to be raised (be aware that v 1.03 is primarily aimed at improving the AI, things like TCP/IP play may be considered for future releases but probably won't be in 1.03). If enough people claim that a fix should be higher priority then we'll look at raising it.

[delatbabel]

ORIGINAL: Soapy Frog

Oh god can you imagine playing EiANW hotseat when you could just break out the actual boardgame? Never in a thousand years.

Yeah, the hotseat game looks after all of those boring numbers for you and allows you to concentrate on strategy.

It also allows you to have, say, 2-6 players and the rest controlled by the AI, and not have to worry about UMP rules.

[Ashtar]

Sorry, just found out a simple solution to implement naval evasion without altering the current DB structure.
Can we get it in 1.03 Marshall? I think it will greately improve balance in naval rules.

tm.asp?m=1786656

thanks

[NeverMan]

ORIGINAL: delatbabel

ORIGINAL: Soapy Frog

Oh god can you imagine playing EiANW hotseat when you could just break out the actual boardgame? Never in a thousand years.

Yeah, the hotseat game looks after all of those boring numbers for you and allows you to concentrate on strategy.

It also allows you to have, say, 2-6 players and the rest controlled by the AI, and not have to worry about UMP rules.

It also forces you to use crappy EiH rules and adds MANY bugs into your game that would otherwise NOT be there (EDIT: AND it takes away a TON of very critical EiA rules), sorry delatbabel, but I don't see how ANYONE can defend hotseat. Why was it implemented? I dont' know. Why was this time not better spent on fixing bugs or IP PLAY???? I don't know. For some reason or another, Matrix decided to make EiANW less robust than EiA, which is fairly counter-intuitive since EiANW is a COMPUTER game.

Matrix has made a TON of bad design decisions when it comes to this game, but I am hopeful that some will get fixed. Hotseat; however, can go the way of the dinosaurs.

[Soapy Frog]

ORIGINAL: delatbabel
Yeah, the hotseat game looks after all of those boring numbers for you and allows you to concentrate on strategy.

It also allows you to have, say, 2-6 players and the rest controlled by the AI, and not have to worry about UMP rules.

Good one. AI... wow... thanks I'd rather use UMP rules. Hey AI is tough to program no doubt about it, however its definitely not a selling point. As for all the rest the board game is way better if you have any number of players face to face because, as Neverman said, you aren't forced to use this whacky half-assed EiH conversion. Who thought using EiH as a basis was a good idea anyway? Almost NO EiA groups ever actually used it. Heck, I played an FTF game with the creator of EiH and even HE didn't want to use his own rules.

Seriously if you can get any number of players face to face, play the actual board game.

[NeverMan]

I agree with Soapy Frog, we never used EiH rules, as most of us thought they were just not that good. We did use some Naval Combat system that was printed in the General (maybe that was an EiH rule, not sure) but other than that, no.

I just can't wait until the editor comes out so we can all play EiA. That will be great.

The PC version has many bugs, which you won't get in a FTF game. Yes, it takes care of SOME of the computations, but nothing that a few minutes, a calculator and a pad and pencil couldn't handle. The PC version is also limited in the types/amount of rules you can play with. Yes, you can institute "house rules" but you can do that FTF anyways.

The ONLY advantage to using EiANW (and I really mean ONLY) is that you don't have to collect 7 players in 1 room at 1 time to play. That is what it has done. There have been other implementations (FREE) that have done the same thing with far less bugs. Albeit, they don't have an AI, but then again, this game doesn't really have one either, YET.

I have little doubt that if Matrix and Marshall stay committed to this game that it will be a LOT of fun; however, because of the bad design decisions they made in the beginning, this game will NEVER be EiA.

IP Play should have been implemented instead of Hotseat, I mean, come on man, it's 2008 already. I thought Hotseat went the way of the C64.

DOES ANYONE HERE USE HOTSEAT other than to play against yourself or 1 other buddy?

[baboune]

Who cares a bout the AI?  This game needs first a good UI and to implement the core EiA game.  The ONLY reason I still have it is because I am in Europe and my friends in North America, and I was stupid enough to think that MAYBE I could play EiA despite all the "features" in that thing.

Dump the AI (that is an almost impossible task) and concentrate on providing a good multiplayer game.

[delatbabel]

Hrm, I quite like having the AI there even if it is bone stupid because it teaches the basic game and UI concepts. For example, in my first game I had no idea how to assault a city (move the surrounding area troops into the city, duh) but watching the AI do it I figured that out pretty quickly.

I would always direct a new EiA player to play against the AI once or twice before taking on a PBEM game.

Let's face it, there aren't many AIs in computer wargames out there that are much good. Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, Medieval: Total War, Warcraft, and maybe a half dozen or so others are there on my shelf as games to play for a wintery day, and in each one of those I can usually smack the AI around quite mercilessly. The only thing that most of the AIs manage to do is get in your way occasionally. The only real challenge is to do the impossible -- e.g. conquering the world as Portugal or Novgorod.

In EiANW I'll be pretty happy if one day, playing as France, Austria and Prussia manage to cause me some stress, or playing as Prussia and rejecting alliances from Austria and Russia I get trounced by the French (which shouldn't be too hard to code).

[KenClark]

ORIGINAL: baboune

Who cares a bout the AI?  This game needs first a good UI and to implement the core EiA game.  The ONLY reason I still have it is because I am in Europe and my friends in North America, and I was stupid enough to think that MAYBE I could play EiA despite all the "features" in that thing.

Dump the AI (that is an almost impossible task) and concentrate on providing a good multiplayer game.

+1

[AresMars]

Ditto...

the AI should be for "training purposes" only.

Before I get blasted for this, I am aware that there are many people who bought this game with playing the AI in mind.

To them, I extend my most sincere apologies....

I am a PBEM advocate....people are better then computers....

[baboune]

Why not make this a poll? Then everyone can vote on what goes in next patch?

[NeverMan]

Although I like the idea of Matrix working solely on PBEM, it simply is not practical from an economic standpoint for Matrix AND it's unfair to those how have already purchased the game thinking they would get an AI.

The AI needs to be fixed, period. Matrix knows this and that's good for them.

[baboune]

lol
And I bought this game hoping I would be able to play EiA.

Now I get to play a different game AND I can not even see my country and forces on one screen or change the resolution or play in windowed mode or access important infos and the list goes on and on ...

Realistically, looking at the current EiANW, hopes are the AI will remain (horribly) bad  even when it is "fixed". And yes from an economic standpoint I dont even understand why they are still working on this game at all.  To fix this will take years.  Will it bring additional customers? I doubt it.  So how do they get money?

Well I guess I am just horribly disapointed.[:(]

[Ashtar]

Why not make this a poll? Then everyone can vote on what goes in next patch?

First fix the pp per loaned corps and the Naval rules (evasion, pursuit, 1/2 pp per fleet, correct combat in blockaded boxes).
Add Kingdom of Italy and Dardanelles control.
This is much needed to have a running balanced game and it is going to be much faster then writing good AI strategies.

When the core game rules works, fix the AI as better as you can (but it will never be good enough, you all realizes that?), check anti-cheating issues and/or security ones, improve the interface, clean the remaining rules and small bug glitches and think about TCP/IP, editors and whatever other bells and whistles you could like.

But please, start giving us a solid EIA gameplay!

[jnier]

As an alternative to AI, has anyone ever considered implementing the uncontrolled major power rules? That would eliminate the AI problem entirely, except for solo play.