Modem support?

[berto]

For the Campaign Series, many players do asynchronous PBEM.

However, does anybody use any of these real-time Multi-Player modes?

[*]Internet
[*]Modem
[*]Serial (Null Modem)

We have no intention to yank Internet mode.

But especially modem play:

[*]Does anybody still play the Campaign Series this way?
[*]Does anybody even have a functioning modem? In actual use?

Note: The question is not whether you have a telephone modem and use it to connect to the Internet. The question is rather: Do you hook up with another person to play the Campaign Series using a real-time, synchronous (telephone) modem connection?

Another (rhetorical) question:

[*]If the CS devs don't even have modems (I haven't owned or used a modem since the last century), how can we support and maintain this mode of game play?

Just looking to remove some possible outmoded cruft here.

[Warhorse]

I haven't tried it in years, I have a high speed cable modem, with wireless router for all the other machines and cells, but don't even remember how to do it! I think some still do, maybe it can be improved, I have no idea!!

[berto]

I'm not asking about high-speed, "broadband" cable modems. I'm asking about "old-fashioned", low-speed telephone modems. You know, the ones that were in fashion in the last century. [;)]

[Crossroads]

I haven't dialled up a manual modem connection since turn of the century. My 0.02 for dropping it from the game.

I would like an Easy-to-use On-line gaming option to remain available. I don't particularly care how that is to be implemented either, and less the players have to know about the technology the game uses the better. So what ever is the standard the modern tools allow two gamers to connect over the internet, that's the way to go then for 1.05 and MW right?

Once we have the 1.05 out one day, I would expect the vast majority to upgrade to it, and the two players playing PBEM or On-line games would be on a same version anyway. So if the on-line game set up is calling for a technology upgrade in general, go for it I would say. (Of course I don't know if that is the case or not, just saying if you see an opportunity to get rid of ancient code base just do it).

[LoneWulf63]

I am in agreement with Mike. If it is old code that is taking up space, get rid of it. Maybe work on playing the game with the newer cable modems at a later time. JMTCW. Chris.

[Arkady]

ORIGINAL: berto


For the Campaign Series, many players do asynchronous PBEM.

However, does anybody use any of these real-time Multi-Player modes?

[*]Internet
[*]Modem
[*]Serial (Null Modem)

We have no intention to yank Internet mode.

But especially modem play:

[*]Does anybody still play the Campaign Series this way?
[*]Does anybody even have a functioning modem? In actual use?

Note: The question is not whether you have a telephone modem and use it to connect to the Internet. The question is rather: Do you hook up with another person to play the Campaign Series using a real-time, synchronous (telephone) modem connection?

Another (rhetorical) question:

[*]If the CS devs don't even have modems (I haven't owned or used a modem since the last century), how can we support and maintain this mode of game play?

Just looking to remove some possible outmoded cruft here.

our group play real time multiplayer game (usually 4x4 or 5x5 and sometimes 2x8 games) during online session on LAN

if you want some bug report what's wrong let me know, we keep list of things to avoid to play successfully

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Arkady

our group play real time multiplayer game (usually 4x4 or 5x5 and sometimes 2x8 games) during online session on LAN

if you want some bug report what's wrong let me know, we keep list of things to avoid to play successfully

Sure. But we don't promise to make this a priority.

[Arkady]

List of mulitplayer online games issues that we encounter
- When two (or more) players select and move/rotate unit in the same hex, game crash for one (or both) of them
- When connected after crash back to the game with same IP (but differant user name), new connection cause probem with turn synchronization (turns advance twice as fast or do not advance at all)
- When bridge is destroyed on map, only original player see it as completely destroyed from both sides, other players see the bridge as destroyed only on one side, they can use the bridge from opposite side without problem.
- Cave movement in Rising Sun works like clone factory, one unit stay at original cave entrance, cloned unit appear at destination. Both units are permanent and work correctly (we experinced a lot of fun with this behaviour when first encountered in my custom scenarion at Iwo Jima)
- When two players move their units simultanously over same hex, two possbile results exist, either one unit completely disappear or one unit is duplicated
- Firing from two players on the same target hex at the same time (not necessary same target unit) cause sometimes reversion of fire effect (destroyed units are reborn)
- Variable visibility setting works diferently for players within the team, they each see at diffirent distances
- Last air strike mission fly each turn till target hex is spotted by friendly unit
- Indirect fire dialog (artillery) cause crashes or fire doesn't work properly, indirect fire have to be plotted by selecting appropriate unit instead
- Units spotted by movement (bump in to the hex) are not visible for other players within the team. They appear only when you fire to the hex later.


One wish: ability to kick player from the game (and from multiplayer dialog list)by host. When several crashes occur, list of the playrs contain both old (dead) sessions and new active sessions, that casue problems with turn synchronization, usually saving the game and application restart for all palyers is required.

Most of things is caused by wrong order of synchronization between host and callers

[berto]

Wow, that's a long list of issues!

As I said, not a high priority.

The good news is that when I have the time to look into this (not soon), I also have extra systems (all with two or even three network interfaces) and two internal networks here to look at this from all angles, directly, myself (oh, with an assistant, perhaps).

Thanks for the detailed feedback! [&o]

[Jason Petho]

Excellent list, Arkady, thank you very much!

Jason Petho

[Warhorse]

My brother and I tried modem play probably circa 2000!? A desert battle, and reinforcement units kept appearing in his midst!!?? Was strange, we only ever tried it that once, anyone else do this, besides Arkady and company? Is it pretty cool overall?

[Arkady]

another bug encounter last weekend

Host of the battle see artillery results only when target zone is visible to his units, otherwise he sees unknown units/unknown results message
All other players are able to see unit hits and result normally


And one more request, fire results dialog should be no modal. If one player meet fierce resistance with plenty of oop fire, other players are unable to do actions [;)]

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Arkady

another bug encounter last weekend

Host of the battle see artillery results only when target zone is visible to his units, otherwise he sees unknown units/unknown results message
All other players are able to see unit hits and result normally

And one more request, fire results dialog should be no modal. If one player meet fierce resistance with plenty of oop fire, other players are unable to do actions [;)]

ORIGINAL: berto

Sure. But we don't promise to make this a priority.

Unfortunately, none of these modem or network play issues will be fixed in the 1.05/2.0 update. Not enough time, got bigger fish to fry. Maybe later in 2014.

[mglshark]

We got it working with win 7/8 over last 3 months (prior to the August 2014 I just saw listed)- some tips:

One player starts game (make sure firewall / AV is off or told "OK", check that IP address!
Other player modem caller first, then start play game using TCIP (3rd option) to connect - IP address,

For save games first player restore save, modem caller does resume game (no files show) then connect

Hope that helps!

ML

[berto]

That's with a recent version, 2.01 perhaps?

If you got it working, that's tremendously reassuring, because it suggests that the code at least is not broken. If there are any difficulties, they might lie outside the code, in the hardware setup, in firewall settings, in the configuration, etc.

We haven't had time yet to test this ourselves. Later this year maybe.

[mglshark]

Have not tested with the latest patch, which base on what I read I have to do a new 1.0 install to get the patch to work. Original disc does not like the new DVD drive I have, might be an issue. When I get it up and running I will post on results.

ML

[Warhorse]

I put all my installation discs on a Virtual Drive, and run off them to install, not sure how popular those still are, but then I don't need to worry about cd/dvd drives. I think mine was from Farstone?