speeding up play

Empires in Arms is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. Empires in Arms is a seven player game of grand strategy set during the Napoleonic period of 1805-1815. The unit scale is corps level with full diplomatic options

Moderator: MOD_EIA

mr.godo
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:19 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by mr.godo »

While I agree that there should be an alternative mode which allows players to control the speed of the turn, I do not believe that there is any means of leveraging optional features for game play acceleration as most of the engine is hard coded to follow a particular model. A follows B follows C.

As an example, diplomacy. In the original games, this was a simultaneous venture. You wrote down your declarations and then revealed them simultaneously. The same is done here, but the mechanism for the phase relies on player A entering his info, then player B, then player C... This order is what kills the speed. If all players could submit simultaneously, that would take a huge chunk out of the speed and not interfere with gameplay.

The same goes for econ. I don't see what the other countries are building. Why am I waiting for the others to get their phases in before I send my off blindly to the next link and then have all revealed later? This is intentional and implemented rigidly. No bundling is required here: Diplomacy should be done by all players at the same time. Econ as well. There shouldn't be some uber diplo-reinf-econ phase. I declare war on you, then build out my forces and set them up here, only to find someone else has stabbed me and set up forces somewhere else. I should know who I'm fighting before I set up to defend myself.
The has been a lot of good discussion in these forums on what the essence of EIA is, so we should be able to figure what made the game great, and what sucked about the old board game and can be improved because someone (Al Gore?) invented the internet.
I honestly believe that the design of the game is fatally flawed and fails to implement modern notions of workflow, graphic design and usability.
Mr. Godó
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: speeding up play

Post by Marshall Ellis »

ORIGINAL: dodod

I have played the board game, and while it may take a year to play, these games will take much more!

It may take a lot of programming, but certainly, it would be worth it.

Forgive my selection of your statement but I must strongly disagree with your time comparison with the boardgame. This is already MUCH quicker than the boardgame simply from automation of manual tasks such as supply, eco, reinf, etc. Even me the programmer can see this :-0

I've played several PBEM games using the Cyberboard system and it too is just as slow AND not to mention inaccurate as heck (Supply calcs wrong, etc).

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

I'm not saying that there is not room to improve but I must be realistic about the gains of a lot of programming that IMHO would gain little.


Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


User avatar
La Provence
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Toulouse (FRANCE)

RE: speeding up play

Post by La Provence »

To speed the game, in a first time, I think that the Diplomacy and the Eco phase could be simultaneously.
Because this don't change / alter the spirit of the game.
 
For Diplo : every one play like he want AFTER contact with the others (mail) so it doesn't mater if the phase is simultaneously.
 
Eco : The same. The incomes and expenses don't depend of the others !
Salut et fraternité

La Provence
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: speeding up play

Post by Marshall Ellis »

ORIGINAL: La Provence

To speed the game, in a first time, I think that the Diplomacy and the Eco phase could be simultaneously.
Because this don't change / alter the spirit of the game.

For Diplo : every one play like he want AFTER contact with the others (mail) so it doesn't mater if the phase is simultaneously.

Eco : The same. The incomes and expenses don't depend of the others !

If there is any room for improvement it would be here. I agree with this.
Diplomacy and Eco are the only phases I would ever allow this for.
Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


mr.godo
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:19 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by mr.godo »

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

The current system makes itself susceptible to temporal patterns.

If player A lives in the eastern timezone and is online from 7pm to 9pm and player B is on pacific time from 7pm to 9pm, as long as player A goes before player B, there's no problem (provided player A doesn't take 2 hours to finish their turn and move it along). If player B goes first, then that adds an entire day to a phase. How often will that ever happen? I had been playing with danes, swedes, americans, canadians and germans. For diplomacy to take a week wasn't ridiculous, it was the norm!

While we can expect the game to last years, the dismissal of considering simultaneous phase resolution is one of the main reasons this game is never going to get any better in terms of time. If it takes each player 5 minutes to play their phase, that means you cannot finish a general phase in any less than 35 minutes.  And if it takes a couple players longer, say an hour each, to process their phases, it elongates the window of opportunity for the players to complete the diplo phase within a reasonable amount of time.
If there is any room for improvement it would be here. I agree with this.
Diplomacy and Eco are the only phases I would ever allow this for.
Then why aren't you? Think of it in terms of adding dependancies. What if you couldn't complete your phase until you had a confirmation email from each player? Would that slow things down, speed them up or make no change?

Russia dip ready: england ok, france ok, prussia ok, turkey ok, spain ok, austria ok .... russia dip sent
France dip ready: england ok, russia ok, prussia ok, turkey ok, spain ok, austria ok .... france dip sent

This is the same as having non-dependant game phases dependant upon other players. Keep in mind, however, that in my scenario, order matters.

England dip ready: russia ok, france ok, prussia on vacation. waiting for prussia. prussia ok. turkey afk will be back tomorrow. turkey ok. spain ok. austria ok ... england dip sent

Simultaneous phases shouldn't be optional. They are crucial.
Mr. Godó
User avatar
La Provence
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 12:58 pm
Location: Toulouse (FRANCE)

RE: speeding up play

Post by La Provence »

Perhaps is it possible to skip same phase :
 
For exemple : Naval for MP who have not fleet ! Prusia and Austria
 
And for naval turn of MP which all fleet are blockade :
Exemple : a pop up windows at the end of the renforcement :
       "Skip my turn if all my fleets are blockaded and/or if the strategic situation of my navy are the same when my turn begin"
 
In this case : if the french fleets are all blockaded and no british fleet moves to quit a blockade box : the soft should be able to skip automatically the french navy step ; and go to the spanish one.
 
In a lot of turn, it is possible to skip at least 3 steps (Prussia, Austria and France).
+ 1 Diplo step (minus 6)
+ 1 Eco step (minus 6).
 
[;)]
Salut et fraternité

La Provence
dodod
Posts: 147
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 1:27 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by dodod »

Marshall...yes, the mechanics are faster...but any process is as fast as the rate limiting step...which in this case is the email filing....it does not take a day for calculating battles, but it can take 3 days to do a battle with PBEM...

So regardless..when trying to speed up a game, the rate limiting step is the one that has to be addressed...which is the slow process of emailing multiple phases in succession.

I still don't see why reinforcement can't be done simultaneously and sent to france to do his last..

Yes, we would have a bit more blinded placement, but it would really really speed things up if diplomacy and econ were together and simultaneous, and reinforcement also...

the former is more important, though.

Furthermore this can be an option.

We have to concede that if players are quitting because of speed, this is a failure of the game as much as the lack of patience of the player. Until that is realized there will be no fruitful conversation. I believe the game is outstanding and would be great hotseat...but alas, most of us don't have that capacity. So lets work to a game where we don't have players dropping like flies, after everyone has invested months of game time...
NeverMan
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 1:52 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by NeverMan »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).



You can stand by this all you want and you are right if that person is on vacation then you are screwed either way; HOWEVER, if no one is on vacation in a 24 hour turnaround game and it takes, on average, 12 hours for each player to do his/her turn then:

12*7 > 24

That's just math you can't deny and I don't understand why you insist on denying it!!!!
Maybe in your universe 12*7<24 but in everyone else's it's not.
User avatar
DCWhitworth
Posts: 676
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:20 am
Location: Norwich, England

RE: speeding up play

Post by DCWhitworth »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

I'm not saying that there is not room to improve but I must be realistic about the gains of a lot of programming that IMHO would gain little.

Nope I disagree completely. I probably have more experience of PBEM play than the majority on this board being currently in five games most of which are pretty fast moving.

All the games have an agreed turnaround time and if you don't play your turn you get skipped. But this is rare, if people know they are going to be away or unavailable then they will arrange in advance for someone else to play their turn (much easier since the 1.04 advent of different save game names.)

In all the games player absence has *not* been an issue for game speed.
Regards
David
User avatar
fvianello
Posts: 532
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2002 12:23 pm
Location: Italy

RE: speeding up play

Post by fvianello »

Empires in Arms is inherently slow, and there's not much that could speed it up,
It's a 7 players game, with several sequential phases per turn; the average turn takes 28 phases (diplo, reinf, naval, land * 7).

It's like trying to speed up bridge; the game has its pace, and that's all.
H. Barca,
Surplus Consuls Dispatcher
User avatar
Mardonius
Posts: 654
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:04 pm
Location: East Coast

RE: speeding up play

Post by Mardonius »

Speed is relative. As Hanbarca notes, EiA will be slow relative to most games. But when you get the right group together and enforce the turnaround time once or thrice, the tempo really picks up and the game churns along nicely. Yes, it is still rather slow, but that is the nature of the game.

(Still, any programming optimization as discussed above would be welcome, of course. These incremental changes will add value)
"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
User avatar
Mardonius
Posts: 654
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:04 pm
Location: East Coast

RE: speeding up play

Post by Mardonius »

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).



You can stand by this all you want and you are right if that person is on vacation then you are screwed either way; HOWEVER, if no one is on vacation in a 24 hour turnaround game and it takes, on average, 12 hours for each player to do his/her turn then:

12*7 > 24

That's just math you can't deny and I don't understand why you insist on denying it!!!!
Maybe in your universe 12*7<24 but in everyone else's it's not.


Hi Neverman:

In my observations, the average turnaround for a good tempo game with a 24 time limit is less than 12 hours. Probably closer to 4 hours. But that is a good tempo game where the players are solid and the rules are enforced.
Where they are not enforced, well, then 12 hours is conservative.

best
Mardonius
"Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant" -- James Madison
"Yes, you will win most battles, but if you loose to me you will loose oh so badly that it causes me pain (chortle) just to think of it" - P. Khan
NeverMan
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 1:52 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by NeverMan »

ORIGINAL: HanBarca

Empires in Arms is inherently slow, and there's not much that could speed it up,
It's a 7 players game, with several sequential phases per turn; the average turn takes 28 phases (diplo, reinf, naval, land * 7).

It's like trying to speed up bridge; the game has its pace, and that's all.

I agree that EiA is slow but even in ftf games we usually did Eco simultaneously. Even just the little bit of speedup is good particularly when we are talking about days or weeks of speedup.

Dip and Eco with 12 hour turnaround = 14*12.
Simul Dip = 12.
Simul Eco = 12.

14*12 > 24, by quite a bit.
Dancing Bear
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:16 pm

RE: speeding up play

Post by Dancing Bear »

The Marshall said a few posts back that he sees sim dip and eco as a way to speed up the game, so I think there is agreement here in principal at least.

I can live with with sim dip and eco (sim dip first of course). I hope that the Marshall can make these changes a priority, because I know the frustration the authors of the other posts are feeling.

I imagine the game is quite fast with committed game testers who are always available (unless they go on vacation or change jobs), but for us on the outside of Matrix, regular life gets in the way, and speeding up the game is essential.
NeverMan
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 1:52 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by NeverMan »

ORIGINAL: Mardonius

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis


I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).



You can stand by this all you want and you are right if that person is on vacation then you are screwed either way; HOWEVER, if no one is on vacation in a 24 hour turnaround game and it takes, on average, 12 hours for each player to do his/her turn then:

12*7 > 24

That's just math you can't deny and I don't understand why you insist on denying it!!!!
Maybe in your universe 12*7<24 but in everyone else's it's not.


Hi Neverman:

In my observations, the average turnaround for a good tempo game with a 24 time limit is less than 12 hours. Probably closer to 4 hours. But that is a good tempo game where the players are solid and the rules are enforced.
Where they are not enforced, well, then 12 hours is conservative.

best
Mardonius

Even so, 4*7 > 24 and 4*14 > 48

So even if you have a SUPER SPEEDY turnaround of 4 hours (which I have yet to experience myself) simul dip and eco is STILL faster.
User avatar
borner
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Houston TX

RE: speeding up play

Post by borner »

Dancing bear - very well said!!!!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [&o]
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: speeding up play

Post by Marshall Ellis »

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth
ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

I'm not saying that there is not room to improve but I must be realistic about the gains of a lot of programming that IMHO would gain little.

Nope I disagree completely. I probably have more experience of PBEM play than the majority on this board being currently in five games most of which are pretty fast moving.

All the games have an agreed turnaround time and if you don't play your turn you get skipped. But this is rare, if people know they are going to be away or unavailable then they will arrange in advance for someone else to play their turn (much easier since the 1.04 advent of different save game names.)

In all the games player absence has *not* been an issue for game speed.

You MUST absolutely be the exception because I have been playing PBEM for years (~2000) and absence is the major cause of delay / end game (in my case at least).

I will remember to use your use-case for any PBEM speeding up tests ;-)


Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


User avatar
DCWhitworth
Posts: 676
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:20 am
Location: Norwich, England

RE: speeding up play

Post by DCWhitworth »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth
ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

I'm not saying that there is not room to improve but I must be realistic about the gains of a lot of programming that IMHO would gain little.

Nope I disagree completely. I probably have more experience of PBEM play than the majority on this board being currently in five games most of which are pretty fast moving.

All the games have an agreed turnaround time and if you don't play your turn you get skipped. But this is rare, if people know they are going to be away or unavailable then they will arrange in advance for someone else to play their turn (much easier since the 1.04 advent of different save game names.)

In all the games player absence has *not* been an issue for game speed.

You MUST absolutely be the exception because I have been playing PBEM for years (~2000) and absence is the major cause of delay / end game (in my case at least).

I will remember to use your use-case for any PBEM speeding up tests ;-)

You've been playing PBEM for 2000 years ? [X(] I apologise for even daring to question you ! [;)]
Regards
David
NeverMan
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 1:52 am

RE: speeding up play

Post by NeverMan »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth
ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I will say this again and I will stand behind this forever! The main cause for PBEM game delay is someone going away on vacation, sick, job change, holiday, etc. ALL of which a thousand hours of programming would not fix (It doesn't matter if diplomacy is run at the same time, you still cannot proceed without Turkey's diplomacy and if Turkey is on vacation then you're waiting).

I'm not saying that there is not room to improve but I must be realistic about the gains of a lot of programming that IMHO would gain little.

Nope I disagree completely. I probably have more experience of PBEM play than the majority on this board being currently in five games most of which are pretty fast moving.

All the games have an agreed turnaround time and if you don't play your turn you get skipped. But this is rare, if people know they are going to be away or unavailable then they will arrange in advance for someone else to play their turn (much easier since the 1.04 advent of different save game names.)

In all the games player absence has *not* been an issue for game speed.

You MUST absolutely be the exception because I have been playing PBEM for years (~2000) and absence is the major cause of delay / end game (in my case at least).

I will remember to use your use-case for any PBEM speeding up tests ;-)



I guess you can mark me down as an "exception" also. How many "exceptions" before we become the rule?
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: speeding up play

Post by Marshall Ellis »

ORIGINAL: NeverMan

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth



Nope I disagree completely. I probably have more experience of PBEM play than the majority on this board being currently in five games most of which are pretty fast moving.

All the games have an agreed turnaround time and if you don't play your turn you get skipped. But this is rare, if people know they are going to be away or unavailable then they will arrange in advance for someone else to play their turn (much easier since the 1.04 advent of different save game names.)

In all the games player absence has *not* been an issue for game speed.

You MUST absolutely be the exception because I have been playing PBEM for years (~2000) and absence is the major cause of delay / end game (in my case at least).

I will remember to use your use-case for any PBEM speeding up tests ;-)



I guess you can mark me down as an "exception" also. How many "exceptions" before we become the rule?

I've always had you down as an exception Neverman! LOL!
Answer: Billions!

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


Post Reply

Return to “Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815”