Page 3 of 4
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:36 pm
by MarcA
Just one things guys, I see you wanted to use 1.6. Well I have some experience with ghosts and they are a PItA. I would strongly recommend we upgrade to 1.602, not 1.6.
It is avaiable in the download section and Frag recommends we all use it, even though it is still a beta. He says 1.7 is unlikely to be released for a long time. 1.602 also fixes problems with whole divisions disappearing which would certainly have a negative effect on the game.
I am sure there are plenty of new bugs in 1.602 but can they be worse than loosing whole divsions without warning.
Alex do you want to start your machinations, assigning areas of command, etc. We might as well get moving. I haven't played Japan before so would like some time to familiarise msyelf with what I own. If you let me know where you want me I will start having a poke around.
Marc
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:59 pm
by Cap Mandrake
Good luck gents. I suspect you will have a blast. I would suggest no more than 3 per side so you dont impair game speed.
And, of course, make sure everyone signs the prenuptial agreement. [:'(]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:09 pm
by GaryChildress
ORIGINAL: mantill
Just one things guys, I see you wanted to use 1.6. Well I have some experience with ghosts and they are a PItA. I would strongly recommend we upgrade to 1.602, not 1.6.
It is avaiable in the download section and Frag recommends we all use it, even though it is still a beta. He says 1.7 is unlikely to be released for a long time. 1.602 also fixes problems with whole divisions disappearing which would certainly have a negative effect on the game.
I am sure there are plenty of new bugs in 1.602 but can they be worse than loosing whole divsions without warning.
Alex do you want to start your machinations, assigning areas of command, etc. We might as well get moving. I haven't played Japan before so would like some time to familiarise msyelf with what I own. If you let me know where you want me I will start having a poke around.
Marc
Hi Marc!
I definitely don't want to loose divisions. I checked the WitP space on Matrix games and only saw patches up to 1.6. Where can we all get 1.602?
[:)]
Gary
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:18 pm
by Nomad
I just went to the members area and downloaded 1.602.
That said, AlexCobra stated he would not be able to upgrade to 1.602.
Alex, do you have enough disk space to put two different installs on? That is what I do, I have an install for
each of my 4 games. That way nothing gets confused.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:33 pm
by AlexCobra
Well, if u'r going to upgrade to 1.602, u gonna lose me. I definitely said that I can't use beta-version patches available through members area, so I'll stay on 1.6 anyway (well, until next official patch comes out[:)]). If u wanna know the exact reasons, I'll PM it or e-mail it. Sorry. And, btw, the ghost bug affects only units touched with 'follow' command, and I use only 'march' command, so there's no difficulties for me.
We are the mighty Allies, we will win no matter what they try.
Heh... u better prove it, man[;)]
Ok, I suppose Scott will take Japs, so we are ready for launch... If no other circumstances will appear, I'll start the game tonight, taking last edited preferences. It'll be 1.6 and with historical 1st turn I'll send it strait to opponents (exactly to Gary). Now we should consider who's gonna be the first reciver of opponent's turn and that person should deliver it to other members of High Staff... And Feurer, mantill, I'll send u mail about the common staff.
And, of course, make sure everyone signs the prenuptial agreement.
Highly appreciate your approval, C. M. Read your AAR's - they'r fantastic![8D]
Alex.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:13 pm
by FeurerKrieg
ORIGINAL: AlexCobra
Well, if u'r going to upgrade to 1.602, u gonna lose me. I definitely said that I can't use beta-version patches available through members area, so I'll stay on 1.6 anyway (well, until next official patch comes out[:)]). If u wanna know the exact reasons, I'll PM it or e-mail it. Sorry. And, btw, the ghost bug affects only units touched with 'follow' command, and I use only 'march' command, so there's no difficulties for me.
We are the mighty Allies, we will win no matter what they try.
Heh... u better prove it, man[;)]
Ok, I suppose Scott will take Japs, so we are ready for launch... If no other circumstances will appear, I'll start the game tonight, taking last edited preferences. It'll be 1.6 and with historical 1st turn I'll send it strait to opponents (exactly to Gary). Now we should consider who's gonna be the first reciver of opponent's turn and that person should deliver it to other members of High Staff... And Feurer, mantill, I'll send u mail about the common staff.
And, of course, make sure everyone signs the prenuptial agreement.
Highly appreciate your approval, C. M. Read your AAR's - they'r fantastic![8D]
Alex.
I assume you mean Scott will take allies. Also, any chance you can run two installs? One with 1.6 and one on 1.602? With the river shock attack rules, using the follow command is nearly mandatory on river assualts. Won't affect me so much, if I'm in the Pacific, but for those Burma/Hong Kong/China type areas, might be a bigger issue.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:29 pm
by GaryChildress
ORIGINAL: AlexCobra
Well, if u'r going to upgrade to 1.602, u gonna lose me. I definitely said that I can't use beta-version patches available through members area, so I'll stay on 1.6 anyway (well, until next official patch comes out[:)]). If u wanna know the exact reasons, I'll PM it or e-mail it. Sorry. And, btw, the ghost bug affects only units touched with 'follow' command, and I use only 'march' command, so there's no difficulties for me.
Alex.
Hi everyone!
How about we not use the 1.602 patch and just use march instead of follow (make it a house rule)? I don't think any of us want to loose Alex.
Alternatively, is it possible for the rest of us to be on 1.602 and for him to play using 1.6?
Does anyone have ideas here on how we can resolve this situation?
[:)] [:(]
Gary
edit: PS. Just now saw Feurer Krieg's reply to Alex.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:35 pm
by FeurerKrieg
I can run two installs on my machine, so it isn't a problem for me to play 1.6 if Alex cannot run 1.602. As I said, it really doesn't impact me, but whoever is running the land campaigns may be of a different opinion.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:59 pm
by scott64
Thanks [:)]
I do not care how we do it but it will be done. I think we should stick with 1.6 because I am on another (3x3 Fear and Loathing Jap style)[:'(] and am not sure if they want to upgrade or not. my email is s dot kime at comcast dot net.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:04 pm
by GaryChildress
ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg
I can run two installs on my machine, so it isn't a problem for me to play 1.6 if Alex cannot run 1.602. As I said, it really doesn't impact me, but whoever is running the land campaigns may be of a different opinion.
Hi Feurer Krieg!
I haven't upgraded to 1.602 yet so I can just stay at 1.6 if need be.
I also propose we take C. M.'s advice and put a limit on the game at 3 x 3.
[:)]
Gary
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:09 pm
by Nomad
I have the Allies on the ground in the CBI. I do not care whether we use 1.6 or 1.602. Let's just use 1.6 and get moving on this. [:)]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:12 pm
by scott64
Allied Commander for DEI, Australia, New Zealand, and Southwest Pacific reporting in.[:)][8D][:'(]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:15 pm
by Nomad
ORIGINAL: scott1964
Allied Commander for DEI, Australia, New Zealand, and Southwest Pacific reporting in.[:)][8D][:'(]
Don't fortget the PI. [:-] It might be very important. [8D]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:32 pm
by scott64
That would be very benificial to them if We did not do anything [X(][:-][:'(]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:38 pm
by Nomad
The only real problem is that there just is not a lot we can do. It is nice to save some ships and aircraft but even if we don't, We still win [:D]
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:10 pm
by FeurerKrieg
Sounds like we are pretty much ready to roll then. Alex/Mantill - you guys okay with me doing 4th, Southeast and the sub fleets?
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:19 pm
by MarcA
v1.6 it is then. Just no crying when the 2nd US marines disappear [:'(]
A point about player orders, we should set the order we handle turns in order of GMT, depending on where there last allied player is located. If that makes sense. So if the hand it over at GMT-6 it would go to Bob at GMT-8 then Alex GMT+3 then me GMT, otherwise we could be waiting 2 days for us to do our turns as it would keep arriving when we have gone to bed. If we do it this way we stand the best chance of getting a turn per day
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:20 pm
by MarcA
ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg
Sounds like we are pretty much ready to roll then. Alex/Mantill - you guys okay with me doing 4th, Southeast and the sub fleets?
No problem here
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:29 pm
by AlexCobra
So if the hand it over at GMT-6 it would go to Bob at GMT-8 then Alex GMT+3 then me GMT, otherwise we could be waiting 2 days for us to do our turns as it would keep arriving when we have gone to bed. If we do it this way we stand the best chance of getting a turn per day
I accept this. It means that Bob have to begin the game. Or should it be me? Anyway, it's time to.
Alex.
RE: multiple player PBEM - vote
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 8:24 pm
by Nomad
For the Allies, send your turns to Gary at EDT and he will send to me at MDT and I will send to Scott also at MDT. He can send it to Bob when he is done.