Matrix Games Forums

In favor of Panzer Command’s model of open xml text based data.

Some games have their data buried deep inside the code while Panzer Command has it open and available for change if errors or new information becomes available.

Recently we discovered there were a slew of T-26 tank variants. Some of these were uparmored as a result of poor showing during combat.

I am waiting on the arrival of a book on the T-26 to answer some of the questions on the various types. But these or any other modifications can be easily added to the game.

What risk do we run of having different versions of the data being used by the various gamers?

Data is notorious for never having all the stats and figures matching for every source. The same it true for OOB's. TO&E's are normally about the most consistant sources that match each other.

I think that's why other companies bury the data. So, it always stays the same unless THEY change it. That way there is a single constant data base for the game to be played with rather than a dozen different versions of what the data for all the units are.

Good Hunting.

MR

In my opinion a modable game will always trump a non modable one.

However I think the points MR raised are valid. To do a good modable game requires data validation and synchronization of the data between players, and this needs to be under the players control and should have a rollback (or virtualisation) capability.

Eg I will play with your T26s for this game, but after I want them to rollback to stock afterwoods. This system should be bullet proof, obviously.

Regards

S.

Actually, not that I have any time any more, but it occured to me that I could write a data validation module for pbem games.

Player 1 runs the data validation program on the scenario he/she wants to play. emails that to player 2. Player 2 then uses that file along with his/her own validation on the same scenario and the system will tell you if there are any data incompatibilities between the two system. That way everyone would be in sync before starting a game.

It wouldn't be that hard to write and shouldn't require any fancy pants activeX either.

ORIGINAL: Mobius

In favor of Panzer Command’s model of open xml text based data.

Some games have their data buried deep inside the code while Panzer Command has it open and available for change if errors or new information becomes available.

Recently we discovered there were a slew of T-26 tank variants. Some of these were uparmored as a result of poor showing during combat.

I am waiting on the arrival of a book on the T-26 to answer some of the questions on the various types. But these or any other modifications can be easily added to the game.

Mobius,

I agree - it's one of those things One of Pz Command's best features is it's open data. ....and one of it's worst features is it's modability.

No, actually I lean to the side of open data structure, I think that is a key feature to give the game longevity. I have hypothetical concerns about data consistency , but since I play almost exclusively against the AI, those concerns are hypothetical. And there are reasonable ways to make sure thats the case as long as both players have the desire to have them them the same.

One thing I think really helps is the JSGME Mod enabler. I haven't seen Cougar_DK around in qyuite a long time, but he really did us a favor by setting it for PC:K and giving a good tutorial. I run it on my 'test' platform to keep things consistent. Any change to the stock game (though not official patches) run through the JSGME on that system.

Rick

But some things work in  JSGME and others don't. How do you tell the difference?

I long ago stopped using JSGME because when I wanted something in the game I wanted to use it without seeing if it would work in  JSGME first. So, I just put everything straight into the game files now.

I agree that if you are only going to play vs the AI then you don't ever need to worry about what version of the data you're running. But I'm not sure I agree that the vs the AI mode will help give the game any longevity.

IMO, getting the game to be played more in H2H mode, especially on ladders at club sites, is what will generate more sales and with those sales more longevity. That means there must be some way to insure that both gamers are using the same data set.

Good Hunting.

MR 

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

But some things work in  JSGME and others don't. How do you tell the difference?

It's very easy to check if it's in JSGME format, and if it's not, its very easy to put it in JSGEM format.

But I'm not sure I agree that the vs the AI mode will help give the game any longevity.

I think if you reread my post, you'll see this isn't what I said. I said "..I lean to the side of open data structure, I think that is a key feature to give the game longevity."

And I agree that another key to longevity is good H2H play and ladder play. I mentioned the vs Ai only as rational as to why I "leaned" the way I did.

Rick

I have never played PzC on line, and probably won't (along with the majority of people that play war games).
I play Red Orchestra MP, and that's about it. If I even attempted to get my data to match up with another PzC player, I would need another install because I've done things to it that I can't even begin to keep track of. A separate, clean install is the only way to ensure things would work for those that make/use modifications.

This problem is always going to apply to a minority of players. The trade-off is that we have a game that is open-ended enough that many, many different things can be done to change it in nearly any ways we wish.

The nice thing about this series is Erik's willingness to include proper "mods" in future updates, so that those with the same version have the same units.

ORIGINAL: Rick

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

But some things work in  JSGME and others don't. How do you tell the difference?

It's very easy to check if it's in JSGME format, and if it's not, its very easy to put it in JSGEM format.

But I'm not sure I agree that the vs the AI mode will help give the game any longevity.

I think if you reread my post, you'll see this isn't what I said. I said "..I lean to the side of open data structure, I think that is a key feature to give the game longevity."

And I agree that another key to longevity is good H2H play and ladder play. I mentioned the vs Ai only as rational as to why I "leaned" the way I did.

Rick

My comment wasn't meant to be negative about vs AI play either. From all the download data I have from HSG scenarios there is a marked preference for vs AI scenarios in general.

I intentionally released vs the AI scenarios on the same day as the head to head version to see what the results would be. They are interesting and not at all what you would expect.

Most gamers like playing other gamers. No doubt about it. However, the vs AI scenarios seem to get more game play. More than likely because they don't require finding an opponent and they are faster to resolve the battle.

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: benpark

I have never played PzC on line, and probably won't (along with the majority of people that play war games).

One reason you've never played PzC on line is that you can't. There is no TCP capability in the game. PBEM is the only way to play H2H.

If I even attempted to get my data to match up with another PzC player, I would need another install because I've done things to it that I can't even begin to keep track of. A separate, clean install is the only way to ensure things would work for those that make/use modifications.

That is the point we are making.

This problem is always going to apply to a minority of players. The trade-off is that we have a game that is open-ended enough that many, many different things can be done to change it in nearly any ways we wish.

If sales stay small maybe. But if PC moves out and starts to join the ranks of the bigger sales games that can't be true. A minority of players? Some laddders have hundreds of gamers on them.

Any attempt at all to standardize the results, for any kind of ladder or tournament play, would need to have a way to standardize the data too. Without the support of the ladders and/or tournaments it's not a big deal. But then, IMO, PC won't move up into the ranks of the games like CM with their sales record either.

Just to make my position clear on where I think PC can go, so we don't get hung up on my past or what I might think of the PC system, PC could easily be a better game and a better seller than the CMx1 series games. From what I've seen of the CMx2 series games they aren't even in the same category as either PC or CMx1, so no competition there either.


Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
If sales stay small maybe. But if PC moves out and starts to join the ranks of the bigger sales games that can't be true. A minority of players? Some laddders have hundreds of gamers on them.

Stridor has a good idea. Run a verification program before starting a PBEM game if you have made some changes and send it to the other player. Then both players decide which data you want to play by if there are differences.

As for ladders you need to have a certain threshold of players to make it viable. The first order of business is to reach that number.

I once told Junk2 back when the release of PCK was delayed for quite a long time that even if they never released it I could play the game in perpetuity if I can make mods in data, make new models and thanks again to Stridor make new maps.

ORIGINAL: Mobius
Stridor has a good idea. Run a verification program before starting a PBEM game if you have made some changes and send it to the other player. Then both players decide which data you want to play by if there are differences.

This is a great idea! [:)]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
If sales stay small maybe. But if PC moves out and starts to join the ranks of the bigger sales games that can't be true. A minority of players? Some laddders have hundreds of gamers on them.

Stridor has a good idea. Run a verification program before starting a PBEM game if you have made some changes and send it to the other player. Then both players decide which data you want to play by if there are differences.

As for ladders you need to have a certain threshold of players to make it viable. The first order of business is to reach that number.

I once told Junk2 back when the release of PCK was delayed for quite a long time that even if they never released it I could play the game in perpetuity if I can make mods in data, make new models and thanks again to Stridor make new maps.

And how will I ever know if you are going to use the same data file that I'm using? Okay, so we checked the data files and they are different. Or even the same. How will I know that your files don't change after turn 3? Or even after we do the check?

Modding the vehicles, maps, etc. is one thing. A very good thing. Being able to mod the games values puts the game in the realm of fantasy. I can put anything I want in that data file. We are all looking at this from a standpoint of historical accuracy and fair play.

Let's take another look at it.

Let's say, I set up a tournament for PCK and get 50+ players from around the world to join. I tell them we are going to use your (Mobius)data file because I like it. I send it to the tournament players. They all have it.

So far we are good to go. Now, I'm playing Ben Park but he likes his own data file better than yours Mobius....I don't know why he just does...and he doesn't use the one I sent. BP's data file has the T-26S as being more effective than yours and my PzIII's get banged up worse than the other German gamers. I come in last in the tournament.........which could happen to me in real life without a data base issue.....[X(]

After the round is over BP admits he used his own data file. The entire tournament is compromised.

Realize, of course, that this is just an example. I'm using the three of us as the players because we have discussed this issue at length. Please, don't anybody think that, I feel for a moment, BenPark would intentionally do anything like I just described.

The point is, that, I know a half dozen gamers that would in CM. I have no idea who would do that in the PC community but there are those that would.

Playing for fun is one thing. When ladders and tournaments get involved that's different. I normally get 50+ gamers to sign up for my CM tournaments. That could mean an endless combination of data files.

With open data files there would be no way to control that. In fact, there would be no way to keep a gamer from finding out that he has T-26s tanks and to modify the data files he is using to make them more effective. To create, a completely new data file, for every single round of the tournament he's playing in. Once he finds out what his units are he simply redoes the data file to suit the vehicles he needs to be more effective. He can pretty much guarantee a high posting in the tournament just by using his own data files.

That fact alone may keep PC from ever becoming a good game for ladders and tournaments. If it does that will IMO hurt PC sales.

While I'm not employed by Matrix, and their sales isn't normally of interest to me, I do buy some of their games. I want them to be wildly successful so they keep making the games I want to play.

There is already a ladder for the PC series of games. It has about 6 players so far. I guess that's all you need to make a ladder viable.

Good Hunting.

MR

I personally think the data file needs to be locked inside the code and Matrix determines what goes in it.

Upgrades from time to time to fill in the blanks or add new information would be easy enough to do.

Keep the information to the game open and IMO you will kill the potential this game system has.

At the very least the game needs to only run if the data files match each other.

Good Hunting.

MR

Matrix JTCS uses encryption on the OOB files. Players can submit modded files for encryption and to be included in the next update.
 
I recall the CM Tourny lock button in the scen editor. Maybe something like this could be added to PC.

Matrix JTCS???


Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
After the round is over BP admits he used his own data file. The entire tournament is compromised.

If this becomes a problem then the data should be gathered by the game and sent with the first turn setup phase to the other player. This stays with the game all along. Then even if each player's local game was updated by a PCK update the PBEM game could go on using the old data.

What happens now if there is some patch that updates the game's data in the middle of a tornament? Players are stuck until the end of the tournament running the old software?

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
After the round is over BP admits he used his own data file. The entire tournament is compromised.

If this becomes a problem then the data should be gathered by the game and sent with the first turn setup phase to the other player. This stays with the game all along. Then even if each player's local game was updated by a PCK update the PBEM game could go on using the old data.

This already is a problem. That's why we are discussing what to do about it. To find a way around it before it impacts games in progress or planned events.

So, I can't switch data files in the middle of a game? Or could I?

What happens now if there is some patch that updates the game's data in the middle of a tornament? Players are stuck until the end of the tournament running the old software?

In CM that's not an issue. The game isn't being updated any more but in the past yes. A tournament would be locked in place as far as updates went for that round.

Most of my tournaments are 4 rounds. Each round is played over 3 months. For the 3 month period of the round there could be no patches applied or it would break the saved game files.

The longest you would be without the patch would be 3 months if they released it the same day.

Good Hunting.

MR

Matrix sells John Tiller's Campaign Series (JTCS) an updated version of TalonSoft's Campaign Series.

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

There is already a ladder for the PC series of games. It has about 6 players so far. I guess that's all you need to make a ladder viable.

Since my play is virtually always vs the AI, perhaps I should stay out of this, but since it would have some impact on me as well, I'll keep reading. And maybe throw in my .02 worth eveery now and then.

First - what PC series ladder?

Second - I was surprised when Matrix went to the encrypted database for JTCS, it didn't use to be there, and it stirred up a fair bit of disgruntled folks when it was put in place. THough I do undertand the reasoning.

I don't disagree that it's an issue, but to me the value of open is still overwhelming. But having said that, I agree with Mobius that a reasonable solution would be to pkg the data in the initial save game, or put in a checksum of some kind to verify that the game data hasn't changed. I think there are some options other than locking the data up.

Rick