PBEM

[BossGnome]

I'm sorry, i'm nearly certain this has been asked before, but how will they handle PBEM playability with 5 players? Also, there isn't a scenario in the game that starts in 39. This means that poland will start off occupied? And, can the Japanese player decide when he declares war on the western allies, or is it a pre-selected date?

Thanks!

[paullus99]

The earliest scenario starts in Spring, 1940 - so Poland is already occupied.

For Japanese declaration of war dates - if Japan does nothing to the WA, the WA declare war at the beginning of 1943.

[YohanTM2]

To finish answering your question Boss, you can play with up to 5 PBEM opponents. When you set up a PBEM game you simply denote what player number is playing a country. So if you we are playing 2 player GE/JA would both be player 1, all all others player 2. In a 4 player game GE would be 1, JA would be 2, WA is 3, RU is 4 and you would assign CH either to WA as 3 or RU as 4. I really don't think anyone except a real newbie who wants to learn as they go will ever play CH alone.

[scout1]

How are the mechanics of 5 players handled ? Does the save game file get passed sequentially between each of the five, or is it a mass mailing from each of the players to the "caretaker" ? If so, then is the turn then just mass mailed back ?

[Becket]

Passed sequentially.

[scout1]

How large are the file sizes that are email'ed about. In WitP, the japanese palyer is emailing ~ 3meg file. The Allies email ~ 1.5 meg file.

[Joel Billings]

Looks like they are around 250k.

[bmodified]

That's not a bad size, could even do that dial-up.

[Gullet]

I've seen somebody raising the question previously, but not seen any real answer (I think).

Q: Will you add on LAN/Internet support in a later patch as they did with Strategic Command? I for one prefer to have everything handled "in-game" instead of needing to check e-mail and click and so forth (hmm, really gives the impression that I'm really lazy, doesn't it...). It does not seem as big a task to program something to handle it all in-game - or am I mistanken?

[Joel Billings]

We've talked about it and it might happen in a future patch. Keep in mind that each player's turn can take 5 to 30 minutes depending on the World Power and the player. Given that there are 5 different World Powers, that's 20 minutes to 2 hours between turns. I'm not sure how many people will really take advantage of this feature as you'll spend a lot of time waiting. It only takes 20 seconds to save the game and send an email. Would you really use this?

Joel

[Sabuesillo]

This sequential PBEM method has been widely used and tested befor ein games like Civilization. Typically a thread is started in a forum and players post their turn file for the next player to pick up, post comments, etc.

ORIGINAL: scout1

How are the mechanics of 5 players handled ? Does the save game file get passed sequentially between each of the five, or is it a mass mailing from each of the players to the "caretaker" ? If so, then is the turn then just mass mailed back ?

[Gullet]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

We've talked about it and it might happen in a future patch. Keep in mind that each player's turn can take 5 to 30 minutes depending on the World Power and the player. Given that there are 5 different World Powers, that's 20 minutes to 2 hours between turns. I'm not sure how many people will really take advantage of this feature as you'll spend a lot of time waiting. It only takes 20 seconds to save the game and send an email. Would you really use this?

Joel

Well, I'd say yes, since in my experience the lion's share of games tend to be played one-on-one to begin with. However, I also see a point even in a, say, five-player game. As I understand things from the explanations of the PBEM-system you would not be able to see other than accumulated moves up till your move(?), i.e. once player 5 has moved he sends his moves to player 1 and does not get to see any game evolvements until player 4 sends his file to player 5 again.

With an in-game function everybody would be up to date ahead of there respective moves and thereby actually cutting game time. This worked with the '98 release of Axis & Allies (apart from some stability issues with the game itself) and I honestly think the game would suffer from the exclusion of this function.

[paullus99]

No actually, each player sees what has happened on previous players turn, so cooperative operations are possible (like the SU hitting a certain territory & weakening it, then the Western Allies move in for the kill).

[mavraam]

ORIGINAL: Gullet


With an in-game function everybody would be up to date ahead of there respective moves and thereby actually cutting game time. This worked with the '98 release of Axis & Allies (apart from some stability issues with the game itself) and I honestly think the game would suffer from the exclusion of this function.

Yeah, I played a lot of A&A online with 5 people. But the difference is, a turn of A&A is usually < 5 minutes. So you make your move, you go have a smoke or grab a bite to eat, etc, sit back down and its your turn again.

This game is going to be up to 30 minutes a turn. Which means with 5 people, you could wait 2 hours between the end of one of your turns and the begining of the next! I don't know too many people that would do that. I certainly wouldn't.

[Gullet]

ORIGINAL: paullus99

No actually, each player sees what has happened on previous players turn, so cooperative operations are possible (like the SU hitting a certain territory & weakening it, then the Western Allies move in for the kill).

Could you elaborate somewhat. Does player 1:
1. send his file to every player (2-5) or
2. send his file to player 2, but player 5 will be able to see all players' (1-4) individual moves when player 4 sends the game file to him?

/G

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Gullet

ORIGINAL: paullus99

No actually, each player sees what has happened on previous players turn, so cooperative operations are possible (like the SU hitting a certain territory & weakening it, then the Western Allies move in for the kill).

Could you elaborate somewhat. Does player 1:
1. send his file to every player (2-5) or
2. send his file to player 2, but player 5 will be able to see all players' (1-4) individual moves when player 4 sends the game file to him?

/G

Option 2. Player 1 sends his file to player 2, P2 sends to P3, P3 to P4 et cetera.

When player X gets his turn from player X-1 he's able to review what happened previously in turn using so called VCR tool/feature. So, you just turn the VCR tool ON and review the events of the previous/current turn.

Oleg

[Gullet]

Option 2. Player 1 sends his file to player 2, P2 sends to P3, P3 to P4 et cetera.

When player X gets his turn from player X-1 he's able to review what happened previously in turn using so called VCR tool/feature. So, you just turn the VCR tool ON and review the events of the previous/current turn.

Oleg

Thanks.

But in that case I still see a valid point in having the in-game solution. One big reason for the lengthy player turns is of course the amount of info one has to take in and deal with. If this is done step-by-step instead of en masse I think this would actually speed up game-play markedly; this due to the fact that you can have a certain idea/strategy of what to do next turn and you can follow the evolvements to see whether it still will be viable when your turn comes and if not alter your plans as the game moves along. In the sequential PBEM you might have to throw you plans out the window and sort of start from scratch again when your turn comes (this is of course somewhat crudely depicted, but I hope everybody catches my drift). Simply put: instead of using 25 proprietary minutes, you could use 20 minutes while the others players' turns evolve and only use 5 minutes while it is actually your turn.

Not meaning to be a thorn in someones side here, but I really do think a LAN support would be meaningful and add real value to the game.

[Oleg Mastruko]

I won't comment on LAN support other than say I will personally never use it. Some players might find it useful (if 2by3 decide to add it via patch), but I think PBEM is a way to go.

The rest of your post I don't understand one little bit [&:]

But in that case I still see a valid point in having the in-game solution.

What do you consider to be "in game solution"? You have VCR/turn replay tool, and it's "in game" solution to review other player's moves. What more would you want, and what's it got to do with direct play being supported or not?

You mean to say it's more fun to actually watch other players move their pieces on the screen in real time (even if it takes 30 minutes for them to do so) then to review what they did in quick and to-the-point turn review in 60 seconds?

I don't think so. Consider that 50% of player's turn is spent on production screens, tweaking production and research. All you'd be able to see during other player's production phase is static map... pretty boring. I'd say.

O.

[Gullet]

I won't comment on LAN support other than say I will personally never use it. // The rest of your post I don't understand one little bit

OK, I'll have a go att explaining it differently. First, what I mean with "LAN" and "in-game solution" is actually the same, so let us just call it LAN for short (I admit it was somewhat confusing). Second, as described by others I find the VCR function in itself great, and therefore nothing to negatively comment on.

Now to the explanatory part. My intention is not to watch a static screen just like a deer is mesmerized by a car's headlights [;)]. I was more envisioning that all the "PBEMing" is done within the game itself (this is what I refer to as LAN) and that every time a player has finished his moves ALL the other players can take part of what has happened - preferably indicated with an alert-sound to your liking. With this "system" you could walk about your apartment/use your computer doing whatever you like to do and when the alert sounds (indicating someone's turn is over) check in on the evolvement of the game, i.e. see the last move and ponder whether that changes your strategy. My experience with the sequential PBEM, as proposed by 2by3games, in multi-player games is that there is no real point in making too much of a strategy before you get to see the other players' moves and therefore all the strategic thinking is done when it is your turn - this is what a referred to as "proprietary time" in my previous posting. My point is that if you have the ability to check in on other players' moves as the game moves along, a lot of the strategic thinking is already done when your turn comes and therefore you wouldn't need the same amount of time once your turn comes - and thereby speeding up things. Using the analogy to how CATV networks are built I am talking about "star PBEM" (the info is spread to all users simultaneously) instead of "sequential PBEM".

Did that clarify things...anything? [:)]

/G

[Oleg Mastruko]

I see what you meant now but I still think it's inpractical and clumsy compared to regular PBEM.

There were some turn based games that supported direct net play (or LAN play or whatever). Excellent SF game Incubation comes to mind (anyone here played Incubation?). But playing them vs. human on LAN was a nightmare.

All it takes is ONE indecisive, slow, too-much-thinking, read-the-manual-seven-times, "think everything over zillion times" kind of player to ruin the game for the rest of the group. One of my buddies at work (effectively my boss) - he must over-analyze every detail in games seven billion times: playing a simplest of FPS games vs. him over LAN meant waiting like hours for him to decide during setup phase whether his guy in the game will wear green or red space suit etc. Playing WaW vs. guys like him using direct net play would be the worst gaming experience I could imagine, I am not kidding [X(]. I'd do my turn in 5-10 minutes then we'd all (whole group of players) wait another hour or two for him to do his turn. THEN if it's 4 player game you'd have to wait another 2 players to do their turns... *yawn!!*

In PBEM you do your turn and then who cares how long will the others take to do theirs. If they're too slow you start more PBEMs to fill the time [;)] If they're VERY fast then it's all the same as if you play directly over the net.

Just my opinion.

O.