IP Play or NOT to IP Play? That is the question!

[Marshall Ellis]

Hello all:

I'm going to throw a little issue out for some feedback!

Do you think EiA would be played VIA IP?

I ask this because when I look at most IP games in the market today (most strategy wargame types), I see a game that was designed to be played in one sitting i.e. NOT to save and continue. This is not an absolute BUT definitely a trend. As you guys know, I'm not sure that most people would or could complete an EiA game in one session. This is weighing on me heavily since I simply see the majority playing at a comfortable PBEM type pace.

I realize the easy answer is "We want it" but I would like to invest my resources and time wisely in featyres that will be used so I'm aksing you to give me some good OBJECTIVE feedback...

Also, as a follow-up:

If you would not play VIA IP then tell ME why...

Thank you

[Sonny]

The reason I would not play IP is the same for most other games - not enough free time for a long session and difficulty of scheduling.

Can't tell you how many times I have played 1492 to 1525 in EU2. Once the session is over the liklihood of getting together again seemed to decrease dramatically. And that is with four or five players (including myself).

Additionally the time for some players to make their turn can be quite long (therefore boring for the other players). Timed turns can work but then those needing a long time per turn would not play, further reducing the field of opponents.

One large caveat though - I have never played EIA. My feelings about the game are from reading of others experiences and being told about how great the game is.

[oldtimer]

If adding IP play is not to difficult then I would add it. But it must be able to stop at some point and then pick up from that point at a later time. I don't ever see a group completing a game of EiA in one session.

Would I play a game using IP probably not. On the other hand it does allow for communication with an empire as they move so you can try and "influence" what they do if you feel it necessary.

Of course it you have IP play then you will need instant messaging and have IM set up so that one can communicate with a particular power secretly.

I just purchased GGWAW and been following its forum and I think you might garner a few more sales with IP play. I personally think playing without it will make this game more fun. Miscommunication, missed emails, lost emails may simulate more the problems rulers had when communicating with other powers. Who knows the email you send to Russia may had been intend for Prussia and well.....

[Uncle_Joe]

I think it should be added if its not going to add huge amounts of headache. Like oldtimer mentioned, it will add to your sales in the long run.

Personally, I really dont like PBEM as I get too detached every turn and it takes too long for 'reality re-orientation'. I have a solid group that will start a game and save it to play later if the option is given. We've played Civ3 and Space Empires IV via TCP/IP and neither of those is a 'finish in one session' game either.

I also concur that the lack of IP play is something of a sticking point for GGWaW as well. It seems that at the very least, there is a vocal minority wanting to see it included.

[Barbu]

Simply put, I don't think it's possible to complete an EIA game, even for the shortest scenario, in a single session. That said, I'd prefer to play in sessions i.e. when everyone is available at the same time with real time communication. But at the same time, while I'd prefer that option, I don't think it's realistic to expect that as a standard for a 7 players game that will drag on over several sessions no matter what, so PBEM at least as an option is an absolute must.

So in short, I'd prefer both. But for this type of game, you'll need at least PBEM.

[Pippin]

I take the tcp/ip over pbem any day. Pbem just can never give you the same dynamics, or ftf diplomacy aspects. When I am allied with someone, I want to WATCH him plot his moves, and offer advice, and consult with him. I also prefer to watch my opponents closely. I love it when they take back a move, re-do it, then change their minds again. It is then you realize he is uncertain of himself. It is at this point I like to send him taunt prompts, just to ensure he does the WRONG move

And of course, I can play 1000 games in the same amount of time it would take to play just one pbem. The whole security (anti-cheat) issue with pbem is another issue too. Unless you are using a secure dice server. But even if you get to use secure dice, how do you stop one from peeking at your units and cheating on the FOW, etc...

It is possible in tcp/ip to cheat as well, but often requires quite some advanced reverse engineering.

In any case, not ALL games need tcp/ip. World at War was designed for pbem and the mechanics are designed to do so with ease. However EiA seems much more dynamic. It should also be known a lot of gamers I know didn't want to buy World at War because it had no tcp/ip support.

[PeterF]

Somewhat off topic is a WaW discussion from the war-historical group apropos of this subject:

Actually in WaW 1 turn requires 4 email exchanges per turn/season - if
four are participating. I don't think this is onerous provided your
partners are non-flaky types. It would be a stroke of genius if future
game developers offered a provision generating a HOST who could reset
absent players to AI control if necessary.


The eagerly awaited multiple turn PBEM game from Matrix is the
Napoleonic PC port Empire in Arms. I believe 6 or 7 powers are
represented, so PBEM participants may be required to submit character
references guaranteeing timely performance.

[donkuchi19]

I have never played PBEM games before so I am not all that interested in that. I am more interested as a hotseat type game. My friends and I have gotten together several times to play the boardgame and have never actually finished a game. We set it up, play several months, end the session, and then something happens. We don't get to meet again for a while, a cat, a child, or something else ruins the game. With a computer version, the only thing that could happen is if a save file corrupts.

That said, I would be interested in an IP version of the game. We would be able to continue games from our own homes and still keep playing.

I would not want it to delay the game any longer though. Maybe as an add-on later on.

(We haven't started a game since I discovered this forum about 2 years ago because we keep thinking, if we start it, it will come out and then we would start over. {Kind of like lighting a cigarette right as your food comes})

[Forward_March]

I think IP play should be possible...it is after great fun to square off for some fast gaming. The game file would have to be able to be saved and picked up later, though. I have doubts about the ability of 7 players to get together at any one time, especially when they are from many diverse time zones. The again, if you could make it a 2, 3, or 4 person game with the remaining countries served by the AI, it would be great.

I feel that the game would be too long for successful PBEM play by 7 players...I'm really hoping for a not-too-stupid AI. My personal experience is that for every 20 guys you play in PBEM, 1 or 2 meet you at the pace you like. And when you start a 4 player tournament of a game, it never makes it past the second turn.

In summary, I give tcp/ip 2 thumbs up....but if it will take too long to implement, give us the game when all of the other bugs are ironed out, then send us a patch.

[NeverMan]

First Question: Does TCP/IP play delay the release of this game?

TCP/IP play is so much better than PBEM. The whole game doesn't need to be completed in one sitting. It should be able to be saved and continued later, obviously.

TCP/IP should definitely be considered and implemented in the NEXT release of this game. Delaying this game any further than it has already been delayed is just not a reasonable

If anything, there is a VERY good chance I will not buy this game because it does not have TCP/IP. Is that a good reason?? PBEM is TOO slow and boring. It's for old men who play chess by mail. It's weak and outdated.

People say "TCP/IP games will never be completed". To that I say "Do you think that most PBEM games are ever completed, or for that matter than even most EiA games in general are ever completed". The answer is NO. Stable gamers probably have finished games before, but most likely not without some player changes.

[adamflo79]

Just for me personally, I will be playing the game with a group of friends on Sunday evening. That is when we always play games. I don't know if there is a hot seat feature in the game or not, but that is the way we would like to play. Being able to communicate with the players, perhaps even make alliances in another room while the other player is doing his turn. So I would like that feature in the game.

[eg0master]

I think IP play is a good idea.
Gettin 7 friends together for EiA once a week seams to be impossible. So PBEM seams to be one solution. IP play is another.

I think at least me and my friends are going to play this game both face to face (for that classic EiA experience) and then use PBEM to keep the game alive between F2F sessions. So if I cannot switch between hotseat (for f2f) and pbem mode (which I don't even dare hope for), IP play might be a solution aswell. once in a while between f2f sessions we can connect from our homes for a few rounds of IP play and then save. For our f2f session we use IP play on a local LAN instead of hotseat or face-2-face-PBEM.

So my summary:
I either want IP play OR the ability to switch between hotseat and PBEM modes during a game. One of these features would solve my (and my friends) problem. Having both is a bonus.

[jclauder]

IP games are the best. It allows the game to be played at a quick pace. Every multiplayer game I have played has been IP. The one time I tried PBEM, it took so long, that we gave up and quit. My vote is to put in IP in the initial release. I'm sure that will add a little time to the delivery date, but not very much. I am very much looking forward to the EIA release.

Jim

[kajmakchalan]

I feel strongly that PBEM is much more realistic than IP play for EiA. I am an experienced EiA player who has played both pbem and IP.

EiA is not designed to be a quick, "let's get in four more turns before bedtime" kind of game. It's a slow, measured game where only 3-4 players are likely to be busy at all at any one time. The other players will be building up their armies or licking their wounds, and not engaged enough to justify IP play.

To play EiA well, some thought and diplomacy needs to go into each players turn. These aren't the kinds of thing that can be carried out well live, on-line. Resolution of the turn is really just the culmination of the planning and diplomacy that has already occured between the players, and is the real game.

Another factor weighing against IP play is the difficulty of getting 7 players together, in the same time zone or on the same schedule, to play enough of the game to make it worthwhile.

I have a group of friends already who are committed to playing EiA when it finally comes out, but we are all busy with life, families, and work. Only through pbem will we ever find the time to sit down and resolve our turns.

[Scoted01]

I'm new to the forum but I have played quite a bit of EiA and agree with the last post by kajmakchalan. There is a lot of diplomacy that goes into the game which shouldn't be rushed and may be easier to pull off by PBEM. I'm sure if you have a committed group for a couple of hours you could get a few PBEM turns in one night. I wouldn't hold up the game release for IP, I'd rather see you focus on expanding the scenarios to include the revolutionary war.

Looking forward to the release!

[Marshall Ellis]

Hey guys:

My thinking is that this game has a following that reaches around multiple time zones and PBEM seems to help compensate for this. Almost every PBEM game I've been in (I will admit, we've NEVER finished) had players from around the world that it would be difficult for many to get up at 2:00AM to do a little IP play.

Just a few thoughts...

Thank you

[MartNick]

IP will certainly be the way to go for anybody thinking of playing this on a network, such as LAN parties etc

Just my 2 cents

[larrywrose]

I would say that you can add IP play, but I don't really see it as necessary. The Diplomacy phase alone when I used to play we limited to 20 minutes. This usually involved 3 players sitting around why France talked to Turkey, Spain, Prussia and Austria. This depends a lot on what wars are involved. On the other hand IP play would be awesome in a 2 player game with 5 computer run countries. Two people getting together is easy. Every time you add another player you increase the chance that somebody will not make it. So my suggestion is can the IP part of the game. Release that in the upgrade with better graphics two years after the release date.

Larry W. Rose

[Forward_March]

ORIGINAL: larrywrose

I On the other hand IP play would be awesome in a 2 player game with 5 computer run countries. Two people getting together is easy. Every time you add another player you increase the chance that somebody will not make it. So my suggestion is can the IP part of the game. Release that in the upgrade with better graphics two years after the release date.

Larry W. Rose

I agree with you completely, Larry. I don't imagine too many 7 player games done by PBEM will make it to 1806. Yes, I sound pessimistic. But my past experience with multiplayer PBEM games is that one gets busy, forgets his turn, doesn't tell someone he's taking a month-long holiday, or a million other things contribute to game stall.

Don't get me wrong...I'd love to play the thing out with six other war-mongers like myself. I just have too little faith in 5 out of 7 of my fellow war mongers.

[Executioner Five]

I'm surprised no one else has felt the same way I do yet...

I'd like to see it, but NOT, repeat, NOT, at the cost of a delay in release. If it can be patched in later, great...if it's either delay the game's release or no IP play, I'd rather see no IP play. I can live with PBEM [:)]