My suggestion
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:04 am
So I've been thinking on how to solve the sequence of play issue. Now, as you know, I believe that whenever you think of the sequence of play, you also have to think about method of multiplayer.
I've said before that I only think it is possible to play mp tcp/ip, something that would rule out pbem. However, there might actually be a middle ground here. During ye average wif-turn, there are phases which requires much interaction from both players (air, naval movement), and there are phases which doesnt require any interaction at all (land movement). The way this usually works in the face to face games (for us at least) is that the phasing player hovers over the map, while the rest of us play some game on the computer, or watch tv or whatever, and whenever any interaction is required, we are summoned to the table.
So how about this:
1) Make the game "joinable" for other players. Make it a pbem game, where the turns are saved and emailed between the players, but when the phasing player has the game open on his computer, the other players can join him. So in other words, the phasing player hosts a tcp/ip session that the other players can join and leave whenever they want.
Then, and here comes the gist of my suggestion, make all interaction like opportunity fire in SPWAW.
For example, when a naval unit moves through a seazone, the game pauses for 5-10 seconds while a pop-up asks the player "do you want to intercept yes/no". If no answer has been posted within the allotted time, it will count as a "no" and the phasing player can continue to move.
Ok, so suppose someone is on a dial-up, and dont want to host or join during his or the other players turn?
Open up a new "order dialouge" for all units. For example, right click on any unit and open up the "non-phasing options"-dialouge. In this dialouge you can set different parameters for different units. For a naval unit you can choose "do not intercept" or "intercept if enemy stack consists of nothing bigger than BB" or "intercept if enemy stack is known and consists of either ship type (select applicable)". Etc...with a handful of options like this, you can have some control over your units even though you are not "there".
Same with airunits, right-click, open dialouge box, select "do not intercepet" or "intercept unescorted bombers" or "intercept in own hex only" or whatever.
These non-phasing options should be sticky naturally, so you dont have to give new orders at the end of your turn every time.
So, here is an alternative that either lets the players be online at the same time for a "face to face"-game. This is created by letting the phasing pbem-player host if he wants to, and if he does that, other players can join the game during his turn. They can scroll around and do whatever they want, but whenever an interaction is required, they are zoomed to the right part of the map, and a popup asks them for their action. If the player is not online at that time, the computer checks for any options set by the non-phasing player.
This way we can keep the sequence of play. We remove the need to send more than one email per impulse and player, but at the same time, we retain the vital interaction between the players.
Any opinions?
I've said before that I only think it is possible to play mp tcp/ip, something that would rule out pbem. However, there might actually be a middle ground here. During ye average wif-turn, there are phases which requires much interaction from both players (air, naval movement), and there are phases which doesnt require any interaction at all (land movement). The way this usually works in the face to face games (for us at least) is that the phasing player hovers over the map, while the rest of us play some game on the computer, or watch tv or whatever, and whenever any interaction is required, we are summoned to the table.
So how about this:
1) Make the game "joinable" for other players. Make it a pbem game, where the turns are saved and emailed between the players, but when the phasing player has the game open on his computer, the other players can join him. So in other words, the phasing player hosts a tcp/ip session that the other players can join and leave whenever they want.
Then, and here comes the gist of my suggestion, make all interaction like opportunity fire in SPWAW.
For example, when a naval unit moves through a seazone, the game pauses for 5-10 seconds while a pop-up asks the player "do you want to intercept yes/no". If no answer has been posted within the allotted time, it will count as a "no" and the phasing player can continue to move.
Ok, so suppose someone is on a dial-up, and dont want to host or join during his or the other players turn?
Open up a new "order dialouge" for all units. For example, right click on any unit and open up the "non-phasing options"-dialouge. In this dialouge you can set different parameters for different units. For a naval unit you can choose "do not intercept" or "intercept if enemy stack consists of nothing bigger than BB" or "intercept if enemy stack is known and consists of either ship type (select applicable)". Etc...with a handful of options like this, you can have some control over your units even though you are not "there".
Same with airunits, right-click, open dialouge box, select "do not intercepet" or "intercept unescorted bombers" or "intercept in own hex only" or whatever.
These non-phasing options should be sticky naturally, so you dont have to give new orders at the end of your turn every time.
So, here is an alternative that either lets the players be online at the same time for a "face to face"-game. This is created by letting the phasing pbem-player host if he wants to, and if he does that, other players can join the game during his turn. They can scroll around and do whatever they want, but whenever an interaction is required, they are zoomed to the right part of the map, and a popup asks them for their action. If the player is not online at that time, the computer checks for any options set by the non-phasing player.
This way we can keep the sequence of play. We remove the need to send more than one email per impulse and player, but at the same time, we retain the vital interaction between the players.
Any opinions?