counter request

Discussion in 'CO2 - Feature Requests' started by sinbad, Dec 9, 2014.

  1. sinbad

    sinbad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Panthers,
    I've my personal request:

    1. To make Multiplayer mode easier and friendly

    2. I'm verry sorry for someone...
    but...
    don't - i repeat, DON't - introduce pbem mode.

    -)
     
  2. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    14
    Would you mind providing the community with the rationale behind your requests? That way it would be easier to swing opinion in your favour, or help other people engaging in an expedient constructive (edited)discussion. I'd be very interested n your reasoning against PBEM.

    P.S.: Non-native tongue here. Did I use "expedient" in a correct context?:oops:
     
    #2 Iconoclast, Dec 9, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2014
  3. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    424
    I'm not sure but I suspect you meant something else other than expedient. Expedient means to do something in a short time frame - eg the expedient option was... Perhaps you meant a "meaningful" discussion or a "worthwhile" one or "rational" one or maybe something else again. Hope this helps.
     
  4. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    14
    Ah, okay. I was trying to find another, more eloquent word for "fruitful" I guess. Thanks! I think "constructive" is another synonym for what I wanted to say :D

    And before someone thinks "he could have used a dictionary". I did! But sometimes, especially when it is about nuances of a language, translations might be a bit ambiguous and/or simply wrong.

    A
     
  5. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    424
    No worries Iconclast. Your courage in coming forward like that is to be applauded. :)
     
  6. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    136
    Your English is great, no worries.
    Expedient has a connotation of 'convenient' as opposed to 'best' (or not necessarily best). If someone came up with an expedient solution it would be the fastest and most convenient, but not necessarily the best. That's the idea. Constructive - as you've put - is exactly the word you were looking for. :)
     
  7. sinbad

    sinbad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's a complex matter

    but...
    here's some argument
    (I quote from an old discussion)

    Ulisin (me. IMHO)
    1
    If you will play CO pbem (Igoyougo or Wego doesnt' matter), you will have 30 minutes turns, let'say. So you will have 48 turns for a day, and then about 70-100 turns for most of scenarios!
    Feeling will be very different from now!
    A very boring game!!!

    2.
    30 minutes turn isn't enough, in most cases!!!
    So - let's say you will have 10 minutes turns... you will have 72 turns for 12 hours of daylight, let's say... And you've done only 1 day!
    Most of scenarios have 2-3-4 days of combat, and more
    = 200-300 400 turns
    Aaassssgggghhhhhh
    Very very very boring!!!

    3.
    During LAN-MP games you can stop and think, of course, but you have to consider your opponent!
    So you don't think too much, and this is very realistic!!
    Thinking too much, to have as time as you want to do a move - as we do with pbem - is not realistic, not at all!!!


    Pekische
    I have the same opinion... all processes in real time is the main feature of Command ops... I would like to see more comfortable UI for online playing rather than PBEM. Online playing could attract more players but PBEM really kills CO specificity.

    Werewolf:
    It is the real time, top down orders structure that makes Command OPs what it is. Order a regiment or a division or even (rarely for me) a whole corps and watch the battle unfold. Jump in as necessary when your AI commanders drop the ball.
    IMO PBEM would destroy the uniqueness of CO.

    Phoenix
    Don't understand the need for turn based. When you play MP you can stop it whenever you want (it runs at the slowest speed selected by either player, including paused) and take as long as you want (subject to your opponent getting bored) to plan things. I agree that the RT nature of it is important. Why not PBEM too? Well, only because the devs are pushed getting anything out given the time/funding constraints and if you add PBEM it will have to be maintained etc. It will take up dev time.



    And now I can add (I beg your pardon for my english)

    Pbem is very "comfortable". So it will happen that everyone will play solo pbem. PBEM per se brings to huge scenarios and huge quantity of unity and troops - that's beacause, if you want to play a satisfying amount of time, you need a minimum of things to do (i.e. to move units).
    A minimum of units x 1 turn simply means (in wargame) a lot of units x 1 move. (wargame is not like chess)

    Huge scenarios usually wants a lot of turns, a lot of turns increase game lenght, and boredom increases.
    Pbem is very "comfortable", you play when and where you want. But it has some side effects

    Pbem is for lazy people and fussy wargamers
    -)-)
     
  8. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    136
    My view on PBEM may have changed a little, though I still don't see how it could be easily implemented with this game. It's a shame, I think, that there is so little player v player activity in Command Ops. I have played H2H a handful of times and it was extremely enjoyable - around 100 times more fun than playing the AI, not even in the same category. It OUGHT to be where it's at. It's tense and unpredictable. It seems to mean something when you play a person, something more. I love it, and would wish to do much more. The reason I haven't done more is because, (a) there's hardly anyone out there who wants to do it, (b) when you get hold of someone who is willing it then becomes quite difficult to get the connect going, I've found, (c)it's even more difficult to arrange convenient times, (d) you need LOADS of free time to do it justice. Point D is usually the killer. It takes loads of time to play the game anyway, of course, but alone you can just come to it whenever you like. With an opponent you need to schedule a massive amount of time away from real life. That's the difficulty. PBEM might solve all of this and introduce a very welcome human dimension. It would have to be WEGO, of course. The length of turn is the difficult thing. I wonder if the players could agree the length, each move?
     
    #8 john connor, Dec 11, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
  9. sinbad

    sinbad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    I love it, and would wish to do much more.
    After only one session of LAN-MP everyone says same thing!!

    The reason I haven't done more is because, (a) there's hardly anyone out there who wants to do it,
    If you introduce pbem system, none will try LAN anymore!!!

    (b) when you get hold of someone who is willing it then becomes quite difficult to get the connect going, I've found
    True, same for us. But connection could be made more easy, or not?

    (c)it's even more difficult to arrange convenient times,
    Yes, true. Can I add "laziness"? No desire to share time with other people?

    (d) you need LOADS of free time to do it justice. Point D is usually the killer. It takes loads of time to play the game anyway, of course, but alone you can just come to it whenever you like. With an opponent you need to schedule a massive amount of time away from real life.
    Yes, true, this is why I think you should add more short scenario, 2-3-4 days
    2 day scenarios means usually 2-3 evenings, it's not too much


    PBEM will solve a lot of problems, true, but IMHO it's a medicine that will kill the patient


    IMHO: you should add PBEM merged with LAN (mandatory for dayhour, mandatory for x hours every y pbem turns, I don't know!!!)
    This could solve part of your (d) problem, without destroying uniqueness of CmdOps and its 'realism'
     
    #9 sinbad, Dec 11, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
  10. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    119

    I don't understand why having so many turns will make it boring, slow yes, but boring?
    If not much is going on for you because maybe you are on the defensive and awaiting your opponent to make a move, it should be very quick and easy to just submit your move, then move onto doing something else.
    That something else might be playing another person via PBEM, or multiple games with multiple people, or it might be a solo game you are playing just before you got interrupted by the PBEM. Or something boring like cutting the grass in the garden?




    I think 30 min turns would work, but it would be much more effective once sequential tasking has been developed for the game, and it would also be cool if players could adjust the turn lengths on the fly, by mutual agreement.

    Even on the slowest game speed the time in game is accelerated. It is approximately 10 seconds real time per 60 seconds (1 min) game time on my computer, others may vary depending on your system, and the number of units on the map.
    This means that for every minute of thinking time you get in real life a commander on the ground would have got 6 min to make the same decision, or put another way, he would have received 6 hours to make the same decision, if it took you an hour to decide on a course of action.
    This makes the decision making time in game very unrealistic.
    There is no denying it makes it more challenging, but it is not more realistic.

    PBME can be almost instantaneous for as long as both players are at their computers, and actively submitting returns.
    When one of the players has to leave for other commitments the game can still be continued even when the two players can't find time to actively play at the same time.
    When both players find themselves at the computer at the same time again the pace can be picked up again.

    I don't really understand this need of yours for the game to be played at speed to make it interesting?
    Some of the scenarios I play for my AAR's take months, Sometimes years lol, and I usually play them in 1 hour turns.




    PBEM is for busy people, that often cant find time to commit to a long session in front of their computers, and for people with bad backs, that find sitting for extended periods painful!
    It is also for people that have high pressure jobs, that are constantly under time constraints at work, who would like to plan and execute their moves in a relaxed leisurely fashion in their free time, but still have the uncertainty, and skill that only another human opponent can bring to the table.

    There is no reason that PBEM Option, should affect the way you decide to play the game.
    Its just another way to play the game that may bring in more customers, or may not.
    Either way if it is developed, participation in PBEM is not a requirement for you to enjoy the way you decide to play the game :confused:
     
    #10 Daz, Dec 11, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
  11. sinbad

    sinbad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Daz
    I disagree (and I'am busy guy, as everyone of us)

    A.
    I'm busy, true: if I play a 100 turns pbem game (not a special lenght, we know), I'll take 300 days to end the game. 1 year to do 3 days of war? there is something that doesn't work.
    waterloo-HPS games, 50 turns, 150 real days, 5 months, 5 months to do 1 day? The day of decision? For whom? For a nitpicker?

    B.
    If you introduce PBEM as another mode to play, everyone will play only pbem, it's too comfortable
    But it's not wargame, IMHO
    Repeat my example: Waterloo in HPS games, 50 turns, 150 real days, 5 months, 5 months to do 1 day? The day of decision? For whom? For a nitpicker?

    It's not "to take decisions" as commanders do (or quite so)!!


    Arjuna, what do you think about this? Please, don't ruin your beautiful 'creature'!


    Let's give a glance to what I call the "PBEM escalation"

    I play TOAW pbem with my friend
    GAME 1
    I start a scenario - 20 units - 15 turns
    1^ turn, I open my PC and I play half an hour, and I'm very satisfied. I have to understant terrain, understand briefing, my OOB, and I have to decide my strategy
    2^ turn satisfaction
    3^ turn - - 5 - 6 same as before, everything it's ok
    turn 7 - the turn before I've decided what to do, in this case ... five minutes and I've finished
    turn 8
    as for turn 4, 5 ,6, etc
    turn 10
    attention: as for turn 7, satisfaction is lessening
    End game - a very good experience! IT SEEMS THE HEAVEN OF WARGAMERS

    GAME 2 - 3 - 4 - as for GAME 1
    GAME 5
    Now I'm very rapid, in some case I'll finish my move in 3 minutes, I spend more time to send my files than in "effective game"

    Game 7
    I start to search greater scenarios

    GAME 20
    I play only grater scenarios

    If I open PC and play I want to have some satisfaction, and satisfaction can be obtained only if I have 100 units or more (let's say, my argument is a logical matter, units can be 50, or less) and (this is very important) I have to move them!!!
    Micromanaging increases.
    I don't "command as commanders do", but I move units, I'm the uber commander=GOD.

    If you give a glance to our PC-played-wargame as WITP-AE and compare it with our boardgame or 3D games (played, not designed), the escalation that I describe is evident.

    200 turns, huge maps, neverending iperdetailed AARs

    Designers start to design this kind of games, there is no space to others, escalation seems inevitable
    I play only megascenarios, micromanaging dominates market and minds of designers and wargamers (can I call them wargamers?).
    To win I don't have to take good decisions in a 'normal' time, but I have to micomanage better than my opponent. And in my 'digital loneliness' I can easily find the time for obsessive micromanaging

    It's "to command" as commanders do (or quite so)??? I don't think so.

    (My argument is a logical matter, obviously if I consider your last game my phrases are not true, I want to explain a concept, let's say)
    -)


    PBEM is the death of true wargame
    LAN is the way to a new life
    Cmd Ops is our PHOENIX
    -)
     
  12. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    136
    Well, it's a passionate and interesting argument, Sinbad!!

    Where are you, Italy? You fancy a H2H game some time? How about Manhay, when CO2 comes out?
     
  13. Iconoclast

    Iconoclast Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2014
    Messages:
    129
    Likes Received:
    14
    I also think that this is highly interesting. Since I have not much time I would like to offer a few general comments.

    Just to get this straight to begin with: PBEM doesn't mean that the complete game has to be played in turns (See Combat Mission).

    Having said that, here's my take on PBEM in general:

    I certainly belong to the younger folks here. I am 23 now and enjoyed some amazing LAN Parties when I was in school. What do I have today? Well, all friends I used to play with (or at least the majority) are scattered across the globe, are studying, Cops or what not. We are trying to set up a Party in my home town since two years, to casually play theme hospital, Quake, or other "Games with not so much thinking", but it hasn't worked out yet. And it probably won't work out in the near future. This whole LAN thing became something that we mention out of courtesy, not so much because anyone really thinks we can pull it off anymore. Sad if you ask me.

    And computer gamers won't get younger. I would argue that I am the first generation of "mass video gamer", where I can expect everyone in my age to know who master chief is, and what World of Warcraft is. But those people will also grow old, have less time at their hand, have families and jobs to deal with. I reckon that in this community players belong to the more experienced group of people, which just is caused by a more challanging game, but when 10% of those who now play CoD find their way to more challanging titles, they will find themselves in the same spot as I do now. With lot's of friends in different time zones, and obligations, playing a genre of games that is not considered "main stream" and with that, an opponent scarcity.

    I am honestly looking foreward to PBEM, getting files from Australia, Rwanda, the Netherlands, Canada.....

    Speaking of community building: Has anyone thought about doing a Google Hangout or something like that (officially and unoffically) as a release party? Might be interesting, we could discuss a few issues live, instead of passing messages on the forum (Something that Sinbad might fancy :p)

    A
     
    #13 Iconoclast, Dec 11, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2014
  14. sinbad

    sinbad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where are you, Italy? You fancy a H2H game some time? How about Manhay, when CO2 comes out?

    Yes!
    Same answer for your three questions
    -)

    Well, it's a passionate and interesting argument, Sinbad!!
    thank you, it's not easy for me to explain "what I'm seeing in wargaming world"

    (I play wargames since 1980...)
     
    #14 sinbad, Dec 11, 2014
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2014
  15. john connor

    john connor Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    136
    Iconoclast, how I wish I were 23 again....

    Actually, I don't. I was concerned about a too much that was stressful (love, career, money, etc etc etc) when I was 23. Life is more relaxed now, definitely (even with two kids aged 8 and 9). But there were compensations then that just don't exist at 51! So I could still get a longing for that age. What there wasn't, when I was that age, was computers. Lol. We're talking only about the 1980s, not so very long ago, but before you were born. There were computers, of course, but they couldn't do much yet, were very large and very expensive. Everything has happened very quickly in this sphere. (To digress....)

    I too think any development that will allow the game to be played between humans more than it is now would be good.

    Sinbad - once CO2 out we must try to hook up then. Manhay relatively short, anyway.
     
  16. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    119
    Your point A.
    Why will it take 300 days to play a 100 turn game?
    If both players are at their computer at the same time you might get in dozens of turns in one session.
    The difference is you can both get up and move around to do other things as you need to, or you can play another game or several games with other people at the same time.

    Your point B
    I think this side of your argument is potentially flawed.
    I think PBEM may lead to people finding partners they like to play with on a regular basis, and could even lead to them wanting to play short H2H games in the future, and go out of their way to find time for it.

    You say that PBEM will discourage people from wanting to play H2H, but I think that the experience of playing another human albeit PBEM to start with, will potentially lead to more people wanting to try H2H.

    The alternative with just H2H as an option, is neither of you can find mutual time, so you never start, or the circumstances change for one, so you never finish.
     
  17. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    119
    What it really needs is a system where both PBEM, and H2H can be used to play the same game session.
    What I mean is you can swap and change between the two, so when the players are at their computers, if both agree, the game can be real time H2H, but after the session the game can be continued as PBEM until such time as both players can get together again.
    This will prevent a lot of abandoned games, and give people that are slow like me time to get their moves, and plans in order.
     
  18. Daz

    Daz Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2014
    Messages:
    861
    Likes Received:
    119
    In the good old days, but after the invention of the computer I must add (you started this Peter, so pull up your sandbag and swing that lantern, while you listen to my story) I was into Dungeons and Dragons gaming, the old rules that is.
    There was a group of us on the Wizards of the Coast Forum that used to PBEM, Dungeons and Dragons games that were entirely text based adventures.
    The only thing we had in the way of computer assistance was an automated dice roller.
    We each had a hard copy of the players handbook to look up the rules as we went along, to assist us in our paragraph of descriptive text to describe what our character were doing, thinking, and how they looked.
    There was usually five to six of us players, and a Dungeon master (DM) who would set the scene, and act on behalf of the monsters we encountered.

    The freedom to act in this play style was second to none.
    You could literally do anything you wanted, but would obviously have consequences depending on what the other players did next, or what the DM did to counter your moves.
    I really wish I had kept copies of the adventures we had, as I'm sure some of them would have made a fairly good book if edited properly, but that was many years ago now, and dozens of hard drives and computers ago.

    I must admit it took a long time to get anything done as with so many people involved in the story you had to wait quite a long time for others to respond with their moves, and quite often the adventure would fall apart if someone left or failed to respond for extended periods of time.
    It was way more involved than just reading a book though, and I have fond memories of some of the adventures, and the characters I made.
     
  19. Joe98

    Joe98 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    2
    .
    .
    My fav way to play a wagame is by PBEM.

    Most opponents are overseas so a 20 turn scenario will take 24 days or so to play
    A 30 turn scenario will take 40 days or so to play
    And so on and so forth

    People get busy and cannot always play a turn a day.

    As for Command Ops it is not designed as turn based. It could never be amended to turn based - it would require a whole new game.
     
  20. Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor

    Dave 'Arjuna' O'Connor Panther Games Designer

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2014
    Messages:
    3,252
    Likes Received:
    424
    My views on PBEM are mixed. Personally I agree with Sinbad but I have become less doctrinaire in my old age. I would like to give my customers what they want but I also want to avoid making a rod for my own back. What I would really like to see is a multiplayer LAN version that we can take to conventions and where our users can come and play en masse. That way we can have social gaming. You know actually meet the other players face to face, share a meal and a drink during the breaks and chew the fat. I could see us setting up a series of gaming rooms at Origins in Columbus OH for instance where we have the players on one side in one room and those of the opposing side in another. We could even have others logging on as observers capable of seeing the battle unfold from both sides. It would be a hoot.
     

Share This Page