I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Anyone else feel the same way as myself?
I get the feeling the amount of people playing by TCP/IP will be miniscule in relation to those wanting AI enhancements.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I agree, first the AI and other refinements!

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I want both, but if I had to choose I think I would go with better AI. I think. Can't decide! AAAHHH!!!! http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

i disagree..without tcp ip...hard to get my Online gaming buddy to play. TCP IP is most important for this game to really take off. its a selling point..i always thought this game had it before i bought it..i dont mind waiting.im learning as i go, but too long...it will take the point of playing. I dont really care about beating up AIs, i want to beat up my buddies..:P

to me..tcp is everything..since you can tweak the AI forever and it never be as Smart as a true human..grin.




------------------
Waves his Red flag

Socialist

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

4 guys..medium galaxy..not to big..60-70 systems...

easy playable..saturday long days or couple hours during weekdays...a bLast...worth playing more than with silly AI's

i know im not alone in wanting that...

------------------
Waves his Red flag

Socialist

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I've changed my mind. I want TCP/IP over AI now. http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I don't have two uninterupted hours much less TCP/IP time. Market wise, Online gaming is probably a miniscule fraction of sales, even more so for turn based wargames as opposed to twitch and shoot stuff or RTS. Give me better AI.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I think very few people will have the time or want to spend their entire weekend multi-play a turn based game. At least I will never try that, even if I do get 10 hours free I wont spend it all on a game (and if I do, my friends don't).

I vote for AI.

(ps, how many turns can u play in 10 hours anyway, 40? probably won't even meet your human adversary ).

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I have seen this debate on every single forum for strategy games in my days. There's always those who want it and those who don't. I say put it in there and give people the choice. That's what sells, alot of choices to make.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I'm all for an AI upgrade first.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

you will never be happy with any AI and it will always be beatable and never stand up to a human.

just pass me the TCP IP ..and you guys fiddle here and wait for neverending patches to make slightly less beatable AI..woopie
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif


i would never buy a game to play against myself/and or AI....only to learn the game and then to play a human and see how one can really do



------------------
Waves his Red flag

Socialist

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Well, the reason I posted this is Mephisto and several other people have made some huge strides in fixing the AI... but it's always nice to have it be "official". This is why it makes sense to me, for them (MM) to post an AI enhancement patch based on Mephisto and companies work, and then get back to the TCP/IP.

By the way, I guarentee only .1% people will actually finish a TCP/IP game unless they are unemployed or retired. The games are simply too big and long, and most people would get bored after spending 15 hours on-line with someone. You'd have to have 2 incredibly insane people dedicated to each other in an almost sick kinda way... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

[This message has been edited by jpinard (edited 10 January 2001).]

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jpinard:

By the way, I guarentee only .1% people will actually finish a TCP/IP game unless they are unemployed or retired. The games are simply too big and long, and most people would get bored after spending 15 hours on-line with someone. You'd have to have 2 incredibly insane people dedicated to each other in an almost sick kinda way... http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif

[This message has been edited by jpinard (edited 10 January 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

funny, thats why god invented the saved game.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Puke, that's not the way I meant it! To play through would take like 5-15 hours at a time! Well, on a medium-large sized game.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jpinard:
Puke, that's not the way I meant it! To play through would take like 5-15 hours at a time! Well, on a medium-large sized game.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif yeah, but it depends on how long you are going to play for. besides, figure how long it would take to do that IP game, then multiply by 10 to get the number of DAYS for a PBEM game at 1 turn a day, and wonder why people want it. this is basically the same boat that all strat games have been in, from SMAC, to the new CIV games.. unless you want to play something mindless like starcraft or AoE, its going to take some time.

even at 1 hour a day, an IP game should take about 1/4th the time of a PBEM game.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

As someone who has been playing a fair amount of hotseat SPACE EMPIRES IV (SE4), I am completely in the "fix tcp/ip first" crowd. The game is so good when you have a human opponant and you will never be able to create an AI (especially one that does not cheat the fun out of the game) which can give you the kind of intense and competitive game that another human player can.

Now, I realize that there are some out there that never want to have to face another human player -- they prefer to be legends in their own minds; but, what has always separated the SPACE EMPIRE games has been that the games have provided the best in space empire gaming. So please, MM, get tcp/ip enabled as soon as possible and then tweak the AIs to kingdom come. The better AIs will lure me back into solo play; but, only as practice for the real thing when I know that there is evil lurking just beyond the next known system.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

what about serial play? when's the Last time you played a game with that, huh? its better than hotseat, you are face to face, but you have two keyBoards! they could make a serial / simultanious mode, that would rock! or how about MIDI mode? anyone remember the Atari ST? anyone here ever do a midi-maze party?

lets have that instead, i dont like the Internet anyway. why not IPX? I dont have an apple, but I can run appletalk as a protocol, lets have appletalk play!

woo-woo!

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Improve the AI !!! I mean the hard-coded AI algorithms, not only the text files (moders are doing a very good work on them already).

TCP/IP is second priority. I will love to play over the net, but I remember from CIV that my counterparts never showed up again after a game had to be saved,

BTW, the serial play would be great. If TCP/IP gets implemented, I hope that this serial will be possible , too.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I go for the AI too... And I don't care if the AI cheat or not: I only want a challenging game.

I have played Moo2 Online, and I was unable to finish ONE multiplayer game! (I have played near of 10, and always somebody lost the connection, or somebody have not intentions to continue the game, or simply was very boring wait during 20 minutes per every player, to do your own moves).

But playing Moo2 against the AI, I have finished hunderd of games... Also, depending of your race and your luck, the Impossible Level could be really very challenging.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I go for the AI too... And I don't care if the AI cheat or not: I only want a challenging game.

I have played Moo2 Online, and I was unable to finish ONE multiplayer game! (I have played near of 10, and always somebody lost the connection, or somebody have not intentions to continue the game, or simply was very boring wait during 20 minutes per every player, to do your own moves).

But playing Moo2 against the AI, I have finished hunderd of games... Also, depending of your race and your luck, the Impossible Level could be really very challenging.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I would have to disagree, TCP/IP would be great for SE4 because unlike Master of Orion 2 it has a simultaneous mode. This way everybody takes their turns at the same time so the only waiting would be if someone takes exceptionally long for their turn. You can also play with more than 2 people in simultaneous unlike turn based games.
I will probably still do play by email though because its hard to schedule times for everyone to play together. I haven't tried PBEM since the demo, I hope the bugs were fixed.
-igoblin

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by igoblin:
I would have to disagree, TCP/IP would be great for SE4 because unlike Master of Orion 2 it has a simultaneous mode. This way everybody takes their turns at the same time so the only waiting would be if someone takes exceptionally long for their turn. You can also play with more than 2 people in simultaneous unlike turn based games.
I will probably still do play by email though because its hard to schedule times for everyone to play together. I haven't tried PBEM since the demo, I hope the bugs were fixed.
-igoblin<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC MOO2 had ONLY simultaneous mode. You would give orders and when you click end turn button, they would be carried out, just like SE4 simultaneous mode. I have played several games of MOO2 on Heat.net but they would never be finished. It would just get too long and boring to wait for all of the players to finish your turns (they would get really long if a player had some large tactical combat). That is a problem with turn-based games, AFAIK.
However, I do think that SE4 should have TCP/IP multiplayer, but I believe that the majority of players will play it SE4 in singleplayer or hotseat, so AI should be addressed first. Personally, I don't have any preference, as I like to play both multi and single player games, so I would vote for both.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

My $0.02: First improve the AI.

Selfish reason: If I'm going to play humans, it will be members of my own family, and for that I can use hot-seat. So I personally don't care about TCP/IP.

Unselfish reason: Improved AI will also improve TCP/IP games (and hotseat games, and PBEM games), unless you're going to play with only human players. No, even then, it helps, because strategic combat will be better. So improved AI benefits everyone, whereas putting in TCP/IP only benefits one segment of the market.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Consider me a tcp/ip voter. I love the challenge that only a human opponent can provide. For my own use, I can only do hotseat with a friend of mine one day a week, but I could do tcp/ip daily and therefor get more bang for my buck with this game. IMO, improving the AI is a gradual process that we modders can participate in along with MM. Tcp/ip is something we can not do on our own, and it represents a revolutionary step as far as game mechanics. I am certain that it will be difficult to code, but it will be well worth it based upon the demand that I have seen for it on this site.

------------------
Vir! You have made a mess of this post once again, now give me a large cup of brivari so that I may begin to forget the bad times and remember the glory of the great Centauri Republic.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Lets put it another way, people who use Email
spend much more time to finish games..almost rediculous to set up a game and play it for a year (patchs themselves will goof up games with so much time spent)

With tcp..hardcore..and i mean hardcore wargamers.in smaller Groups could actually play and save. There are ways of allowing people to look around while others do their turn and do it right. AOE had some workablity in that area. resonable games..
mid level galaxy 60-70 systems or so..we all know huge 200+ would be rediculous. even solo i dont do anything that big..100 systms is huge in my opinion. The point being, people would play each other and can get back to one another. Wont take long to pick out the losers who dont come back and finish what they started. Keeping games at 4 or so players is workable..and reasonable..finish working on the AI, im not against that. What does bother me is if they dont make a
good "Stable" tcp ip connections..turn based game work great in TCP IP, just needs a little time and effort and most will be satisfied.


sorry but playing a AI is meaningless long term, they are just "extras" to move aside ...variables in the mix..in between Humans.

An AI doesnt care if it wins or loses.



------------------
Waves his Red flag

Socialist

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Just to elaborate a little on what dmm touched on: I think he's very correct.

If you think about it, coordinating an ongoing TCP game with 2 or 3 people shouldn't be a problem. Coordinating a TCP game with 5 or more people could get hairy. Add even more players and the problems increase exponentially.

"Well, so-and-so can spare an hour saturday between 8 and 11, but what's-his-name has to take his wife out. Meanwhile who's-his-face has a wedding to attend sunday, so he can't make it saturday after 10. Etc., etc..." Schedule problems will also be compounded further by different time zones.

With this in mind, it seems that the most enjoyable TCP games will be played with around 3 or 4 people. And a large quadrant with only 3 players could get... well, boring quickly. Now, fill the remaining slots with a few of the current Version AI's and you've got basically just a few minor hindrances until you can get to one of the other human players. Fill the empty slots with a few good, solid AI's and the game would really take on some color. It would be really cool to have to seek out alliances with your human buddies in order to survive a vicious AI onslaught. I guess you could accomplish this easily enough with the current AI by using Team Mode, but then diplomacy with the AI would be rendered useless.

Then again, all of this is pure speculation as we have yet to see how well TCP would work. So maybe I'd like to see the TCP first so we can start seeing how it plays. Honestly, I started writing this as an argument to improve the AI first, but now I find that I'm completely torn on the issue.

Sorry for wasting everyone's time with this absurd post of mine hehe http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif...

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Also, a good AI would make it difficult to tell whether the person you are facing is an AI or another human. (That is, without relying on the content of text Messages they send you...)

Derek

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

One feature which is common in several tcp/ip enabled games is a time limit on moves. If you are playing in simultaneous mode, you just set a time limit that the players are permitted to make their moves and I don't see why the same concept could not be used for a turn based game. This simple device will keep most games moving along. The only problem would be IF tcp/ip would permit tactical combats to be played. At present, that only works with the turn based mode. The nice thing about hotseat play, at present, is that you get to do the tactical combats -- which can be a bLast.

My current hotseat game is on a large galaxy map with the maximum number of players (two of which are human) with the AI set at the most difficult levels and bonuses. So far, the game has really been a bLast.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Yes, time limits on moves would be a must for TCI/IP play. A real benifit to the game. However, in some cases, that does cause crashes as the packets get lost. (Rebellion, BOTF)

Overal, I think its much more important to support TCI/IP than anything else at this point. Make the game universally accessibable to players over TCI/IP, and the game will grow in leaps and bounds.

Look how long BOTF was active at the Zone. Dispite its flawed MP, it was still a great game to play, and poeple played it there for over a year and a half. Rebellion was also a success in that regards although limited to only two players. (that was its down fall)

SEIV has the potential to be a "long term" game. You set up in the morning, and play all day. Of course, you would want to play with about 5 to 8 players, with a medium galaxy (100 to 125) systems.

Otherwise, you'll be saving and coming back to it again and again.

The one BIG problem with TCI/IP games is the fact that people can not dedicate the needed time to play a full game. They will often, more than not, drop out resulting in a CRASH. AOL players get shafted here as AOL will regularly shut down there connection. The people with Cable and DSL will get spiked every two or three hours as there provider randomized there IP's on a DHCP system. (Same as getting disconnected for a minute or two)

Over all, TCI/IP will be boost to the game, but it does have its draw backs. But the players of this game are dedicated types, and I would hope are into a game for the long hull.

Well those were just my thought.

------------------
"We've made too many compromises already, too many retreats! They invade our space and we fall back -- they assimilate entire worlds and we fall back! Not again! The line must be drawn here -- this far, no further! And I will make them pay for what they've done!" -- Patric Stewart as Captain Picard
UCP/TCO Ship Yards

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I wouldn't suggest getting 5-8 people into an IP game. That's cause once you save the game, you will not open it for several weeks, if not months - that's how hard it is to get everybody back together again. I'm speaking from my experience with Alpha Centauri. If you want 4-20 people, pbem is gonna end up as faster way to play. IP games are best for 1 on 1 playing.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

imperishable, I can't agree with you there. It's all about finding the right crowd to play it. When I was an active AoW player Online I rarely had problems taking up saved games with 6-8 players in them.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Puke Empire:
I think very few people will have the time or want to spend their entire weekend multi-play a turn based game. At least I will never try that, even if I do get 10 hours free I wont spend it all on a game (and if I do, my friends don't).

I vote for AI.

(ps, how many turns can u play in 10 hours anyway, 40? probably won't even meet your human adversary ).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

if you play a simultanious ... trust me you can easly get lots of people playing. turn based is a little harder.. but still heros of might and magic... 1-7 warloards just to name a fiew others that i can remember playing for over 24 hrs at one setting with around 5 other guys warloards was tcp and helped... specaly cause we could all use our own puter... it could be a BIG asset if done right... or a nightmare if wrong... but it has every chance of making it worth wile... plus what about seIV con (ie quake con) the email option is kinda cool in one respect... but i couldent see spending a year to finsh a game... one turn at a day... and i play a web based game that is real time..

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

having never played a strategy game in multi, I'll defer judgement to you who have. willing to try though if/when implemented.

as for improving the AI... I am in only the second game where I have survived long enough to be in a dead heat for 3d or 4th place. most time I get glassed ...so the AI is bad enough for me http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/ima...ons/icon12.gif

[This message has been edited by pathfinder (edited 15 February 2001).]

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I'm going to make a few real silly points.

1) Those who want to TCP/IP and can play for hours at a need are younger persons who have lots of free time on their hands. (IMHO)

2) The rest of us don't have hours or money to sit and use up a phone/cable line to play a game.

3) If you can be Online to do TCP why can't you just open up and send out the files via e-mail?

4) not to mention if you do it via e-mail you can play from work with little effort.



------------------
Seawolf on the prowl

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Besides, for those who don't want to wait for email because it might be slow, you can always x-fer files through icq/aol/yahoo messenger/etc/etc, or if you are adventurous set up a PPTP tunnel with your buddy and share folders and have a direct write going. You have to wait a few minutes to finish turn anyway, what is 2 seconds to reopen SEIV and start the next turn.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I agree fully with seawolf.
As the game is now there is no really reason for me (old fart) to play it Online or even per pbem.

This would change if MM introduce a scenario generator with its MP-addon. With such a generator we could create short to medium scenarios which could be played in a reasonable time.

If MM does not make such a scenario generator, I fear for a lot of people the Multiplayer addon is not very useful. In this case the time should be rather used for AI-improvement.

bye
Klaus

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

TCP/IP doesn't necessarily mean internet games. I work in an office with about another 5 guys willing to play a couple of hours after work or during lunch.
Lan play in simultaneous works well. Alpha Centauri was brilliant. Warlords was cool.
AI is important but you will never get an AI good enough to challenge a good player.
Fo a challenging game human is the only possibility.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

sending email on a lan with no internet or email server wouldent work to well and lots of collages get kids renting/reserving a large conferance with no internet access...(or wont allow the students to access it from there) plus its a pain to explain how to use the mouse to some people... let alone explain to them how and WHERE to place the file sent via email.. (if im remembering correctly never played email.) plus as i understand alot of moder's are working on helping the ai as well.. (not shure if its hard coded..expecting it mostly is)

i would like to see a form of live play be put on back burner... weather it be using say icq Messages or some form of network play.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Atrocities:
Yes, time limits on moves would be a must for TCI/IP play....
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I like the way it was done in Global Conquest...you could select the time limit everyone agreed upon. You had selections from unlimited to 'Firecracker', with 5 minute turns being the default. I personally liked the 'Firecracker' option....where, the first person done ended the turn for everyone else. There was also an option that ended the turn 1 minute after the first person finished (ie, player 1 just hit the 'Done' button and now everyone else has exactly 1 minute to finish).

But in all cases, you should have the option to choose your time limit.

As for whether or not Malfador Machinations should work on TCP/IP interface, or on game AI...depends on what will sell more games http://www.shrapnelgames.com/ubb/images/icons/icon7.gif I'd like to see an IP option. With exactly the same amount of conviction, I'd like to see a smarter computer player too....

Paul E. Mason
Senior VMS Systems Administrator

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

you don't need email to play PBEM, hehe contradiction in terms??
All you need to do is transfer the files to the host computer. You could do that by mapping a drive on each client computer to the seIV directory on the host computer.
So the only issue right now is the fact that SEIV exits when you finish a turn. There is no need for tcp/ip for a lan game (i mean a tcp/ip interface for the game, tcp/ip-netbue or ipx/spx are still needed for network) You can already play a langame, all we need is an option to keep the game running after your turn. True, the host still has to send the files to each client, but you can write a batch file to do a copy directory to do that.

with a little skill anybody can set this up, if only the game didn't stop.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I am currently playing a hotseat game with three other players. We are having a bLast; but, we all dream of the day when we can all simply log on at home and play tcp/ip. Even though we would have to (as the game is now configured) play with simultaneous moves and would not be able to use the tactical ship combat, we would much prefer the tcp/ip option. I say damn the torpedoes -- let's get tcp/ip implemented for the true fans of SE4.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

I can see the need for both. one one hand yes every one pretty much uses the ai in one form or another in all games... but to help the game grow tcp or some CONVIENANT method of play needs to exist.(ie sharing your hdd over the internet is a BAD!!! idea especaly on cable) but tcp can also caus problims. a thought could a "helper" program be made, maybe by a fan. that would do the connecting and file transfers for seIV.


also question to Aron and Richard what can we the fans do to help. i know sundevil/jpinard and others are in a "modconsortium" of sorts in hopes to help you guys. but PLEASE let us know if you would? or not like our help as I am shure there are lots of people in the community that would be glad to help you guys to improve the gaming quality.

sory if the message doesnt make sense somehow it got cleared had to rewrite and it doesnt sound right :/

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Overall the AI will be used by a lot more players, if only to flesh out hotseat/pbem games. Making the AI as challanging as possible would provide the most bang for the buck.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Why not do something like Counter-Strike? Here me out before you shake your heads and laugh...

Have permanent SEIV servers with a set number of user slots. Players could connect and take control of the various empires. When players weren't using an empire it would be run by the AI.

Yes I know, but why would want to run an Empire after some amateur or stupid AI has run it into the ground...well my answer is that here we have a simulation of the rise to power various leaders with various styles and goals. Personally I think it would be awesome, the challenge of taking some downtrodden empire and bringing it to power through superior tactics. Of course the players who were dedicated to playing longer would have the advantage because of simply a better knowledge of there empire and it being molded to their will.

The game would be won by reaching whatever victory conditions were active at which point the map would be regenerated and a new game started.

OR!!!! And this is ambitious, I know, but I was very intrigued by by Nyx's interview with Aaron in which he suggested a massively multiplayer Version of the game. Personally I would like to see a system like Star Peace with a constant Online community that could be logged on an off. When you weren't on, your empire would be played by the AI. This would take a much larger map or, perhaps, several different universes. Also needed would be a constantly upgraded research tree. This would probably be the most ambitious part as you would need some creative individual or team to constantly come up with new techs to keep the game fresh. New players would get to start a new empire in some far corner of the galaxy. The system could be kept clean by elimination certain empires after so many months of idle time and so on.

My main problem with all of this is you would have to maintain some kind of a time limit on turns. This in turn would limit the size of your empire as you would only have so much time to carry out the various important tasks requiring your attention. Or perhaps this make a player focus on maintaining proper battle lines with the core worlds being AI controlled. I know this whole proposal is a little clumsy but, if it could be enacted, it would be somthing that I most certainly would be interested in playing and I believe others would be too...especially since using these ideas you wouldn't be required to play hours and hours if you didn't wish too.

Just a few thoughts...PLEASE PLEASE RESPOND!!!! AND FEEL FREE TO SHOOT THIS TURKEY FULL OF HOLES....I AM VERY INTERESTED IN FINDING SOME WORKING MODEL OF MULTIPLAYER.

------------------

"He's dead, Jim."-- Lt. Commander Leonard "Bones" McCoy |Chief Medical Officer / USS Enterprise (NCC-1701)

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

TCP/IP is a must!!!
Every three or four month we do a little LAN-Session. It's just more fun to beat human opponents than some more or less dumb AI.
I got a flatrate now, so me and a few friends would surely use the tcp/ip feature to play a few hours each evening.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Dirk - I think if a persistant universe was made, then guys with better experiance should not be able to engage in battle with new guys, otherwise it does not become fun for someone just starting out only to keep getting his butt kicked cause his pdc level 1 can't quite take out the battleship with a full compliment, at some stage, new guys are going to expand into the main arena. A possible solution to this would be a tech level thing, you can't attack an empire with a certain amount of tech levels below your own, but a lower tech level could try it's luck against a higher level.

tic

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

Good point TicToc....perhaps you could make it that after a certain period of time techs would become available to the new guys so they wouldn't start to far back. You could do this by having a universal Tech Level that advanced at it's own pace seperately from empires. This way it would still be possible to gain technological superiority, but you would never fall so far in the hole as to actually be in the dark ages. I also believe that this would mirror reality as even the poorest nations on Earth have some forms of modern technology. Or mabye you could do like in Imperium Galactica where you could buy ships and such on the open market. That way even while their tech was small you could purchase some newer ships. Or, new races could start with a certain amount of research point allowing them to get caught up with the rest quicker...

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

dirk.
this is an absolutely awsome idea. As you mentioned it would require a much larger universe and more players. And especially a much larger and more expensive tech tree.
its up to MM to develope the tools for the GMs which allows them to initiate such a game.

Additional features I suggest for such games:
1. races can evolve during the game -with experience points given by the GMs because of good active role-play, good strategy, intel or whatever.

2. GMs should be able to create events, races, single and multiple units and much more to keep the game interesting and to create a kind of storyline. This should be a very powerful tool only for GMs.

bye
Klaus

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

We went from basic tcp/ip to wanting an Ultima style game, of course nobody wants to pay for it,... what you are describing will require servers (which are expensive) and a whole lot of tech expertise. I am sure MM has other things to work on besides SEIV.

For now all we need is a fix to stop SEIV from automatically exiting after a sim turn. the transfer/helper program will be useless till then.

Re: I\'d rather have MM work on AI as opposed to TCP/IP
 

BY the way,.. i never suggested sharing your harddrive over the internet, and anybody who uses cable with out a NAT device like a netgear rt314 is foolish to think by not having file and print services installed that they are safe.