multiplayer
 

did someone make some experiences? the multiplayer mode interest me over tcp/ip. I dont have the gameyet, therefore I ask.

Re: multiplayer
 

Huh?

Me and Se5a have been playing some multiplayer, using FTP for convenience, but Email works too.

Re: multiplayer
 

argh! no tcp/ip? that is a joke or?

Re: multiplayer
 

Its there but SJ is saying he hasn't tried it.

Re: multiplayer
 

ah ok, thanks. how do the attitudes/konfiguration for the multiplayer look? someone would be so friendly and few screenshots show up?

Re: multiplayer
 

There is a TCP/IP mode, yes.
However, as a Turn Based Strategy game, you don't need it.

There is no reason why players need to be online at the same time, other than the fact that you get through more turns if your schedules match.

When playing via Email/FTP or PBW, you take your turns whenever you like.
You can even play while the other people are sleeping or at work/school.

Re: multiplayer
 

yes thats right, but i would play the game in network in simultan mode. more rounds in a session.

Re: multiplayer
 

Indeed, all serious multiplayer is simultaneous mode, no matter what the file transfer method.

Re: multiplayer
 

the old game civnet (civilization network) supported simultaneous mode over tcp/ip. the gameplay in multiplayer mode was perfect. i hope in se5 is that similarly too.

Re: multiplayer
 

Simultaneous here means that everyone enters their orders at the same time, and then all of the action is simulated all at once simultaneously, so that movement proceeds more or less fluidly, battles occur in the sequence that makes sense based on speeds of fleets and so on.

Re: multiplayer
 

I am not knocking a PBEM/PBW game pace in the slightest. I plan to play it, and I think I will enjoy it.

However, having played online MOO2 for the past 8 years, I have to disagree with your dismissal of playing online at the same time for extended periods. In my experience, players often find time to play an entire game in one setting, if they are willing to block out the time for it. Game settings matter a lot, of course, to keep it manageable.

Also, if players wish to play 1-on-1 matches, scheduling becomes much easier and multiple play sessions becomes a practical thing. It's even possible to do in a 4-5 player game, though it's much more difficult.

TCP/IP is important to a lot of us, especially those of us who have spent considerable time using similar play modes in other games. I hope MM isn't quite so dismissive as several posters I've seen about getting this functionality to work smoothly.

Respectfully,

-Gusset

Re: multiplayer
 

No, you misunderstand me.

I am all for organizing schedules and I've played a few 50-turn weekends myself.

I'm just saying that TCP mode isn't nessesary. The other modes work just as well, and are often easier to play with. They shift cleanly from daily-turns during the week to turn blitzes during the weekends.
No worries about reconnecting everybody before you can start playing. You just play, and if everybody happens to be on at the same time, the turns go voom!

Re: multiplayer
 

isn't Thomcat's avatar from moo2??

Re: multiplayer
 

I should probably let Thomcat answer that, but the question was a response to my post. I hope this doesn't violate etiquette.

Yes, TC's avatar is from MOO2.

Re: multiplayer
 

@Yimboli

yes my avatar is from moo2. the mrrshan race http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

i think over tcp/ip in a simultaneous mode the gameround are faster, to before all if to 6 or 7 goes plays one constitutes a date per week and then play for 4 hours. with play a which this mode well converted folds smoothly with seIV was that unfortunately not so the case.

p.s. my english is not the best, i hope u can halfway understand itself nevertheless http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif