Multi-player questions

[Jim]

We have seen this problem in the historical OOB at the higher command levels. One idea that is still floating is to have the historical OP OOB for brigade/division level fights and to have a non-historical but more balanced OP OOB for Division/Corps level fights. We are still exploring options here and creative ideas are welcome.

-Jim

[69th NYSV]

I was always a fan of the old MTW system where you had so many points to build your army. The "host" would set the parameters for the game, like which map, how may points, etc., then you built your "army" to suit your style or compliment your team mates. It added a little extra something being able to "spend" your points efficiently and let you tailor your troops to your style.

For our purposes it could be, the map, how many players, size of battle (corp, division, etc) total and/or each player, how many points each player and/or side could spend. You then spend your points how ever you want, how much or little of infantry, artillery, or cav, if you want a few crack troops or many green, etc.


Maybe this is already along the lines you guys were thinking with different open play oobs as you could do something similar that way.

[Gunfreak]

if it would be possible I would have liked two system

Historic: pic a corps or army of your choice, mabye Shermans army in 1865 against lee in 1863 ect. and see who wins. if you play a corps game, the computer gives the side with a fewest solders a nother corps or half a corps from the same army, so if the union only have a corps of 12000 men, they got mabye another corps to get up to 24000 so they stand a chance against Longstreets 29 000.


Competative: with point system, were each brigade has a number value, based on their grade, like the iron brigade would have a higher point value, then a raw brigade just out of basic.

[norb]

69th NYSV wrote:

I was always a fan of the old MTW system where you had so many points to build your army. The "host" would set the parameters for the game, like which map, how may points, etc., then you built your "army" to suit your style or compliment your team mates. It added a little extra something being able to "spend" your points efficiently and let you tailor your troops to your style.

For our purposes it could be, the map, how many players, size of battle (corp, division, etc) total and/or each player, how many points each player and/or side could spend. You then spend your points how ever you want, how much or little of infantry, artillery, or cav, if you want a few crack troops or many green, etc.


Maybe this is already along the lines you guys were thinking with different open play oobs as you could do something similar that way.

I coded something like this when I worked on Waterloo. It worked out very well and it's something that I would like to put in some day. But it is an extra feature and not required for the base MP to work, so it's probably something that would have to be revisited in the future.

[69th NYSV]

norb wrote:

I coded something like this when I worked on Waterloo. It worked out very well and it's something that I would like to put in some day.

That's excellent news and something to look forward to as it works really well for ladders and tournaments.

As for Waterloo, I've never played it but saw your name during a "google search". I think some of us tend to think of you as just "some guy", but you've been around the block once or twice.:laugh:

[norb]

Actually that was the first commercial game I ever worked on and my contribution was very limited. Most of my years of coding experience (16+ now) was not in gaming. But I find that my style of coding works no matter where I'm doing it. I've worked in all sorts of industries and have enjoyed them all.

[2nd Kentucky]

norb wrote:

Definately. It's one of the main features.

Awesome, because when something bad happens we wont say damn AI, we'll say damn Chantilly, or damn estabu.:laugh:

[JC Edwards]

2nd Kentucky wrote:

norb wrote:

Definately. It's one of the main features.

Awesome, because when something bad happens we wont say damn AI, we'll say damn Chantilly, or damn estabu.:laugh:

Or damn you!!!:P

[estabu2]

2nd Kentucky wrote:

norb wrote:

Definately. It's one of the main features.

Awesome, because when something bad happens we wont say damn AI, we'll say damn Chantilly, or damn estabu.:laugh:

:laugh: B)

[estabu2]

How is NSD going to combat cheating? Not that I think anyone on this board would cheat, but with online games there are the less honorable that would try to get the upper hand.

Just curious if you guys have any ideas or are you going to trust the community?