Will you use the 3d view in MP battles ?.

[Darsh]

Since you will never ever get as much information from the jump map as you do from the 2D map (that kind of compression is not lossless), and the amount of information you can get from watching the 3D view is considerably limited, competitive players will probably prefer the 2D map.  

This is not TW after all.

This would still be a great game even if there were no 3D view at all.

Hook

The game is a First Personnal Commander, the first wargame to propose to live an experience on a real Napoleonic battlefield.
A TW game is an arcade game and Histwar is a simulation but both propose a 3D view unlike many wargames.
In fact without the 3D view it would stay a great game but it would also much less attractive.

[Gunner24]

competitive players will probably prefer the 2D map.

They might, they might not.  I'm not sure MP gamers want a 2d game, perhaps they do, but I've not heard much from anyone so far on all the forums I visit.

This is not TW after all.

I'm sure most of us here know, that but to dismiss TW games as NOT being great MP games is rather silly, LG needs an MP Community, and not a Community of 10 people, or does it ?.....is it really a SP game ?.

This would still be a great game even if there were no 3D view at all.

Then it would be a great 2d SP game, but perhaps not a great MP game.

In fact without the 3D view it would stay a great game but it would also much less attractive.

I agree, a great 2d SP game, no doubt whatsoever, a great MP game ?....I don't know yet, I will hope it is, but it's so not certain - something has failed to generate much MP interest, why is everyone not talking about MP games ?........why is that ?.

but both propose a 3D view unlike many wargames

It needs the 3d views for MP, not for SP perhaps, but MP it becomes more important - I think.

I'm hoping the full game has more "flowing" graphics with Regiments not standing around doing nothing much so often - I'm hoping that is one of the bugs....and the 3d runs better than the demo.

[Hook]

The game is a First Personnal Commander, the first wargame to propose to live an experience on a real Napoleonic battlefield.

Agreed, and I love the First Person Commander concept.  

The problem is that the largest unit you can reasonably control without leaving the ground level viewpoint of a commander is a regiment.  You can see this in Take Command, where it works very well.  The scale of the Napoleonic battles is such that there's no way to give orders to corps scattered all over the battlefield by drawing lines in the 3D view while looking out through the eyes of the army commander.

This means you have to give orders by drawing lines on a 2D map, which is pretty much what Napoleon would have done.  The jump map is too small for this.  

If there were another way to give orders that didn't require a map, then we wouldn't need the 2D map for this.  I've suggested a text interface where you issue orders in English (or whatever) which wouldn't require a map at all.  I'll eventually work on this as a mod if there is enough interest and I can get assistance from JMM on the internals.

For competitive play, the players will use the view that gives them the most situational awareness.  For now, that's the 2D map.  

If we added an additional level of difficulty so that the only units displayed on the 2D map are the last known locations of your corps commanders, with no other units from either side, then in order to develop situational awareness people would have to move their generals around and actually look at the 3D battle or rely on the text reports that are already in the game.  This is not for the faint of heart, but certainly fits with the First Person Commander concept.  Orders would still be given on the 2D map.  Or eventually in text with a mod.

That's the way I would eventually be playing.

Hook

[Hook]

... to dismiss TW games as NOT being great MP games is rather silly

No one ever said that the TW series weren't great MP games.  Chess is a great MP game. Neither has anything to do with LG.

I doubt many people here want to turn LG into yet another game in the TW series.  I'm pretty sure JMM doesn't, but you could ask him to be sure.

The real trick here is to accept LG as a totally new game, different from anything you've ever played before.  Don't compare it to something else, either TW or chess.  Accept it for what it is, and you'll be a lot happier in the end.

I guess a bunch of us could go on the TW forums and complain that the TW games aren't enough like LG.  I'm sure that wouldn't annoy anyone there.  No chance of the mere mention of HistWar being banned.  Probably win all sorts of converts to our game.  Make a lot of friends that way.

For those who don't like the 2D map, there's always the F4 symbolic map.  It's in 3D and it's useful enough to give orders.  The standard 3D view does not now, and never will be useful for an overview of the total battlefield, unless we extend the camera positions and add symbolic information from the F4 map. Might as well use the F4 map to start with.

The TW model is only ONE way to play a multiplayer game.  It's not the only way, and may not even be the best way.  The people who play TW are used to it and probably won't like any other way.  So be it.

LG will never be able to compete against TW in the eye candy department, although it does look very good.  But TW will never be able to compete against LG in the "actual experience of the Napoleonic battlefield" department.  And they shouldn't try.  Their market probably isn't interested in that.  We'll eventually capture the part of their market that is.

Will LG have a large successful MP player base?  We'll have to wait and see.  There's no time to redesign the game to make it more like something else.  Is LG a mass market game?  No.  Can it ever be?  Maybe.  Can we get it on store shelves?  Difficult to say.  Think about that after the current version is *finished*.  Publishers will demand enough changes that the base game needs to be completely done first.  Can we attract the TW crowd?  We'll get some of them, but only those interested in actual Napoleonic battles beyond just a game.  This kind of thing is how many people change from being game players to serious students of a subject.  We should get a lot of them if we approach them right.

But LG isn't TW.  And that's a GOOD thing.

Hook

[Franciscus]

I am afraid that most MP players play to win, no matter what. And to win they will resort to everything available. If 2d view is better to win, that's what will be used in most cases.

That's one of the reasons why I am a single-player only . I do not play necessarily to win. I like to play when I have time and inclination for it. I like to ponder my decisions, enjoy the maps and units, and yes, few things give me more gaming pleasure than a sound beating by a good, non-cheating AI   (that has the added advantage of not bragging about it, after  )

Regards

[GrosPaul]

I am afraid that most MP players play to win, no matter what. And to win they will resort to everything available. If 2d view is better to win, that's what will be used in most cases.

That is for me a surprising notification. Why could we be "afraid MP players ... everything available"? What do you mean? How to extrapolate about a MP game actually reduced to a so meager (at least about MP) SP demo?

What I am afraid is those, at that point pessimistical, they could influence in the bad direction some future brave fighters.

In my opinion, actually the best is to consider MP as a ghost or an ufo, because honestly none gentleman will agree to judge definetely something/someone/this demo from so few arguments.
Therefore, from my point of view, the wiser is to wait the full game even buggied.
Buggied? how could that be differente with such a enorrmous "monument"? I am quite sure, even Michel-Angelo didn't produce perfect works at his first try.

Please, don't be confused. I don't wish to aggress or harm anybody. I only try to redress a possible bad direction. From my point of view (yes again, "my point of view", I repeat myself ... poor vocabulary. Sorry) the sole bad direction was to launch, precipitately, this demo.  But I thrust JMM to emerge from that.

Cheers, GP.

[Gunner24]

I don't re-call ever saying I wanted LG to be anything like a TW game, why would I ?....for TW type games, we have, well, TW games !.  And a new one on the way in a few months.

All I'm saying (or rather asking) on this topic is will the 3d screen be used much in MP games ?, from the comments so far it seems not.  If that is right, we have to ask how big will a MP community be IF it's all about the 2d map ?.

I want LG to be like LG is, not like something else, but I also want to see the "action" as it happens on the 3d map view......GP has a good point, we have not yet seen it in game, only in a demo.

The demo "game engine" is just as I expected it to be, very good, everything apprears to work very well in the game, but the 3d graphics are a dis-appointment, so far.  They are NOT a dis-appointment because they are not TW graphics, I could not care less about flashy graphics, but I do care about being able to "see" the action.  As GP has said, maybe when the game arrives the 3d side of it will be better than the demo and we won't see some of the strange things any more.

I hope that comment does not see me marched off in front of a firing squad !.

 

[Hook]

And a new one on the way in a few months.

I'll be getting that one myself.  Not necessarily to play, but just to watch.  Sometimes I just like pretty pictures.  If it actually plays well, so much the better.  Besides, I promised that when they came out with a Napoleonic version, I'd buy it.

how big will a MP community be IF it's all about the 2d map ?

I don't see it as a problem, but then I've been working with 2D maps for.. well, forever.  I started with the 3D view, but didn't really start enjoying the game until I started using the 2D map almost exclusively.  This isn't the fault of the 3D view, I don't think.  One thing that might help a lot is having a good zoom ability.  The field of view is very wide-angle.  We need that but shouldn't be restricted to it.

maybe when the game arrives the 3d side of it will be better than the demo and we won't see some of the strange things any more.

Amen!

Hook

[Franciscus]

That is for me a surprising notification. Why could we be "afraid MP players ... everything available"? What do you mean? How to extrapolate about a MP game actually reduced to a so meager (at least about MP) SP demo?

Either you or me are misinterpreting something. Of course I was not referring specifically to the MP side of LG, because neither I nor anybody else (apart from JMM and the betas, presumably) have seen it. I was referring generally to my past direct and indirect experience of the inherently competitive, "play-to-win" environment that usually surrounds MP gaming. If LG will have a well developed MP game experience, I have no doubt that most MP gamers will be competitive and will do everything possible to win - if need be, play only in the 2d view.
But let me be clear, to each it's own. I do not have anything against MP gaming (how could I ?  ), it's just not the way I like to play; and if LG offers both good MP and SP experiences, so much the better.

Regards

[ess1]

Either you or me are misinterpreting something. Of course I was not referring specifically to the MP side of LG, because neither I nor anybody else (apart from JMM and the betas, presumably) have seen it. I was referring generally to my past direct and indirect experience of the inherently competitive, "play-to-win" environment that usually surrounds MP gaming. If LG will have a well developed MP game experience, I have no doubt that most MP gamers will be competitive and will do everything possible to win - if need be, play only in the 2d view.
But let me be clear, to each it's own. I do not have anything against MP gaming (how could I ?  ), it's just not the way I like to play; and if LG offers both good MP and SP experiences, so much the better.

Regards

Indeed.   A kindred soul, perhaps one of many.

[GrosPaul]

I understand now what you mean and I agree, Franciscus.

[Gunner24]

I was referring generally to my past direct and indirect experience of the inherently competitive, "play-to-win" environment that usually surrounds MP gaming. If LG will have a well developed MP game experience, I have no doubt that most MP gamers will be competitive and will do everything possible to win - if need be, play only in the 2d view.
But let me be clear, to each it's own. I do not have anything against MP gaming (how could I ?  ), it's just not the way I like to play; and if LG offers both good MP and SP experiences, so much the better.

I would agree 100% about some MP gamers, you are totaly correct, there is no getting away from that, but this does not of course apply to all of them, I'm sure if you had played MP with any of the NBC guys you would know that they like to win, but they like to ENJOY the game more.

It's like I've said about golf many times, it's better to win OR lose by one shot on the last green, after a mighty close game, than win a boring game by 10 shots - so it is with MP gaming, or any sport/game come to that....what's best ?, to win by a huge distance or lose by a tiny amont ?.  The people you refer to will amswer to win by a huge distance - which is fine if your a professional sports person, but Nap MP gaming is a hobby, not a profession and if you win or lose does it really matter ?.....no one "gets" anything for winning !.

An interesting tought might be, in SP gaming, does anyone play to try and lose to the AI ?.

[Eif]

This sim (wargame? warsim?) appeals to a very niche fanbase, even within the wargaming community. The majority of people who purchase this sim are (mainly) historical fanatics looking for an authentic recreation of the tactics, atmosphere, methods, etc., of the Napoleonic era, and would be satisfied even if the 3D component was nonexistent (I know I would at least). Thus, multiplayer matches will usually be played with like-minded people (ie., patient, non-clickfesters, teamwork-orientated etc.).

This = fun fun fun.

[LNDavout]

Ok my 5 cent as a long time TW/MP layer,

In this game a regiment is the unit, like 1 units in TW.

So if you order a unit inTW it zombies to what you told it.

At HW your regiment will try to follow it by using its doctrines.
(You can change this doctrines)
In HW the fun is to send your troops at the right moment in a way that your regiment can make it.

At TW it will just follow even totally stupied orders(in fact movementpoints not orders!).

So the main Factor you have to master is: "moral"
and for MP: the closer you are at the spot of fighting, and the more time you got to check the odds and choose the right time to act.
thats the main thing; imo, that will give MP its special place.

[Holdit]

An interesting tought might be, in SP gaming, does anyone play to try and lose to the AI ?.

Not so much try to lose, but I have handicapped my own play with house rules that (obviously) don't restrict the AI. I will also play hotseat against myself à la Bobby Fischer.

Holdit