Matrix Games Forums

Come and see us during the Spieltagen in Essen!New Screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Sack of Questions

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series >> Sack of Questions Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Sack of Questions - 3/3/2012 4:20:39 AM   
The Gray Mouser

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/12/2009
Status: offline
Hello! Couple of questions:

1) from the screenies it appears fog of war is implemented(ie hidden movement etc) is it so?

2) are heavy artillery and air strikes implemented in any way (whether on board ,off board , no board :) )

3) MP : will it be using Slithertrix's unique system?

4) for scenario design, is there any unit cap? ie could I theoretically have 300+ squads on a side?

4) specs: this is my big concern as the required specs, especially graphics card wise seem kinda high for a turn based game and taxing to my aged PC
I have a Nvidia 7600 gs 512mp card... Unfortunately i doudt Im getting full performance as I have , embarrassingly , only an AGP slotted mother board. Hopefully the the 2d mode will be easily handled by my old, yet faithfull dog of a PC??

This looks like a great game and I cant wait to get my greedy hands on it.

Cheers!
Post #: 1
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/3/2012 5:10:03 AM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10036
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Here are some answers; more to follow:


quote:

ORIGINAL: The Gray Mouser

Hello! Couple of questions:

1) from the screenies it appears fog of war is implemented(ie hidden movement etc) is it so?

We've got both fog of war -- to quote the manual, "If fog-of-war is turned on, players cannot see hexes that are outside of the line-of-sight of their units" -- and the boardgame's system for hidden units.

2) are heavy artillery and air strikes implemented in any way (whether on board ,off board , no board :) )

Yes.

3) MP : will it be using Slithertrix's unique system?

Yes. Implementing it was a major factor in our pushing back the game's announcement (and its release), but will be judged well worth the extra wait.

4) for scenario design, is there any unit cap? ie could I theoretically have 300+ squads on a side?

I don't know offhand, so I'll check.

4) specs: this is my big concern as the required specs, especially graphics card wise seem kinda high for a turn based game and taxing to my aged PC
I have a Nvidia 7600 gs 512mp card... Unfortunately i doudt Im getting full performance as I have , embarrassingly , only an AGP slotted mother board. Hopefully the the 2d mode will be easily handled by my old, yet faithfull dog of a PC??

I'm not the technical brains at WCS, so I'll ask Eric.

This looks like a great game and I cant wait to get my greedy hands on it.

Great! Here's to hoping you don't need to buy a new computer in the process...

Cheers!


_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to The Gray Mouser)
Post #: 2
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/3/2012 7:05:33 PM   
Gil R.


Posts: 10036
Joined: 4/1/2005
Status: offline
Okay, I've got the final two answers:
* There's no limit on units.
* It's still a bit too early to know our video requirements, but there is a decent chance that you can at least play with chits. Please check back when we announce the official specs in the coming weeks.

_____________________________

Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 3
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/4/2012 2:54:34 PM   
The Gray Mouser

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 7/12/2009
Status: offline
Sounds good, thanks for the replies!

(in reply to Gil R.)
Post #: 4
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 2:58:36 PM   
Iain McNeil


Posts: 1960
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline
Just to be clear on the multiplayer system, this game is not PBEM using our PBEM++ server, it uses a great new head to head multiplayer server system we are developing. We are developing this new system specifically to support Conflict of Heroes match making and provide good community support tools. It is different to the PBEM++ multiplayer server system we use in pure turn based games such as Field of Glory, Battle Academy and Panzer Corps. We've also decided to create a routing server to simplfying playing the game. Usually to play a head to head multiplayer game you need to open ports on your router to allow you to play. This is nto an indie developer thing, this is what many AAA games still require on PC. We know that many of you are not used to this sort of thing and we decided we wanted to invest a system that just worked and made this process easier. We're creating a server that each player will access, then the server will take messages and pass them to your opponent. This means you'll never directly connect to your opponent and removes the need to do all that tinkering with routers and ports - it will just work. It's a pretty significant job but its part of our commitment to make it easy to play the our games and support the developers with we work by adding tools to enhance their games, and one of the things that makes us unique! :) The only down side is we are not sure we can stick to the original date and get this extra server set up so we may be looking at a few days to a couple of weeks delay on our original plans.

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Slitherine Software
Website http://www.slitherine.com

(in reply to The Gray Mouser)
Post #: 5
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 3:49:20 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7996
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
WOW...that sure sounds like alot of work went into it. It also shows that Academy Games\Slitherine\Matrix are expecting this to be a long term flagship game.

Shame there is a release date delay though.


New tech like this will always have teething troubles. My only fear is what if the worse happens and it goes the way of Down in Flames at Battlefront where the game is still being sold even though the server is never working \on etc due to lack of players.


It would be great if there was the possibilty to bypass the server and link directly aswell, just in case the sver is down or any other not so nice things happen.

< Message edited by wodin -- 3/5/2012 3:52:50 PM >


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Iain McNeil)
Post #: 6
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 5:20:11 PM   
James Crowley

 

Posts: 377
Joined: 6/10/2003
From: Chichester UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Just to be clear on the multiplayer system, this game is not PBEM using our PBEM++ server, it uses a great new head to head multiplayer server system we are developing. We are developing this new system specifically to support Conflict of Heroes match making and provide good community support tools. It is different to the PBEM++ multiplayer server system we use in pure turn based games such as Field of Glory, Battle Academy and Panzer Corps. We've also decided to create a routing server to simplfying playing the game. Usually to play a head to head multiplayer game you need to open ports on your router to allow you to play. This is nto an indie developer thing, this is what many AAA games still require on PC. We know that many of you are not used to this sort of thing and we decided we wanted to invest a system that just worked and made this process easier. We're creating a server that each player will access, then the server will take messages and pass them to your opponent. This means you'll never directly connect to your opponent and removes the need to do all that tinkering with routers and ports - it will just work. It's a pretty significant job but its part of our commitment to make it easy to play the our games and support the developers with we work by adding tools to enhance their games, and one of the things that makes us unique! :) The only down side is we are not sure we can stick to the original date and get this extra server set up so we may be looking at a few days to a couple of weeks delay on our original plans.



Why not release the game anyway, if it is ready, and patch on acccess to the new server when it is up and running

Not everyone can or will want to play H2H and those who want to can get used to the game and it's nuances prior to going online.

_____________________________

Cheers

Jim

(in reply to Iain McNeil)
Post #: 7
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 6:09:17 PM   
KEYSTONE07950

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 12/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Crowley


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

Just to be clear on the multiplayer system, this game is not PBEM using our PBEM++ server, it uses a great new head to head multiplayer server system we are developing. We are developing this new system specifically to support Conflict of Heroes match making and provide good community support tools. It is different to the PBEM++ multiplayer server system we use in pure turn based games such as Field of Glory, Battle Academy and Panzer Corps. We've also decided to create a routing server to simplfying playing the game. Usually to play a head to head multiplayer game you need to open ports on your router to allow you to play. This is nto an indie developer thing, this is what many AAA games still require on PC. We know that many of you are not used to this sort of thing and we decided we wanted to invest a system that just worked and made this process easier. We're creating a server that each player will access, then the server will take messages and pass them to your opponent. This means you'll never directly connect to your opponent and removes the need to do all that tinkering with routers and ports - it will just work. It's a pretty significant job but its part of our commitment to make it easy to play the our games and support the developers with we work by adding tools to enhance their games, and one of the things that makes us unique! :) The only down side is we are not sure we can stick to the original date and get this extra server set up so we may be looking at a few days to a couple of weeks delay on our original plans.



Why not release the game anyway, if it is ready, and patch on acccess to the new server when it is up and running

Not everyone can or will want to play H2H and those who want to can get used to the game and it's nuances prior to going online.


I agree 100%. Release the game without the multiplayer.

(in reply to James Crowley)
Post #: 8
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 8:50:07 PM   
Chris Merchant


Posts: 1134
Joined: 4/18/2000
From: Adelaide, Australia
Status: offline
I don't agree :-)

Get the server config working prior to release.
This way any players who want to try H2H can do so without the need to wait for patches, making changes to their port forward settings on their routers, confusion etc.
A healthy multiplayer community will improve the chances of the system's longevity and early rumours that multiplayer is broken will not help.

cheers

(in reply to KEYSTONE07950)
Post #: 9
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/5/2012 11:25:01 PM   
James Crowley

 

Posts: 377
Joined: 6/10/2003
From: Chichester UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chris Merchant

I don't agree :-)

Get the server config working prior to release.
This way any players who want to try H2H can do so without the need to wait for patches, making changes to their port forward settings on their routers, confusion etc.
A healthy multiplayer community will improve the chances of the system's longevity and early rumours that multiplayer is broken will not help.

cheers


There won't be a multiplayer community until the server is setup; whereas everyone could familiarise themselves with the game while they are waiting and those who can't or who are not interested in multiplayer will have the game to play sooner rather than later.

And why should anyone think multiplay is broken if, from the outset, it is announced that multiplayer will be available at a later date. If anything, not releasing the game sooner could start rumours that it is, in reality, primarily mutiplayer only and that the AI is an afterthought or not good enough to support the game on it's own merit.

Also, if you had read Ian Mcneil's post more thoroughly, you would see:

"We're creating a server that each player will access, then the server will take messages and pass them to your opponent. This means you'll never directly connect to your opponent and removes the need to do all that tinkering with routers and ports - it will just work."

So no need for confusion etc.

Why is it that people who only play games H2H assume that their needs and requirements are more important that everyone elses?

_____________________________

Cheers

Jim

(in reply to Chris Merchant)
Post #: 10
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 2:56:43 AM   
Joram

 

Posts: 3197
Joined: 7/15/2005
Status: offline
Whoa mate, I don't see that they are putting anybody ahead of anyone.  They are simply making sure that the game is equally fun to those who want multiplayer to those who don't.    While I'm sure they are very flattered by your eagerness to play the game, I don't think waiting a week or so is going to change yours or anyone's desire to play the game.   

(in reply to James Crowley)
Post #: 11
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 3:15:05 AM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2449
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

While I'm sure they are very flattered by your eagerness to play the game, I don't think waiting a week or so is going to change yours or anyone's desire to play the game.

The longer that the game is under the development, the better that it will be when it goes on sale.


_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Joram)
Post #: 12
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 4:03:49 AM   
k9mike

 

Posts: 496
Joined: 10/25/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

While I'm sure they are very flattered by your eagerness to play the game, I don't think waiting a week or so is going to change yours or anyone's desire to play the game.

The longer that the game is under the development, the better that it will be when it goes on sale.



+1...Listen to what these guys are saying....;)

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 13
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 10:16:16 AM   
Iain McNeil


Posts: 1960
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline
We have no intentions of releasing a partially finished game :)

It takes a lot of work to build to a releasable version whether it is single or multiplayer. That has to be every time you build a release build and test it. Doing this twice adds a huge overhead to the project and wastes time that could be better spent improving the game. We always have this fight between people who only want one mode or another or specific features and the answer is always the same - the game will be released when its ready and not before :)

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Slitherine Software
Website http://www.slitherine.com

(in reply to k9mike)
Post #: 14
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 10:50:17 AM   
PirateJock


Posts: 458
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: North West, UK
Status: offline
I'm not a big multiplayer person but I'd go for waiting till all finished ... within reason ;) I've plenty of other games to keep me busy until release.

Cheers

_____________________________

Combat Command Matrix Edition Company, The Forgotten Few

(in reply to Iain McNeil)
Post #: 15
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 3:04:18 PM   
Josh

 

Posts: 2320
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Leeuwarden, Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joram

While I'm sure they are very flattered by your eagerness to play the game, I don't think waiting a week or so is going to change yours or anyone's desire to play the game.

The longer that the game is under the development, the better that it will be when it goes on sale.



A bit OT maybe, but I used to believe that. So I waited twelve (!) years for Duke Nukem to finish...
First day it got released it was on my pc. Man what a bummer, 12 years to ruin a game. LOL
Oh well I'm sure that's *not* the case here.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 16
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 5:02:04 PM   
k9mike

 

Posts: 496
Joined: 10/25/2006
Status: offline
Dont worry Josh...You wont have to wait THAT long...lol. But, like Iain mentioned....better to release when its complete and not before...

(in reply to Josh)
Post #: 17
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 5:36:59 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 32922
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline
We're not expecting this to become a major delay and it is something that we think the community will definitely appreciate. It may be something we can add to some of our other TCP/IP games as well once we have the system up and running, but it will definitely feature in Conflict of Heroes.

We will definitely make sure it is finished and tested before release.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
Director of Product Development


For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to k9mike)
Post #: 18
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 6:02:30 PM   
**budd**


Posts: 1468
Joined: 7/4/2009
From: Tacoma
Status: offline
seems like command ops would be perfect for this multiplayer.

_____________________________

Enjoy when you can, and endure when you must. ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

*I'm in the Wargamer middle ground*
I don't buy all the wargames I want, I just buy more than I need.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 19
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/6/2012 9:53:15 PM   
parusski


Posts: 4727
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PirateJock

I'm not a big multiplayer person but I'd go for waiting till all finished ... within reason ;) I've plenty of other games to keep me busy until release.

Cheers


Same here +1


_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to PirateJock)
Post #: 20
RE: Sack of Questions - 3/7/2012 12:37:46 AM   
VPaulus

 

Posts: 1306
Joined: 6/23/2011
From: Portugal
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski


quote:

ORIGINAL: PirateJock

I'm not a big multiplayer person but I'd go for waiting till all finished ... within reason ;) I've plenty of other games to keep me busy until release.

Cheers


Same here +1


+2

(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Conflict of Heroes Series >> Sack of Questions Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.113