Version 1.06 notes!

Empires in Arms is the computer version of Australian Design Group classic board game. Empires in Arms is a seven player game of grand strategy set during the Napoleonic period of 1805-1815. The unit scale is corps level with full diplomatic options

Moderator: MOD_EIA

User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Marshall Ellis »

Hey guys:

I am looking at ways of increasing the maximum number of units BUT in doing this it will make newer games NOT compatible with versions older than 1.06 (i.e could not load a game started with 1.06 in 1.04 BUT could load a game started with 1.04 in 1.06).

I want some brainstorming here to discuss implications (BTW:This is not done yet).

I really do not see any problems other than PBEMers need to make sure that everybody is at the current release.



Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


User avatar
borner
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Houston TX

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by borner »

as long as the upgrades work it seems like what is happening now, progressing from one version to another.
User avatar
DCWhitworth
Posts: 676
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:20 am
Location: Norwich, England

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by DCWhitworth »

Is this an issue at all ? I don't see any reason why someone would want to be loading a game saved under a *later* version of the software. Or am I misunderstanding you ?

You're saying games won't be backwardly compatible ? But hasn't that been the case with several previous updates ?
Regards
David
User avatar
obsidiandrag
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:02 am
Location: Massachusetts, USA

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by obsidiandrag »

No complaints here (although.. I was wondering if this will be a checkable option or a game changer?)  As there are alot who may not want the un EIA aspect of it all.. 
 
 
bOrIuM
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 12:50 am

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by bOrIuM »

what you mean by "increasing the maximum number of units" ?

Thresh
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 4:19 am
Location: KCMO

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Thresh »

IIRC, There's a limit as to how many units (Corps, Fleets, Garrisons) the program can keep "track" of.  In some situations (France at peace with a ton of money and builds), you can hit that limit, especially when creating garrisons in out of the way cities because the rest are full.

It's a rare occurence, but it does happen.  Not a game breaker per se, but an annoyance when you run into it.

Todd
User avatar
DCWhitworth
Posts: 676
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 1:20 am
Location: Norwich, England

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by DCWhitworth »

ORIGINAL: Thresh
Not a game breaker per se, but an annoyance when you run into it.

Actually I think it *is* a game breaker. We've hit it in a PBEM game with tensions rising and war possibly imminent. As France I'm under pressure from GB, Prussia and Russia. I am reluctant to reduce the number of my garrisons, why should I ? I think they're all important.

And furthermore since it is an overall total and not a nation by nation total reducing my garrisons simply gives a chance for my enemies to increase their's.

This badly needs fixing.
Regards
David
Dancing Bear
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:16 pm

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Dancing Bear »

Hi Marshall
I don't see the problem, and I agree with David, that this needs to be an urgent fix (along with the disappearing corps).

1.05 was pretty tough on our PBEM games, and it seems like quite a few games have stalled. What is your timing like for 1.06?

Now, I was thinking (wishful thinking), that if you are changing the database anyways, why not make room for naval evasion while you are at it (maybe not implement it, but at least set the game datbase up to handle it).
D'Bear.
Thresh
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 4:19 am
Location: KCMO

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Thresh »

I don't disagree with you, but at the same time I do think this could be an easy fix.

As to whether or not that garrison at Soissons is really important, it would depend on what other garrisons you have. :-)

I've only ever run into playing Russia, and even then it took a little effort, and a lot of builds.

Hopefully Marshall can adress this one pretty quickly for you.

Todd
ORIGINAL: DCWhitworth

ORIGINAL: Thresh
Not a game breaker per se, but an annoyance when you run into it.

Actually I think it *is* a game breaker. We've hit it in a PBEM game with tensions rising and war possibly imminent. As France I'm under pressure from GB, Prussia and Russia. I am reluctant to reduce the number of my garrisons, why should I ? I think they're all important.

And furthermore since it is an overall total and not a nation by nation total reducing my garrisons simply gives a chance for my enemies to increase their's.

This badly needs fixing.
bresh
Posts: 936
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:10 am

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by bresh »

Marshall. i hope you soon be able in a not to far away patch.
To add some security.
I dont know if it would need much change in the battle-engine.
To not show chits & rolls after Defender selects, "but still roll dice there", Maybe "show if withdraw was success, but not why to avoid reloads".
If the rolls only show when send back to the attacker (nothing should be gained by the reloading).

Another "enhancement" I would also like a game-option where you could turn off the "1 corps auto-defend-battles. ".
Personally i repeatly see bad chit choises for solo corps.
Like some chits like defend might be fine vs 1 attacking corps, but against 3+ stratetic commanders with several corps it might not be as good.

Regards
Bresh
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Marshall Ellis »

Hey guys:
 
Games will still be backwards compatible from 1.06 going forward BUT not before 1.06 i.e. 1.07 games could be loaded with 1.06. I have figured a way to make the DB more dynamic in size that should not interrupt a game in progress!
 
I must put this into 1.06 becuase I want it to be tested a thoroughly! I do not want to rush this!
 
 
 
Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Marshall Ellis »

ORIGINAL: bresh

Marshall. i hope you soon be able in a not to far away patch.
To add some security.
I dont know if it would need much change in the battle-engine.
To not show chits & rolls after Defender selects, "but still roll dice there", Maybe "show if withdraw was success, but not why to avoid reloads".
If the rolls only show when send back to the attacker (nothing should be gained by the reloading).

Another "enhancement" I would also like a game-option where you could turn off the "1 corps auto-defend-battles. ".
Personally i repeatly see bad chit choises for solo corps.
Like some chits like defend might be fine vs 1 attacking corps, but against 3+ stratetic commanders with several corps it might not be as good.

Regards
Bresh

Bresh:

I am adding a new security feature that will report land combat loads. If someone is loading the game multiple times to fight battles mutliple times then it will be reported to ALL players. I'm not stopping it at this point BUT it will become public to all if any patterns exist. This way the host can penalize the player in PP, etc. if he/she wants. I will add more later but let's start with this and make sure it is useful!




Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


User avatar
delatbabel
Posts: 1252
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 1:37 am
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by delatbabel »

Integration with an on line die roller would be great. e.g. many on line PBEM players (before EiANW -- i.e. they used things like Cyberboard to control the maps and so on) used things like ACTS and Warfare Project to control their die rolls and chit picks. Every time anyone rolled the dice it was broadcast to all other players.
--
Del
User avatar
Tarleton
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 5:02 pm

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Tarleton »

Hi Marshall,

Well, my input is more conceptual in nature, and probably won't be addressed by V1.06, but here goes.

All the options in regards to battle security, results etc. as well as the current time-lag involved in playing the game PBEM, which folks have been talking about could probably be solved by having the engine as is synch with an FTP "Battle Server" or "File Server". The host could handle options, "If country X submits a battle reply, country Y has 12 hours to respond, or a choice will be randomly made for player X, etc."

Wargame companies (Matrix, HPS, et al) are strangely behind the curve on taking advantage of synching software with server support. Most MMRO's, Fantasy Sports, Strat-O-Matic type sports games do. It's very simple, inexpensive software, and given the turn by turn nature of the game, as it is not a real time game, the server space required would be minimal. And Matrix could probably charge $10 a year for the service.

Regards,
Tarleton
Unofficial and Unlicensed Matrix EiA Forum Consulting Psychotherapist

Haya Safari!

Marching song of the Schutztruppe Ost-Afrika
User avatar
obsidiandrag
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 1:02 am
Location: Massachusetts, USA

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by obsidiandrag »

Is anyone else having issues starting 1.06 since the last update??  I had the s/n error, then dragged in the new exec to fix that.. then got the no scenario error..  Dragged in the file to fix that but it did not fix it..??
 
 
NeverMan
Posts: 1712
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 1:52 am

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by NeverMan »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

ORIGINAL: bresh

Marshall. i hope you soon be able in a not to far away patch.
To add some security.
I dont know if it would need much change in the battle-engine.
To not show chits & rolls after Defender selects, "but still roll dice there", Maybe "show if withdraw was success, but not why to avoid reloads".
If the rolls only show when send back to the attacker (nothing should be gained by the reloading).

Another "enhancement" I would also like a game-option where you could turn off the "1 corps auto-defend-battles. ".
Personally i repeatly see bad chit choises for solo corps.
Like some chits like defend might be fine vs 1 attacking corps, but against 3+ stratetic commanders with several corps it might not be as good.

Regards
Bresh

Bresh:

I am adding a new security feature that will report land combat loads. If someone is loading the game multiple times to fight battles mutliple times then it will be reported to ALL players. I'm not stopping it at this point BUT it will become public to all if any patterns exist. This way the host can penalize the player in PP, etc. if he/she wants. I will add more later but let's start with this and make sure it is useful!





Yes, there needs to be more as I don't see this being all that hard to get around (delete some file, change some registry, etc..)
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Marshall Ellis »

It won't pass the NSA standard BUT let's keep an honest man honest... LOL!
Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


bresh
Posts: 936
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:10 am

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by bresh »

Marshall, it wont solve all :)

I encountered a player leaving "playing France, witch can kill many games if players leave because of the security issue".

So i repeat my question, would it require much work, to hide the dice roll and chit on the defenders "when picking chit" and "rolls" ?
As far as i can tell rolls are executed on the defender pc and he will always recieve a battlefile from attacker before he selects his own looses anyway.
It might give 1 extra file exchange in case of succesfull withdraw but thats a tiny sacrifice to gain this much "secutiry".

About reloads in battle phase, this should be used for naval moves.. I seen France break a blockade he had less than 5% chance to do, this is only few people i would trust if this happens, especially if they never any failed attemps..

Regards
Bresh
User avatar
Marshall Ellis
Posts: 5630
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 3:00 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by Marshall Ellis »

Bresh:
 
How can they see the chit and the dice now BEFORE they pick?
 
Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games


bresh
Posts: 936
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:10 am

RE: Version 1.06 notes!

Post by bresh »

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Bresh:

How can they see the chit and the dice now BEFORE they pick?

Its still the reload issue, witch would not be a problem if the "rolls/chits" where hidden for defender till he takes casulties.

Its not stupid for someone ask their ally for advice during a combat and a info that someone reloaded a combat file a extra time doesnt mean he naturally would be in the cheat corner.
Advice could be about reinforcements, agree on division on casulties if they had not before, should they commit guards +1/+2 etc.
I have had allies ask me such questions.

Im requesting for it to be hidden, since as it is now, combat rolls are on the defender pc, who then sends the battlefile to the attacker (and does not take his own casulties till in the return battlefile) ?

And note, the naval move-reload button count !

Regards
Bresh

Post Reply

Return to “Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815”