Time to play a MP game.

[Gunner24]

On the assumption that all the problems being reported are fixed I still see a major MP problem with this game.

I have noticed that it is far better played with a slow speed, like 30/60, than at the faster speeds.

In the real world of MP gaming you are not going to be able to run this game at a fast speed because in some area's of the map there is movement and fighting that you need to keep an eye on, but in other area's nothing much is happening and you would want to speed the time up here, like when waiting 2 hours for a corps to get it's orders to move.......so I don't see how MP will work, some parts of the map need faster speeds than others........trying to play it at 10/60 will be a nightmare, but playing at 30/60 will perhaps take 3-4 hours.....I know there is a save game for MP but in the real world it's not likely that people are going to want to get involved with stuff like this.

[Gunfreak]

As I said,  I would play a 4-6 hour battle

[Gunner24]

So would I, but how many others would do that ?........I'm not concerned about it working in MP, it will be 100 times better than playing against the pc, but it's not going to be easy or straight forward opertaion.......do you agree in the faster speeds it does lose a lot of it's appeal, it looks horrible with the men racing around at 100 miles per hour........for me it has got to be played no faster than the 20/60 speed, max.......which is 3 battle hours played in one real time hour........6 for 2, 9 for 3, so 3 hours real time might do the job, but it might not seeing how long it can take to even get the orders to a Corps, let alone get them moved to where you want them.

[Hook]

At least people shouldn't be getting bored.  With full fog of war you'll have to collect reconnaissance reports and such early in the game, and later you'll be fighting.  There will be plenty to do.

But yeah... how many people will be able to spend at least 3 hours to play an online game?  A lot will depend on how well the game handles saving and restarting a multiplayer game.

Hook

[Gunner24]

A lot will depend on how well the game handles saving and restarting a multiplayer game.

As long as that works I'd rather do that 1v1 then use PBEM....saving a MP game with only two people to worry about re-arranging a new start time will be one of the best things about LG, that is a serious great feature and one that will be well used I suspect.

[trw2264]

I, for one, believe (if it works correctly) believe that a strength of this game would/could be it's ability to have a head-to-head game online. I look forward to sitting down and playing a 4 hour game against other humans, not knowing what surprises might be in store.

[HarryInk]

You might end up playing faster games with smaller commands?  ie. no more than a corps each with faster settings...

[Marshal Beale]

gotta remember, not everyone has that amount of time, for me, particually not during school nights, with homework increasing, I'll only have time for a MP battle on weekends and holidays, same with people who have to work!

[FranzVonG]

well, you don't have to play a MP battle every night (at least, not the same battle). I've seen many clubs preparing themselves for 3vs3 multi battles, where you have to scout/receive order/discuss and so on (and imho those battles will be much longer than 3-4 hours, I'll bet on 6 or more).

But I don't see where the problem is: there are many gamers that play Europa Universalis 3 multi campaigns for example, and those can last for more than 100h, I doubt that 8h will be a problem (obviously, battles will be played slowly, lasting a week or two).

[englishoo7]

I would be happy to have a MP Battle for 4-6 hours once a week or so... This is LG's most potent selling point for me, I just wonder how many others would wish to.

[Gunner24]

I would be more than happy to play from 8pm to midnight almost every night of the week, at the stroke of midnight the battle ends, if not already done so.......the stats will show who won, hows that for a wild idea ?.

[Cyrano]

This is undoubtably one of the great challenges of this game reaching a broad audience.

I do not think it can, nor do I think it should even try.

There are a ton of games that substitute arcade action for simulation and I enjoy many of them.

Let this ONE be for those of us who know the battle of Cannae did not take 12 minutes, that there were only so many members of the Guard, and that ordering troops 1 mile away took that most precious commodity -- time.

Jim

[gazfun]

On the assumption that all the problems being reported are fixed I still see a major MP problem with this game.

I have noticed that it is far better played with a slow speed, like 30/60, than at the faster speeds.

In the real world of MP gaming you are not going to be able to run this game at a fast speed because in some area's of the map there is movement and fighting that you need to keep an eye on, but in other area's nothing much is happening and you would want to speed the time up here, like when waiting 2 hours for a corps to get it's orders to move.......so I don't see how MP will work, some parts of the map need faster speeds than others........trying to play it at 10/60 will be a nightmare, but playing at 30/60 will perhaps take 3-4 hours.....I know there is a save game for MP but in the real world it's not likely that people are going to want to get involved with stuff like this.

You will at the start, play the slower paced game until you get used to the system.  But after that the 10/60 is better, you may need to go down to 20/60 but only when there is a real need.

[Gunner24]

But after that the 10/60 is better

That is very fast on the 3d map, it's ok on the 2d map but if your following the action on the 3d map that speed looks a bit silly......like watching a movie in fast forward.

[Montecuccoli]

I suggest you to try the F4 view, it is like an Osprey's Campaing series Book bird's eye view map and it is really good to issue orders