Idea for a better Game Center experience

[Yojimbo252]

Let's call those people the "PBeM people". They are different from the "live People" you are part of, apparently.
It is my opinion that currently the Game Center experience suits the "live People", not the "PBeM people".

I'm actually not a 'Live' player. I tend to make 2 to 3 moves per day (sometimes more sometimes less) and have 3-4 Async (PBeM) games running concurrently.

What I don't understand is why you wish to play PBeM where players aren't under pressure to make moves and can play at their leisure when you get bored if games don't finish quickly.

[Croix de guerre]

I tend to make 2 to 3 moves per day

It means you have committed to play the game for the next three weeks. You are aware of that, aren't you? (10 game-days times 6 Axis impulses per game-day divided by 2.5 impulses per day = 24 days) And it's assuming everyone keeps playing at the same pace.

What I don't understand is why you wish to play PBeM where players aren't under pressure to make moves and can play at their leisure

I do not. I think your idea is a good idea. I am just saying it doesn't solve the problem for "PBeM people" because games are just too long, even when the pace is enforced to 2 or 3 moves per day. The impulse system is ill-fitted to PBeM.

[Yojimbo252]

I tend to make 2 to 3 moves per day

It means you have committed to play the game for the next three weeks. You are aware of that, aren't you? (10 game-days times 6 Axis impulses per game-day divided by 2.5 impulses per day = 24 days) And it's assuming everyone keeps playing at the same pace.

Yes I'm aware of that. I've been playing async games for many years and some might take several weeks, even months to complete.

The way I approach asynch is I'm not too concerned how long a game will take to reach its conclusion as long as I'm enjoying the experience. If turns are ticking over at a pace that I'm happy with then I'm fine with that. If I have to wait weeks for my next turn or my opponent drops out on me without resigning and the game hangs, that's when I start to get frustrated (fortunately I've not experienced this with BotB as yet) probably because the game might attract a more mature audience.

In any case the number of turns/impulses required to complete a game isn't particularly important to me. It's the length of time between turns that's more important.

But each to their own.

[Croix de guerre]

If I have to wait weeks for my next turn or my opponent drops out on me without resigning and the game hangs, that's when I start to get frustrated

You must be joking. What are the odds that it won't happen?

(fortunately I've not experienced this with BotB as yet) probably because the game might attract a more mature audience.

No, that's because you have been playing with a playtesting audience. The game was shipped five days ago!

[Yojimbo252]

If I have to wait weeks for my next turn or my opponent drops out on me without resigning and the game hangs, that's when I start to get frustrated

You must be joking. What are the odds that it won't happen?

It doesn't happen with games that include game timers because timers manage those situations.

(fortunately I've not experienced this with BotB as yet) probably because the game might attract a more mature audience.

No, that's because you have been playing with a playtesting audience. The game was shipped five days ago!

I've been playing against players that weren't involved in the playtest and all are making their moves on a fairly frequent basis so I've no complaints.

The same can't be said for other games I've tried upon initial release.

[Croix de guerre]

I've been playing against players that weren't involved in the playtest and all are making their moves on a fairly frequent basis so I've no complaints.

I see. Let's talk again in three weeks...

[Croix de guerre]

Hi Yojimbo!
Three weeks have passed. Happy new year!
What do you think now of the Game Center experience?
How many games were you able to finish?

[Benbos]

Hi Yojimbo!
Three weeks have passed. Happy new year!
What do you think now of the Game Center experience?
How many games were you able to finish?

I think the Game Center mechanic works great. The player makes his move when he gets time. Simple.

In fact a slower pace is great for a wargame with a scale this size. I don't see wargames being played as 10 minute rushes. Never could play like that.

That's also why I avoid playing several games at a time. Still played a lot. Some games were finished in 2 hours, some took 3 days. I think the pace is great for a wargame. If you want to play faster, invite a friend and agree on the playing time per move ...

---> one thing though: an in game chat system would be great or better still: a message line to accompany your latest move ... Like telling the other guy "this was my last move for today". This addition would be great.

Also i will keep saying it: the Axis have a clear advantage in this game with equal capable players. The Aliies can't make a bad DR or one slip position for a unit or he loses.


That's far worse of course.

[Yojimbo252]

Hi Yojimbo!
Three weeks have passed. Happy new year!
What do you think now of the Game Center experience?
How many games were you able to finish?

Happy New Year to you.

I think the Game Centre experience is very good. I've been able to complete every game started since we last spoke. I haven't had any opponents abandon a game on me. I accept it's likely to happen at some point but not yet.

I think BotB supports async play very well as there's is no in between turn interaction required from the opposing player which really hamstrings many boardgames ported to the iOS.

Also the actual time taken to complete a player's turn is very short relative to other games so I've noticed more occasions where I'll flip a turn and then I'll receive a notification within a min or so that it's my turn again as my opponent (who may well be in a different timezone) happens to be 'online' also so we get through several impulses in a short succession.

This doesn't usually happen with other games where it can take 5 to 10 min to watch a replay of what happened, analyse the game board and any associated player boards etc, formulate a strategy, perform all the actions required for each phase of a player turn, etc etc. By that time the opponent has most likely gone on to do something else and it could be another 24 hours before my next turn.

I do agree with others that chat functionality would be a welcome addition as well as tweaks like being able to specify the game type and so on along with stats tracking and review/replay recording. But all in all the multiplayer game is very enjoyable.

What's been your experience?

[Croix de guerre]

What's been your experience?

It wasn't great. It was OK.
I managed to play three or four games. None lasted beyond the 20th of December unfortunately.
Somehow I failed to notice that one of the game was for the Run to the Meuse scenario. Needless to say, I lost this particular game.
The pace was erratic. Sometimes I was able to play every 10 minutes, which was enough of a disturbance to prevent me from doing any work done. Sometimes I had to wait for a day. I had trouble remembering which game I was playing, which is not good to help build a deep strategy. I don't think it is possible to enjoy playing more than a few games in parallel. It is just impossible to remember the situations.
I am still convinced the game would benefit from a PBeM mode in which players would simultaneously enter all the moves of a single game-day in one go.
Now I have lost interest in playing this game.

[Yojimbo252]

I don't tend to have more than 3-4 games in progress at any one time either as like yourself, any more than that and I start losing track from day to day of my medium to longer term strategies and start just playing the board as it stands in front of me.

All I can suggest if you were thinking of persevering a little longer is friend some opponents that like to play at the same pace as you at the same times as you.

Getting play aligned in this way I think is an important aspect in terms of enjoyment for any online game.

[Weids]

Nice suggestion, but it wouldn't work for BotB. Our studio have done a very great job in designing this game. Right now we shouldn't truble ourselves with the development of that type of gaming system which might not be as successful as the Butterfield's method currently in use.

As the allies, I do feel great pressure from even an inexperienced Axis player. As I see it, if my opponent could mostly figures out the right strategy under the circumstance and the best possible move accordingly, while I articulate a different strategy from them, and hence unprepared, then by no chance I could win if not by the Gods side, which have never been the case. Even though, winning as the allies is quite possible. Don't you agree?

If not, come have a game with me. I will expect you to be nothing else but an expert who have a good habit of playing and is willing to be serious.

Game Center ID weid sun or Weidong sun.

[boone737]

There've been a few times where I've clicked "pass" inadvertently, or clicked "commit" before I had moved all the units in the activated sector.

Since there is no way to undo this, can the "pass" button have some reddish color added? And, maybe the activated sector have a transparent highlight to it, until the "commit" button is clicked?

I know I should just slow down but, for me, it might help me to have just one more clue that I shouldn't pass or commit just yet.

Thanks.

[s_nkarp]

Hi Boone,

You can actually Cancel while the Time Passage dialog is rolling over (there's a button on top) -- but making it long enough to catch easily would delay the game too much.

I pushed hard for more confirmation/reconfirmation to prevent accidental commits/passes. The result most of the time was that people were annoyed at the delay, however. Ideas welcome for a mechanism that lets people take back errors without encumbering players who want to move ahead promptly.

Best,
Nick

[boone737]

Thanks, I guess if my fingers were fast enough to "commit" they should be fast enough to "cancel".

I would like to throw my vote toward a "continuing" option on a completed game. I just had a player resign because he was in a bad spot, but he had a ton of points and had a distinct opportunity to win. I was a hollow victory for me and it made me wonder if I could've beat me given his position.

In that respect, I'd also like to be able to see how the board looks when the game ends. When you reload a completed game, you get to see the last move and the splash screen with the "telegram" that covers most of the board. Is it possible to click something to make the telegram disappear?

[Yojimbo252]

I pushed hard for more confirmation/reconfirmation to prevent accidental commits/passes. The result most of the time was that people were annoyed at the delay, however. Ideas welcome for a mechanism that lets people take back errors without encumbering players who want to move ahead promptly.

The only occasions where this becomes an issue (for me at least) is where I activate an area, move a unit (or no units) and forget to move others that may be in that activated area. eg. The classic case is where I launch an attack across a river, only one unit can attack but a remaining unit(s) could have been repositioned elsewhere for better effect.

What would be useful just for that particular situation when pressing the commit button is a warning message "You have unordered units remaining in the activated area, do you still wish to commit?" or something to that effect.

In that way it wouldn't pop up that often, only when I make that mistake or I intentionally wish to leave a unit(s) in place which tends to be the exception rather than the norm.

...I'd also like to be able to see how the board looks when the game ends. When you reload a completed game, you get to see the last move and the splash screen with the "telegram" that covers most of the board. Is it possible to click something to make the telegram disappear?

I'll second that suggestion.

[s_ron42na]

I pushed hard for more confirmation/reconfirmation to prevent accidental commits/passes. The result most of the time was that people were annoyed at the delay, however. Ideas welcome for a mechanism that lets people take back errors without encumbering players who want to move ahead promptly.

The only occasions where this becomes an issue (for me at least) is where I activate an area, move a unit (or no units) and forget to move others that may be in that activated area. eg. The classic case is where I launch an attack across a river, only one unit can attack but a remaining unit(s) could have been repositioned elsewhere for better effect.

What would be useful just for that particular situation when pressing the commit button is a warning message "You have unordered units remaining in the activated area, do you still wish to commit?" or something to that effect.

In that way it wouldn't pop up that often, only when I make that mistake or I intentionally wish to leave a unit(s) in place which tends to be the exception rather than the norm.

I think the "haven't moved units in activated area" warning is an extremely good idea. I understand and agree with the point about minimizing confirmations, but this is one case where I think a confirmation is a good idea.

[rbeyma]

Yes, I have at least 3 times ended up accidentally making a bad attack from an area that I wanted to move someone out of, a warning would be great. I understand it may be a pain to code, but providing that warning would take down a potential threat to a new player who isn't aware of how it works and has the potential to get frustrated and quit playing.

[s_Mylo]

I disagree totally with any kind of warnings. Paying attention to what I'm doing is part of the fun for me, so is trying to deal with a mistake that I just made by not moving units that I should have. .....we have 'warnings' for everything in life, let's keep them out of our gaming experience.

WARNING. WARNING. WARNING. ....Baaaaa, tired of it all. Let me screw up, it's part of the experience.

Mylo

Oh, almost forgot, on Croix's original PBEM comments, I love the idea of pre-determining the day's moves in order of completion and having the AI determine results based on my opponents moves. I would be basing my day's plans on the intel I have available at the time AND trying to out maneuver my opponent, thinking a day ahead, trying to guess what he was going to do and counter it accordingly. I feel it would be quite realistic and add a certain tactical challenge. I really enjoy the PBEM method of play....I would do my move over morning coffee and I don't care how many days it takes to complete a battle as long as I'm enjoying the game.

[Yojimbo252]

I disagree totally with any kind of warnings. Paying attention to what I'm doing is part of the fun for me, so is trying to deal with a mistake that I just made by not moving units that I should have. .....we have 'warnings' for everything in life, let's keep them out of our gaming experience.

WARNING. WARNING. WARNING. ....Baaaaa, tired of it all. Let me screw up, it's part of the experience.

What's your opinion on the fact that the game includes on Undo function?

Oh, almost forgot, on Croix's original PBEM comments, I love the idea of pre-determining the day's moves in order of completion and having the AI determine results based on my opponents moves.

I'd suggest it would require a pretty major re-write of the game and therefore it's very unlikely to happen considering SS want to be able to start focusing their attention on other projects.