Multiplayer discussions

[Patrick Ward]

Ideally this would be a sub-forum but I don't have that ability and those that do are in virus lockdown so we'll soldier on like the troopers we are. Not being a sticky this will quickly get lost if you don't add to it.

This was requested so we can start some conversations (without shouting) about multiplayer. Your hopes, dreams, experiences, etc. etc. No suggestion is too stupid but please don't expect the developers to reply to everything. They will read but they're up to their ears at the moment.

Thanks

[Kerensky]

Why is this a sticky? This is clearly just a discussion, so let them discuss like normal in the general forum area. They don't require a dedicated place to discuss multiplayer. Yes it would be nice, but there's nothing wrong with just posting thoughts, feedback, and the like in the main forum area until it comes online.

[creesto1]

My 4 friends and I are waiting to buy Panzer corps 2 until more multiplayer content is released. Really wish the multiplayer experience was more comprehensive.

My wish list:

1. Non-scenario multiplayer experience - both sides start from scratch and build up, allowing for a different experience every time. Think advance wars dual strike.

2. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 mode

3. Options for team quick match with friends

4. Updated multilayer server

5. Different historical factions and Generals to use and play in multiplayer.

[Kerensky]

Thanks for unsticking. I want stickies to be rare, but meaningful and important. I don't like forums with dozens of stickied threads.

My 4 friends and I are waiting to buy Panzer corps 2 until more multiplayer content is released. Really wish the multiplayer experience was more comprehensive.

My wish list:

1. Non-scenario multiplayer experience - both sides start from scratch and build up, allowing for a different experience every time. Think advance wars dual strike.

2. 2v2, 3v3, and 4v4 mode

3. Options for team quick match with friends

4. Updated multilayer server

5. Different historical factions and Generals to use and play in multiplayer.

My only response is that yes, waiting is the correct response. If you're not satisfied with what MP is offered... hammering the downvote button doesn't help anything. Enjoy the MP there is, but go in with eyes open and knowing exactly what is in store. And it's perfectly acceptable to request, and then wait, for the features you want to get integrated. If enough people ask for things, the demand obviously goes up, and so is the impetus to satisfy that demand!

As with anything, especially in times such as the ones we currently live in, things take time.

The game is packed with campaign, solo, tutorial, puzzle, random, and multiplayer content. Adding more and improving on any or each of these things takes more time.

[creesto1]

Well said, and you are right! Hard to argue with this haha

[Real_MultiPlayer]

Exactly having more sub forums is a far more organised way for people to talk about the different aspects of the game that they want to.

Multiplayer Is a huge aspect of the game that was a very key buying point for many people.

Other aspects should require other sub forums Like we have with the scenario / mod sub forum.

Sticky is only until the Sub forums can be added.

Thanks again Patrick !!

If you do choose multiplayer be aware of the very very small chat icon at the far left top of the screen you can click this and chat in real time to other players waiting to play or looking for a game to join.

I would have expected this would have been open by default since it is not easy for many people to see and can easily be closed if you didnt want to see it.

It would be great and very helpful if this could be set as open by default.

Also it would be very helpful to have the names of all the people waiting in some sort small list so we can see that we are not alone and other people are there they just dont know whats going on how the interface works etc. Being able to see the chat other players that do know how it works will be helpful to let them know.

Please I dont want hear about discord again !! A lot of players wont even find their way to this forum or the steam forum they just want to play the game and expecting people to be using 3rd party apps that isnt reasonable.. I have looked at discord and was a waste of time.


Thanks Again Patrick .

[Real_MultiPlayer]

As for going in eyes wide open if you care to look at the store page and at what was advertised in promotion videos it should be very easy to see why so many people are disappointed and some even very angry see steam forums and reviews ?

You seem very much out of sync with what so many players want Kerensky and what they thought they were getting.

And for some reason hating on multiplayer..

Im sure I have said this before lost somewhere in the millons of unorganised posts but I

Only bought this for the ONLINE multiplayer that was advertised ..

Not to play vs ai that are hopelessly useless and will their run tanks full speed into cities that are occupied every single time ..

Even on Official scenarios where presumably they could have been scripted to not on the first turn run tank full speed into fortified/bunker hexes Example Minsk 2 player co-op ..

[Dorky8]

So far I've found multiplayer pretty descent so far but it certainly needs to be expanded over time.

Some thoughts on improving Multiplayer.

1) Why not just take several of the better campaign scenarios and balance them (add a few units) with more variability. Seems like an easy way to add MP content, many people like the historic scenarios over the fictitious ones. PC1 had many of the campaign scenarios but most were very lopsided and useless.

2) Adding some rankings might make it more interesting. At least add a reliability score, that may shame more players into leaving games dormant.

3) To my knowledge you currently can't resign, you need to have the ability to resign. Currently if you are losing badly you can either go thru multiple (10+) turns of continuing the agony or abandon the game. Without resign the game will just end up with tons of abandoned games. Resigning in some cases is the honorable thing to do.

4) The MP platform has been pretty stable except yesterday when I joined (my opponents turn) and it crashed twice ( I sent 2 reports). I think the game can get rid of the join function its just a very long version of playing your turn. Its a turn based game not real time.

5) You should be able to turn off chat. The PC2 crowd is much more mature than say the World of Tanks group but you still occasionally get some putz you dont want to hear from.

6) Over time you need to add more 4X4 (3x3) scenarios they can be great fun. Currently its hard to find reliable 2x2 players, given the reliability of opponents if you aren't playing with friends I fear 4x4 games will never end. Eventually when people get to know the better reliable players more quality 4x4 games need to be added. In PG2 they were a blast.

[Real_MultiPlayer]

Confused by a lot of this ..

You dont want to play in real time

And you dont want to see other peoples chat..

If you dont like the person you are playing with perhaps just join another game .. besides it very easy to not see the chat if you simply click the chat icon.

it seemed like were only doing the play pbem thing anyway.

Many people prefer to play in real time so taking away features that were advertised and used by others which bought the game for those features is rediculous

Its like me saying take away the campaign cos i dont use it... Also I dont like russia lets take that out too..

[Dorky8]

If you want to play and think its real time fine, no reason to get so excited. I joined 6 games and two crashed. For ME its painful waiting to see the slow next turn while your opponent crabs a beer. To ME a a lame way of trying to make a turn based look sort of real time. When its my turn and I join I see the same thing just much faster. I don't think its a good addition but if YOU like it have at it.

I like to be able to turn join off, so my opponent can join and start trash talking.

Why would you care if I want to toggle chat off, its a common feature.

Try not to get so excited and not make conversations so personal.

" I like to the turn feature a lot and thats a big reason I bought the game"

[Real_MultiPlayer]

None of your comments are making any sense to me

Is English your first language?

I would Love to see some screen shots of this trash talking simply can not imagine it in this type of game

I havent had any problems with my opponents crashing .. I guess you or the other player had bad hardware? or settings..

[Dorky8]

Try not to get so excited and not make conversations so personal.

[Mordan]

at least in PzC1, there was a description of the game, passwords etc. Pz1C had a utility where you could check if u had turns without launching the god damn game. PzC1 launch fast. It takes 2 minutes to launch PzC2 just to check if i had some turns.

the MP match maker in PzC2 and overall experience is nothing that was advertised.

I also bought PzC2 only for the MP

[Dorky8]

I don't really have performance issues at this point and MP loads quickly.

MP is fine for me right now but I haven't played in a long time and am getting up to speed.

I do strongly agree that MP needs to be expanded significantly to make it worthwhile over time

1) picking sides - I'm locked in to one side if I start the game?

2) Comments

3) Passwords for private games.

4) Being able to resign

5) Turn chat off option

6) Many more scenarios, again why not just use some of the current campaign scenarios, balance them and add some variability. Seems like an easy way to add content.

[Dorky8]

Looks like many MP issues are resolved in the new patch

nice job folks

[Kerensky]

Looks like many MP issues are resolved in the new patch

nice job folks

Awesome!

[Gwaylare]

So here are my first impressions about multiplayer games. Up to now I have had not much games, so it is really a first impression.

What is really nice:
The surrounding mechanic is really nice for MP. This creates a lot of dynamic in a game. It will balance OP units and gives the possibility to counter them by outnumbering with weaker units. I think this will work at least as well as the flanking mechanic does in Fields of Glory. Good job.
Only the presentation of the hostile areas which are surrounded are sometimes a bit confusing. The algorithm sometimes marks large areas as being surrounded. The algorithm is right but is not helpful sometimes. May be it is getting better when we get used to the surroundig mechanic.

I like very much how aircraft does work now. Fighter are much cheaper now, so there will be much more struggling about air supremacy in multiplayer. Aircraft now is related to what is happening on the ground. Without an near by airbase aircraft is nearly worthless.

About unit surpression I was suprised that is active for the whole turn and even beyond together with surrounded units. So surpression is more important than in PC. Together with raising infantry to strength 15 it brings a great difference between a full strength or wounded infantry unit. The balancing looks really good here, artillery is powerful but it is not overpowered. The idea of supporting only attacks against attacking infantry (soft attack) units is confusing at first but quite clever on long term, I think. Same for powerfull artillery with very low defence against air attacks. So there are a lot of way to counter artillery.
The range bonus for artillery on high ground is really strong and may be to strong for MP.

Attached transports with the ability to get out after driving some hexes give a great mobility for towed support units and infantry. I not really aware about how much movement points the transport may have spend to get out of the transport, but the visualisation is really good here.


What do I not like:
You are able to conquer a supply source and buy units at once. That is really a strong feature. The limitation in PC to wait for two turns to get a valid supply source and to avoid opponent from buying units by having an adjecent unit to the supply source did work very well.
Same for reinforcing wounded units. The general limitation to reinforce a maximum of 50% max strength is really good, but the limitation should drop with any adjacent hostile unit even before surrounded.

Anti tanks units now are really powerfull. That is good for towed AT, because they were worthless before. Armoured AT now may get to strong. At the moment for me there is no obvious counter for armoured AT behind tanks. May be I just did not find a way to do it but on the other side we might have balancing problem here.
May first idea was to assign AT feature to towed AT only and think about a different feature for armoured AT. The way armoured AT was handeled in PC was not to bad. Give just an small feature comparable to overrun to armoured ATs.
By the way I really like the idea of features assigned to units and the visualisation with icons.

The name of the map in the multiplayer game menu is in the language of the player started the game. I really like to play games within an international community, but I really want to know the map I am joining.

Then there are client crashes, which are really bad for mulitplayer because of the reloads. Acording to the anouncements my expectations were to get a server based multiplayer. But it seems to log on to a game while the opponent is moving is a pair to pair connection. Overall this means a client crash will undo all moves and you have to start again. Do you have any further plan here? I like PBEM, but why not sending a file after every move which is reloadable after a crash? At least stored locally.


Missing features:

What is about a replay? I do get one at the beginning, when the opponent is done already. When I am logged in the game I may miss some moves or I will forget about, because it takes some time till the opponent is finished. Would be great to have a look at all opponent turns again on demand.

There are still no waypoints to assign to unit to avoid the AI pathfinding. This is very important when moving into or near by fog of war. This was a request in old PC day already and it should not be to hard to implement.


Overall PC2 will have a lot of potential for multiplayer games. Hopefully we will get this running on a large fan base. The latest patch does point into the right direction. My vote for an own sub-forum.

Best regards and thanks a lot
Gwaylare

[Dorky8]

excellent summation

The only thing I would add is its difficult to differentiate between Axis & Allied units.

Also many units look very similar (109 vs 87) Arty vs tanks etc.