Slitherine

I know I should know this – but I don’t seem to.


What does “Paired Game” mean in multiplayer – Opponent's side column? And how does it work?

Means you play both sides of the same battle vs your opponent, thus two games.

You mean it would be the same as if I set up playing The Frozen North with you as Axis and also set up a game playing The Frozen North with you as Allied?

Xerkis wrote:You mean it would be the same as if I set up playing The Frozen North with you as Axis and also set up a game playing The Frozen North with you as Allied?

Yep, except it would be more work to do it that way Also, if you are posting as open challenges you might get two diffent opponents. One of the ideas of paired games is balance, as some scenarios clearly favour one side over the other. Paired games let you "average out " the results so to speak. Of course it is embarrassing losing both games in an unbalanced scenario situation

Xerkis wrote:You mean it would be the same as if I set up playing The Frozen North with you as Axis and also set up a game playing The Frozen North with you as Allied?

Yup. Playing a paired game generates two separate games where both player plays a different side in each game.

Nowhere close to what I thought it was.


I was thinking it was a scenario with say Germany and Italy on one side and whomever on the Allied side. When two people start playing – one plays as Germany and the other plays as Italy – as a team. And the AI would play the Allied side.

Go figure.

Xerkis wrote:Nowhere close to what I thought it was.


I was thinking it was a scenario with say Germany and Italy on one side and whomever on the Allied side. When two people start playing – one plays as Germany and the other plays as Italy – as a team. And the AI would play the Allied side.

Go figure.

Team play is something that I hope is considered down the road, not only for PC but other Slithery titles as well: FOG, BA etc.

Playing a paired game is the same as playing with no Fog of War.

Play as Axis and then boot up the game as Allies as see what they have.

Just not my cup of tea to play with no Fog of War.

Razz1 wrote:Playing a paired game is the same as playing with no Fog of War.

Play as Axis and then boot up the game as Allies as see what they have.

Just not my cup of tea to play with no Fog of War.

r u srs?
paired game is not even remotely like playing with fog off.
maybe u should play the game more before u talk about it

Linai wrote:

Razz1 wrote:Playing a paired game is the same as playing with no Fog of War.

Play as Axis and then boot up the game as Allies as see what they have.

Just not my cup of tea to play with no Fog of War.

r u srs?
paired game is not even remotely like playing with fog off.
maybe u should play the game more before u talk about it

He's partly right, I think. I made a pairs challenge and selected fog, weather, and supply to be ON, but, maybe because it was a pairs game, once we were playing they were all OFF. Not sure if it is a bug or a feature. It's fun to go chasing the enemy fighters all over the board without ever having to refuel.

aschindler wrote:

Linai wrote:

Razz1 wrote:Playing a paired game is the same as playing with no Fog of War.

Play as Axis and then boot up the game as Allies as see what they have.

Just not my cup of tea to play with no Fog of War.

r u srs?
paired game is not even remotely like playing with fog off.
maybe u should play the game more before u talk about it

He's partly right, I think. I made a pairs challenge and selected fog, weather, and supply to be ON, but, maybe because it was a pairs game, once we were playing they were all OFF. Not sure if it is a bug or a feature. It's fun to go chasing the enemy fighters all over the board without ever having to refuel.

If Razz1 is right or not - I have no idea..... obviously since I started this thread with the question of "what is it"

But ... With all that has been written here so far - I'm with Razz1; not what I think I would like playing. Although, I'm sure I will give it a try at least once.

What I'm saying is it is similar to playing hot seat. You can see what the other side has and what they can buy and when, just by booting up the other game.

I prefer to play a game all the way through on one side so it is a challenge, then play the other side.

Just not my cup of tea. Option is there for those who like it.

Razz1 wrote:Option is there for those who like it.

Yup, this is the important item to keep in mind. Panzer Corps is designed to provide a very strong degree of flexibility and choice. We should have a little something for everyone, and an editor for complete freedom to make exactly what people might be looking for.

Kerensky wrote:

Razz1 wrote:Option is there for those who like it.

Yup, this is the important item to keep in mind. Panzer Corps is designed to provide a very strong degree of flexibility and choice. We should have a little something for everyone, and an editor for complete freedom to make exactly what people might be looking for.

So true.
And the list is growing of more options we want

Xerkis wrote:

aschindler wrote:

Linai wrote: r u srs?
paired game is not even remotely like playing with fog off.
maybe u should play the game more before u talk about it

He's partly right, I think. I made a pairs challenge and selected fog, weather, and supply to be ON, but, maybe because it was a pairs game, once we were playing they were all OFF. Not sure if it is a bug or a feature. It's fun to go chasing the enemy fighters all over the board without ever having to refuel.

If Razz1 is right or not - I have no idea..... obviously since I started this thread with the question of "what is it"

But ... With all that has been written here so far - I'm with Razz1; not what I think I would like playing. Although, I'm sure I will give it a try at least once.

If the options for FOG ammo etc are set that is what you will get when you play a paired game. There is nothing different than if you issued two challenges to play as different sides in a single scenario. If that is not the case then it is a bug in that game you tried or you issued or accepted a challenge where that was set to off. As for seeing/prior knowledge of what the other player has?? No doudt very soon every player you face in a MP will have played the canned scenarios from both sides already, so there wont be any difference either way. Also in many scenarios I have played, have a clear "attacker" "defender" set up. Which means if you are the defender you are basically holding cities with infantry, and your role is limited to which unit do I heal between attacks fron your opponent, really not many more options. With a paired game you get to be on the giving and recieving end from the same player. I really think that "common" dilemna adds to the MP experiance, not detracts. I mean, once you get to know all the scenarios, how often will you really want to issue a challenge or accept a challenge when your victory conditions and forces/prestige alloted mean you basically are just sitting there awaiting your opponent to do things activley ,maneuver etc and have all the fun , while you passivley wait?
Disclaimer: i take no accountability for illogical arguements , spelling errors etc, for I have been partaking of the grape this evening.

Razz1 wrote:What I'm saying is it is similar to playing hot seat. You can see what the other side has and what they can buy and when, just by booting up the other game.

I prefer to play a game all the way through on one side so it is a challenge, then play the other side.

Just not my cup of tea. Option is there for those who like it.

Razz, that seems reasonable if you only plan on playing a Mp scenario ONCE. After that though, arnt all bets off? Are you saying that if I see you issue an open challenge, then if I accept I can presume you have NEVER played from either side before and, being very chivilric, will only accept the challenge If i have NEVER either, and thus that way we are both in the blind? That will really only be possible if Slitherine ever impliments some kind of "random force , random map" generator for MP, but I suspect that will be way down the road , if ever. Also, playing the game from one side and then non consecuatively playing fron the other doesnt detract from the knowledge you gained in any way .

Just an update................

I’ve played a paired game finally (or in the middle there of) and I don’t care for it.

I tend to be focused on things way more than I should be at times – and to completely switch the strategy from the Axis side and then to the Allied side on the same map… just sort of messes things up for me.

I can certainly see why some would like to play paired games – but just not for me.

Ive got a bunch of games goign at the same time and once in a while I try to move a unit thats not mine because I just got so use to playing that side 3 times in a row in different games hehhee!...but thats just me,,probably a glitch in the noggin.

TheGrayMouser wrote:

Razz1 wrote:What I'm saying is it is similar to playing hot seat. You can see what the other side has and what they can buy and when, just by booting up the other game.

I prefer to play a game all the way through on one side so it is a challenge, then play the other side.

Just not my cup of tea. Option is there for those who like it.

Razz, that seems reasonable if you only plan on playing a Mp scenario ONCE. After that though, arnt all bets off? Are you saying that if I see you issue an open challenge, then if I accept I can presume you have NEVER played from either side before and, being very chivilric, will only accept the challenge If i have NEVER either, and thus that way we are both in the blind? That will really only be possible if Slitherine ever impliments some kind of "random force , random map" generator for MP, but I suspect that will be way down the road , if ever. Also, playing the game from one side and then non consecuatively playing fron the other doesnt detract from the knowledge you gained in any way .

for replays' sake,..it has to happen.. with you on that one tiger man!