View Full Version : TOTAL WAR COMMUNITY
TakeshidaSo
01-24-2002, 02:18
VALUE OF GOODWILL
Is it meritless to say, that the company men don't appreciate the importance of re-establishing, and maintaining, the goodwill of their customers? If they didn't offend people, or too-quickly take offense without proper warrant, or abandon all dialog with people who want proper service; then a positive environment would prevail. The people who get called snipers, or complainers, are often shown how to behave that way. As evidenced by this recent, and many other examples. It is only natural for people to feel deeply disatisfied with being insulted, or totally ignored.
Goodwill is critical to improving the company's online performance. Goodwill has a tremendous economic impact on a company's value, not only to itself, and it's investors, but to it's customers who want to remain loyal to their own smaller investments. Even serious problems with policy protocols, and service limitations, could be turned into a positive for the goodwill of the company, if the right public approach was taken.
The latest developments of cooperation with the community has been a positive sign. Establishing limited customer contact, after all this time, with a small clique of veteran players, is not going to entirely solve the problem of re-establishing company goodwill. Even though it is stark in comparison with the past, it was a desperate remedy to the failure to be inclusive in the first place. The result of which, was a firestorm of criticism for Mongol Invasion, instead of the tremendously positive boost it should have been.
Many of the game-features, designed specifically for online play, have repeatedly shown themselves to be inadequate, or counter-productive to developing a strong online market, and have been critisized for years. Equally important is how the company men have interacted with, and responded to, it's customers, and their complaints. This company handles it's somewhat regular physical service lapses, with extremely weak customer service, which has only exacerbated the poor cooperation between EA/CA, if that was the only cause of every serious problem.
A review of physical service, customer service, public relations, and online marketing strategy, is desperately needed prior to the release of MTW. With special emphasis on existing, or new, game features that will improve online play, and increase the number of customers who play online. No matter whether you want to ignore what I say; by calling it unworthy of a response, or a complaint intended only for the purpose of inciting a flame-war, listen to the people who do consider it, and do analyze the merit of it. Maybe you will listen to me second, or third-hand.
P.S.,
Start another thread, if you want to see how quick you can get one closed. If it's not on-topic, it's spam.
Moles Belli
01-24-2002, 02:31
Umm...I've been gone for months, could someone tell me what the hell is going on?
That is, someone not involved and biased if at all possible http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
Boy, I'm just full of demands, or something...
solypsist
01-24-2002, 02:58
[edit: on Anssi's advice]
[This message has been edited by solypsist (edited 01-23-2002).]
Anssi Hakkinen
01-24-2002, 03:05
I agree with Takeshida-san's Post Scriptum there. This is your chance of striking up an actual, workable discussion on this topic. This is your chance of proving one can exist. But if this degenerates like the two previous ones, I'm not sure any of us will be willing to entertain a fourth exactly similar thread. So think before you post. Please.
And Soly-sama, if you have nothing useful to contribute, you know what to do...
...wait, do you?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
lighten up http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
[This message has been edited by LordTed (edited 01-23-2002).]
ubertech
01-24-2002, 04:06
Quote Originally posted by Anssi Hakkinen:
But if this degenerates like the two previous ones, I'm not sure any of us will be willing to entertain a fourth exactly similar thread.[/QUOTE]
The last closing was my fault. I’ll admit it, so please don’t count it as strike two against TakeshidaSo. I didn’t think I’d be taken so literal, did I?
Any publisher who includes MP in a game should support it properly. Amen to that.
What I believe happens, Take, is that it becomes more difficult after the fact to justify allocating expensive resources to satisfy what for this game amounts to a tiny cadre of online aficionados. What you describe as a firestorm of criticism for Mongol Invasion was IMO (and EA's and Dreamtime's and CA's opinion also) a tempest in the dojo teapot.
Moles Belli
01-24-2002, 05:21
Is the lack of online players due to the fact that the battles online have no real meaning? Let us compare the Shogun MP capablities to that of FPS. FPS games where winning has no real meaning(Deathmatch) are not as popular online as games whose outcomes do (Team based games). For example CS has about 10 to 20 as many people playing as all the DM games do. Maybe people are tired of meaningless oneoff battles and hunger for something more.
Like an online Multiplayer Campaign http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif
ElmarkOFear
01-24-2002, 05:24
In a way Nelson, I agree with you. They do not consider our opinions to matter much. The "small" multiplayer community though is the one who pays the price for the lack of support. If they consider us such a small community, why do they force us to use their servers and not allow for IP games? The cd key travesty when the new game was released punished only the multiplayer community and not the larger single player community. The use of a CD key does not prevent the person who would play single player from copying and playing the game. It only punishes the small community of online afficionados by forcing them to use a service that breaks down continually and has registration problems.
The game is very good. The business decisions that were made were very bad. Which is par for the course for EA. I am happy to hear that Creative has teamed with Activision for this new game. I just hope that Activision treats its online community better than EA has.
This subject has been heard many times, but I understand the frustration that Take and Uber feel. My solution for this was to never again purchase any game published by EA. Fortunately, MTW will be published by Activision and I will be able to keep in touch and play with my many online Shogun friends. So HERE'S TO ACTIVISION . . MAY THEY HAVE THE PRESENCE OF MIND TO:
1. MAKE GOOD BUSINESS DECISIONS.
2. OFFER THE ONLINE COMMUNITY AND THE GAME"S STRONGEST SUPPORTERS THE RESPECT THEY DESERVE.
3. SUPPORT MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO PLAY NOT ONLY AN ONLINE SERVICE & LAN CAPABILITY, BUT IP PLAY AS WELL.
Red Peasant
01-24-2002, 09:48
There's hope cos Activision are responsible for releasing Return to Castle Wolfenstein, and they've done a great job with the MP side of the game.
------------------
"Gutta cavat lapidem non vi sed saepe cadendo"
--Ovid
(The drop hollows the stone not by force but by dripping often)
hi guys,
who play this game?
i would say 2 different groups od players..
the 1. are player who play max. 3 months and than leave or play an other game
the 2, are players who play much longer, some of them since over 1 1/2 years now..
i think a MP online campain, with normal players (if u want he 1. one..) its imposible...
or u guys think that 4 or 6 players have every day, the time to play a online campain?
what is if 2 of them fight each other? the other 4 players have to wait till the battle is over!
sorry, but i dont think that this is fun!
...and i dont think that peoples will play such a campain...
on the other hand, we have our own campain, but the last 1 didnt work ether, it took 3 months for 6 turns...well wich player will play over such a long time?
what the guys want who are posting here, is a MP online campain, wich are playable in fast time...and this is impossible!
koc
I tend to agree with old man Kocmoc here, campaigns are very hard to work and also be fun in a short time...and if they drag on over longer periods a plethora of problems seem to arise.
Toda Nebuchadnezzar
01-24-2002, 18:39
I agree with Rath and Kocmoc. It's simply impossible!
------------------
Grand Master of
The Knights Templar
"non nobis Domine non nobis sed Nomine tuo da gloriam"
MagyarKhans Cham
01-24-2002, 18:42
koc rath
the technical problems arise when teh developers try to mirror the campaign we have in SP.
I am convinced that a developers online campaign could be done if they limit/skip some furures.
but again i dont think it will have true value compared to the effort it needs from the developers. I think it would be a win win situation where they allow us to make homemade multi campaigns easier with little features like being able to field units which are decimated like 28 muskets and so on.
I think it is impossible to make a turn based game like this into a online campaign enabled game.
You'd have to have be in battlefield mode permanently... and the map would have to be of the whole country -- ALL provinces. And you'd have to be able to build shit while in battle...
GAH! Would would be able to realistically command 5 simulaneous battles raging all at once in different corners of the map! GAH! And it would turn this game into a RTS click-fest.
GAH!
I think its fine as is -- without online campaigns. GAH! Would be nice if there were more people... more maps... more fun... GAH! Come to think about it, the only kind of campaign feasible would be the little scenarios... where battle 1 leads to battle 2 and so on. If there was conditionals in there... like if A beats B in battle 1, go to battle 3, otherwise, go to battle 2... that would be nice.
GAH! My stream of consciousness is going berzerk! GAH! Must... stop... posting... GAH!
...
Krasturak
01-31-2002, 06:29
Gah!
Vanya wrong, MagyarKhan right!
The online campaign is certainly possible given the right structure.
Certainly Magy has done more work than anyone along these lines ... and much of his work has aid off for the participants.
Quote Originally posted by Krasturak:
...Vanya wrong, MagyarKhan right!...[/QUOTE]
Gah! 3 months for 6 turns! How can that be "right"?!?
Fine for dedicated die-hards... but for those of us with "responsibilities" that lie beyond the scope of STW, that is unrealistic to expect tight schedules and what-not. And add time zones to the mess! Gah! It truly is unworkable unless your map is 3 provinces! And waiting for other pigs to finish their battle?!? How you intend to get around the negative effect that this will have on those that must wait? Waiting is never fun. Otherwise, the DMV would be THE party zone! Gah!
If you have to "schedule" a game or arrange a time to play it, the scheme will inevitably fail. It may work for a few, but it will fail for the masses. And if it fails some times, it cannot be a "feature" of the product. It must never fail for that.
Gah! And I am not referring to the server uptime! That problem will always persist with the current architecture! Gah!
GAH! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/eek.gif GAH! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/confused.gif GAH! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/tongue.gif GAH!
MagyarKhans Cham
01-31-2002, 08:57
u both are right
the clan campaign we have now can be done weekbased
i am sure the community can programm their own campaign but it would be so much easier with some goodies. one of them is a txt file in which we can add decimated armies to a battle, full access to the map and/or some webtools/programms like an automatic "mapupdaterutility".
but in the end a MP campaign could be done by the developers but it needs some -paid- creativity...
Konnichiwa,
A problem with a campaign like the SP ported to MP is its scale. Like Vanya san said:
"Gah! 3 months for 6 turns! How can that be "right"?!?
Fine for dedicated die-hards... but for those of us with "responsibilities" that lie beyond the scope of STW, that is unrealistic to expect tight schedules and what-not."
I don't say that a full MP campaign isn't something that should/could not be made.
But such a thing would consume a lot of time, not suited for occasional players or even regular ones who can't meet the required schedules.
A dynamic scenario is something that could be played within a couple of hours. Perhaps a save option to enable playing it in some 2-3 hour sessions.
In general: the outcome of a battle decides the where and how of the next battle.
A player has a limited supply of warriors(types). He can gain victory with 10% of it or waste 100% of it in the first two battles.
A player has a limited supply of taishos. If a taisho wins a battle he'll gain honor (morale for the men, which means willingness to fight not better combat stats!). If the taisho routs the morale of the army will drop. If the taisho is killed, the morale of the survivors could increase in the next battle (inspired by the taishos bravery).
Goal is of course to win battles or occupy land: this will generate money (harvest seasons, pillage). Money means that the player can buy better weapons for his soldiers (upgrade combat stats). This increases the value of your army and in case you get beaten by the enemy, he'll gain a large amount of money.
MTW would also allow to build a castle and add to the defensive value of an area.
-Two players cooperate in a dynamic scenario vs AI players.
-Two players play vs each other.
-Two players play vs each other and AI.
-Two or more teams fight vs each other (optionally also vs AI).
This could also be played by clans: a clan has a territory and simultanous battles are fought. Clanmember A uses taisho 1 to fight in the east, while clanmember B & C uses 2 and 3 and fight in the west. This would be like a tourney, but instead of 5,000 koku for each battle it will depend on the previous battles. And instead of a fixed 1 vs 1, you could also have 3 vs 1, which means that somewhere else in the fief there will be a 1 vs 3 battle!
A territory has rich flat lands, and hilly poor (same concept as STW). Areas can be attacked from at least 2 sides. So a rich river 'area' like Kawachi can be attacked from both the north and the south at once: meaning that a defending army would be surrounded. One easy bridgedefence, but also a nasty full attack. A small squad/army could sneak unseen through occupied territory to attack the back of a bridgedefender while the mainarmy struggles to cross the bridge!
------------------
Ja mata
Toda MizuTosaInu
Daimyo Takiyama Shi
http://www.takiyama.cjb.net
Erado San
01-31-2002, 21:39
Guys, you are forgetting something...
You are thinking about this in Shogun terms. Well, start thinking in Mediaeval terms for a minute...
The strategy bit has been expanded enormously. There is much more emphasis on strategic units, diplomacy will be enhanced (marrying princesses and others...), there's an RPG element now as well, with character development to some extent, there's a huge number of special characters that will be available in certain periods...
I don't think many (besides Magy and his campaign group perhaps) have thought more about this than I have. The campaign is not possible from within the game itself. Oh technically it is. Give them an extra development team that could specialise in it and they could do it. They don't have that extra team by the way, but they could if they did. Then we get an MPC that's a crime to play. Many would try it, I don't doubt that. Most of them would dismiss it as crap in about 3 or 4 attempts. Only a few due hards with cable or ADSL connections and a lot of time on their hands would play it in the end. I am talking 10 to 50 people perhaps. Just think of how hard it has been to keep Magy's campaign going... From within the game the problems would be even bigger. So, while they have looked at this very long and hard, they may have decided to scrap it again.
Yes, they should put in some extra options to make it possible for the community to come up with something. They know what to put in. If they do, we can still decide to do something, based on the options we will have.
I had a dream... of writing my own campaign site... where people could log in, create campaigns and make moves on any number of maps... where battles were scheduled automatically... and outcomes were recorded by uploading the logfiles from all parties for each battle and parsing them to enforce rules... a site that offered the full aspects of the current SP game but relied on the EA foyer to play out scheduled battles...
Users could participate in as many simultaneous campaigns as they wanted... Campaign hosts could define guidelines and number of players... starting provinces could be assigned or set at random... Where new strategic maps could be added or created at the whim of an admin... Where decisions were not the result of a committee but they player's own mindset... where the turn-based SP framework would not interfere with the online campaign...
I had the design all layed out... I had the database architected... I had the software foundations to build it on... everything was in place to start writing the code...
Then I realized that there was not a free web hosting site in the world that would allow you to put ASP files in your site! GAH! Double GAH! The PIGS! And a database?!? FUHGETTABATIT!
So I had to scrap it. And the rest is history... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif
[This message has been edited by Vanya (edited 02-01-2002).]
Toda Nebuchadnezzar
02-02-2002, 01:20
soz Vanya but it just isn't gonna happen mate the technology of our internet connections is simply not fast/good enough. Or if it is it comes with a damn big price tag!
------------------
Grand Master of
The Knights Templar
"non nobis Domine non nobis sed Nomine tuo da gloriam"
Erado San
02-02-2002, 02:52
Doesn't Brinkster.com have free hosting anymore?
Quote Originally posted by Toda Nebuchadnezzar:
soz Vanya but it just isn't gonna happen mate the technology of our internet connections is simply not fast/good enough. Or if it is it comes with a damn big price tag!
[/QUOTE]
The dream was simplicity in motion. There was NEVER a demand that all the players in the campaign be present together! Each move could be done independantly. The software would then 'post' a list of battles to be fought and who was involved and what they could get. The players involved play their battles in any order they want. But all must be played before the next round can be openned. So, as you can see... there never was a big demand for Internet resources within the paradigm of The Dream...
Quote Originally posted by Erado San:
Doesn't Brinkster.com have free hosting anymore?[/QUOTE]
'Tis not enough to have just free hosting... but have free hosting where you are ALLOWED to use ASP files (that is what I know how to work with, Gah!, no CGI, PERL or crap like that here!) AND allow you to plop of whopper of a database! You saying Brinkster.com will 'give' you a nice SQL Server 2000 database?!? GAH! You must be kidding! And Access would royally suck wind on this! So... as I was unwilling to dish out the bucks to pay for a site (and deal with all the bozos 'managing' it for me), I was forced to scrap it. I think it would have had a good chance of making it somewhere after all the initial bugs were cleaned out and it progressed through a generation or two...
Gah!
So... should I find a free server with SQL Server 7 or higher on it... they maybe this will become a reality some day... But then, by the time it is out, maybe MTW will be roosting.
Not much of an issue, really, as all you'd have to do is add the new units, maps, etc and go at it...
Can it be done? Yes! Free? No. Of course, I might have cooked upp something y'all would think totally sucks... so why spend the effort even if I did have the free server unless I would know it would be welcomed... But, I digress...
Erado San
02-02-2002, 09:41
Well, maybe 6, might be more months ago I received the Microsoft.net beta and Brinkster was one provider that DID give me ASP, SQL and ACCESS database connectivity, in fact almost full .net support. Free.
Since you guys are talking about a multiplayer campaign again, check out this new thread on the topic: http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002911.html
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.