Printable View
Before I make my mind buying BI, is there any issue with connection, game being dropped, diverging game in MP and so on?
Has the lobby changed at all? Is it still GameSpy?
I read in SP forum that cavalry has been made weaker, infantry tougher, and archer got to pick their target better... All of which would probably greatly enhance balance for MP. Any feedback on that?
Louis,
Dont do night battles online major lag.
I find night battles to be fine online and offline, so it's probably more to do with your graphic settings and your computer.
As for your questions, Gamespy is still being used, and the lobby hasn't really changed. I seem to lose connection to Gamespy more often than I did previously (which was almost never), so there may be some new port or something I haven't picked up on. As for in game, most games go fine, but some people do have a dodgy connection as before, but this is a minority. So I don't think a lot has changed really.
What has changed though is the gameplay balance, this is much better now, with infantry being able to effectively stand up to and defeat cavalry head on, and spamming or blobbing cav just being ineffective. Cavalry as well is a fair bit more expensive, so less can be actually afforded. Also, overall defence stats have been increased, so the melee actually lasts longer. Overall impressions are very much of an improvement on RTW and it is much more enjoyable to play (there are a couple of balance questions around berserkers and horse archers, but people are considering specialised rules if they become insurmountable, but it's too early to tell really).
No trust me pal, everyone in the game we played had major lag, they dont go well, maybe if they are on small unit size it wont be laggy. and its fione for me offline too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist
Ragnar, If one person's computer isn't up to it, it'll slow down the game for everyone else as well, as games have to run at the speed of the slowest computer. I have played quite a few night games online and I know I'm not imagining it not being too laggy. ~;)
After playing several times on gamespy i find it no better than RTW in MP....there are way too many downright abusive players and there is no hgonor at all to speak of. I do miss thedays of STW and MTW. Why in the wolrd do guys think people care one bit for what they type on a PC. Like that actually hurts anyone? Thats stupid. Love playing BI but sadly am making a list of those clans who I wont be joining their games......
D
That kind of reminds me... Is Ignore still broken?
Louis,
Quote:
Originally Posted by King Ragnar
Night battles work just fine on the few MP battles I tried too. SO it must be a problem with the graphics card etc. ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Nihilist
The gameplay is better by far but the lobby has become populated with very abusive players who are the majority only because the vets left in droves. It's such a pity that players feel the need to try to out do each other with their swearing and/or purile abuse. But what can we expect if there is nobody to guide them and try to maintain a harmonious atmosphere?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimeolas
......Orda
If i had to describe the average RTW player in one word, i would go with "punk". Ignore isn't an option because there are too many of them... does ignore work now or does it still reset every time you go in? Because if it works, it might actually be possible too get rid of them.
Perhaps more of the vetrans will come back now that the gameplay is much better?
It will be interesting to see if they could make a difference now that things have deteriorated so badly. There are still some decent people though, not all are 'punks'
.......Orda
Are all the lobby areas filled with spammers? In RTW certain lobbys were just empty, all the "punks" Were in the "friendly" lobby for what ever reason...
Maybe the patrons of the .org could agree to use one of the less crowded lobbys?
I agree it seems a bit better but cav is still a major problem imo. There is no reason for cav to die vs infantry in this game. If the charge dont succeed the first time there is nothing stopping the cav from pulling out of the fight and try again.Quote:
What has changed though is the gameplay balance, this is much better now, with infantry being able to effectively stand up to and defeat cavalry head on, and spamming or blobbing cav just being ineffective. Cavalry as well is a fair bit more expensive, so less can be actually afforded. Also, overall defence stats have been increased, so the melee actually lasts longer. Overall impressions are very much of an improvement on RTW and it is much more enjoyable to play (there are a couple of balance questions around berserkers and horse archers, but people are considering specialised rules if they become insurmountable, but it's too early to tell really).
I tried to pinch cav between 2 spears, between spears and a faster horse and so on, nothing help, heavy cav slaughter light cav so fast u cant get the other unit in there in time and if heavy cav fights only infantry and does not succeed in a devastating charge it can be pulled out so easily that it is virtually untouched and free to try again or run elsewhere. (a thing the infantry that just fought it cant do since it is so much slower so the cav will have decided the battle before it reach anywhere)
Cav needs to be harder to pull out and save if it has overextended itself or has come into closecombat with enemy inf.
Kalle
That's odd, I watched six Cataphracts get stopped dead by spears and heavy inf entered and dispatched them with relative ease
........Orda
Most Clans use the Chat lobby, though the etiquette of some of these Clans is not what we are used to from STW and MTW. It also seems harder to fill a game there.Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose
Apart from abuse, there are still players who just quit the game if something happens which they do not like. This is really annoying since any saved replay is ruined by 'out of sync'. There is the option to admit defeat which does not leave the battlefield littered with AI controlled units but nowadays, with so few 'old school' players, we are left with those who do not care if they spoil a game
......Orda
Most clans use either the chat or competetive lobby when in rome. Although I wasn't around from the MTW/VI days the clans i have heard of from thoses days are RTK and SA (although there not around much any more).Thats about all I can think of of the top of my head.
That's great and I'm glad it's fixed, but that's not the issue Kalle is pointing out. Then again, I remember most STW players wanted to be able to disengage cavalry, and now that feature is in MTW/VI and RTW/BI. The relatively slow combat cycle compared to the run speed in RTW/BI is probably helping the cav disengage without much loss. In MTW/VI, the run speed is slower and the combat cycle faster. You still saw hit and run tactics in MTW/VI, but it was usually done with the fast light cav.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orda Khan
In STW, spears cost about 1/2 of the cavalry they could defeat, and there was no disengagement possible. With the ability to disengage, the value of mobility has increased. In fact, in Samurai Wars for MTW/VI, spears cost 1/3 of heavy cav and can defeat them. This was arrived at empirically by many multiplayer tests done by experienced multiplayers. I don't see this cost structure reflected in MTW/VI, or in RTW/BI.
No, all of the lobbies are not filled with Spammers.Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose
Generally as has been previously stated clans tend to use both the Chat and Competetive lobbies and usually these lobbies are home to the more skilled players (although in BI it wont be the case as much for now as everyone has to learn the factions again to become skilled once more.)
The friendly lobby is where most players are though, indeed.
Greetings to all.
Let me first mention that BI is very near VI gameplay. The main issues is and remains lag which is brining down the atmosphere of team matches.
I have a bit different view on cavalry effect. I belive that is strong as it should be, but Kalle is right when he mentiones killing ratio between heavy and light cavalry.
I will not go in details, becaus lobbies are sleepy there atm.
As far I've experienced, many of those who you might refer to them as 'unmature individuals' are still playing RTW. Lobbies seems quit 'peacful' (maybe I've loged at 'right' time).
Main issue are clans as mentioned befor. I don't know if clan Aggony, clan Bears and rest of them has any interest in BI. We will see how will all turn out.
So this won't sound negative, BI has one good quality. It is competitive again and not anyone is able to win skilled player or team to be more specific.
oh? It's out already, sweet.
Your a week to late Sjakihata. That also means your a week behind!~;)
My quarrel with BI , just as it was with rtw is i feel new and unexperienced players have far too good a chance to win with using an unbalanced "spam" armies and tactics so simple they're almost non-existant!.
Just yesterday i fought a chap (whos first game i assume it was) who took 10cilibans (very heavy cav) put them all in one big wedge and rolled over my entire army. An army i might add which was made of balanced portions of missle, infantry an cavalry units. I must aslo mention this was in a forest where im sure cav are meant to have a disadvantage agaisnt infantry. i also flanked him almost immediately with my own noble cavalry. It displeases me to see there is still no penalty for stacking units or buying more than 4-6 of the same type.
I strikes me, just as before that a win depends more on the army you take and much less how you use it. This was not so much the case in MTW/VI which i still play daily~;)
Having said all that bad stuff,... i do think BI is cirtainly worth buying the because there is a great improvement in the overall balance and battle mechanics. Even if this was not the case i feel it has more potential now to become good with the help of several of the mods currently in production.
Maybe is just me, but I assume that in BI you are able to win this with nice balanced army (you just move units a bit differently then in mtw/vi) which was not possible in RTW. Imho.Quote:
Just yesterday i fought a chap (whos first game i assume it was) who took 10cilibans (very heavy cav) put them all in one big wedge and rolled over my entire army.
Maybe we will see players coming back to VI, but I still belive that BI is a step in right direction. For me problematic issue is lag and replay desync.~:handball:
It's not about just moving units differently. In MTW, overlapped units fought at half effectiveness, there was a 20% cost increase for each unit over 4 of the same type and the RPS in melee was stronger. Even with the improved performance of spears vs cav in RTW, the spears may still be too expensive relative to the cav they can stop. A spear unit shouldn't cost more than half as much as the cav it can beat. Right now with large units in RTW v1.3, a silver shield pikeman at 760 denari can beat a cataphract costing 940 denari frontally, but it's not 1/2 the cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loinnreach
The thing to find out is how many spears you need in a more or less balanced army to beat an all cav army. In STW, you could do it with 6 yari samurai infantry, but there cav couldn't disengage and the anti-cav bonus was 400%. In MTW, you need 8 spears (50% of your army) to beat all cav, you have to withstand multiple charges, and the anti-cav bonus is 300%. In RTW, the anti-cav bonus is weaker (only 60% in RTW v1.2 and I don't know if that has changed), and it's easier to disengage than it was in MTW. In RTW v1.3, the anti-cav performance during the charge is much better than it was in RTW v1.2. You probably need at least 10 spears to have a chance against an all cav army in RTW v1.3.
Another approach to this problem is to play at low enough money so that you can't afford all cav. However, for that to be viable the morale of non-upgraded units has to be high enough for them to be useful. Total War games have always had low morale without upgrades, and most people don't want to play their battles at such low morale.
In Samurai Wars for MTW/VI, a combination of these approaches is used to make balanced armies not only viable but desireable. The anti-cav bonus is 600%, the money is kept low enough that you can't afford all cav and the morale is high enough that you don't need upgrades. What this does is allow 4 spears to be a sufficient number to bring to any battle, and this in turn increases the maneuver tactics because you have fewer spears vs fewer cav, so you have to use them well and get them to where they can counter the enemy's cav threats.
I liked the VI community mod you guys and Sam wars for that matter because it kept balance and a good standard of morale without the use of upgrades. The upgrade system in RTW/BI is even worse than it was in the predesessors because the price for an upgrade doesnt go up the more you buy.
Myself and a clanmate are in the process of developing a new mod for vi using similar foundations and also using elements from BKB's Supermod which has many new units and factions.
Thought i should make this aware to anyone thinking about coming back to VI :)
Yes Yuuki, as well all that as you have mentioned. With that manouvering I had in mind that in RTW you as well were able to group all units almost in one spot which is not possible in MTW/VI and should be made here as well, but... (won't go in details)
I've just played few team matches against few players who picked spam armies (cavalry for example) and won without too much difficulties and in this sense I belive good direction was made with BI.
My personal opinion is that BI is competitive and you need a some skills to win thought. It is not just 'click fest' like many referred to RTW.
TW series are beside gampleay very important from aspect of unit stats , of what we all are aware.
I can't agree that this is bad, becaus this system should be compared to RTW not MTW/VI and in this aspect, upgread system for BI imporves it's gameplay.Quote:
The upgrade system in RTW/BI is even worse than it was in the predesessors because the price for an upgrade doesnt go up the more you buy.
RTW/BI simply is different game same as MTW/VI is different game then STW/MI.
BI upgread system from BI aspcet of gameplay is good as VI upgread system is good from VI aspect of gameplay.
I've talked with few 'veteran' players, regarding TW upgreads. Some have agreed that it would be best if factions would be balanced wihout any need for upgreads.
This would be best solution and will allow you as well to play a game on every denari level.
For example in MTW/VI as well, you can turn one ordinary unit into 'super unit'.
We all have different opinions how things should be made. I just know that those of old generation players who has left are in role playing games, few on fake STW servers and rest in MTW/VI or RTW/BI.
If we then even add mods to this different series we soon get the whole picture. There are/were issues like 'what amount is best to play MTW/VI matches' for example.
I really don't mind what someone is playing, the fact is just that TW MP players are 'crumbled' all over.
ps. That there will be no missunderstanding, I appriciate all the time mod makers spent on all those mods.
If the replay desync has come back, that's unfortunate because it's difficult to track down the cause. At this point, I'm far more interested in whether or not RTW/BI multiplayer is worth investing the time and effort required to play it. Once you get away from Total War multiplayer, you realized how many other things you gave up doing in order to play Total War online.
To me it's important to be able to use a distributed formation. If you have to keep your units compacted into a small area to prevent them from being routed by a frontal rush, it's very limiting geometrically because you can't set up different angles of attack or even effective counterflanking moves. At least you should be able to utilize several groups of units that can be positioned with substantial separation between them. You don't want to be able to come from a great distance to assist a unit or group of units that are in trouble, but you want to be able to come from "some" distance. Identifying that distance, which varies for various unit matchups, is an interesting part of the game and allows you to set traps and ambushes etc. If that distance is compressed to nearly zero by the game mechanics, an interesting part of the gameplay is lost. The same is true on a larger scale for whole armies in team games if it's necessary to concentrate all the teams armies in a single area as fast as possible.
The upgrade system has actually kept moving in a good direction. In STW, you had 9 levels of honor and each level gave a 40% increase in combat power. In MTW, that was cut back to 4 levels. In RTW, it's cut back to 3 levels, and each level only gives a 20% increase in combat power. In practice, the upgrade system tends to compress the differences between the low end units and the high end units because you get the same combat power increase for less money on low end units. That was addressed in MTW by inflating the cost of the upgrade over what it was actually worth. I don't think that's the case in RTW.
Uneven upgrading can also alter the role a unit plays in RPS which I don't like, but some players do like. To the extend that CA balances the units, it's done with equal upgrades and a particular morale level. As I recall, Longjohn said it was balanced at zero upgrades. Uneven upgrading and different levels of morale alter the balance of the units. So, the optimum balance will be found at one particular morale level which you can adjust in steps of +2 by using uniform upgrades. This optimal morale level in MTW was higher for team games than it was for 1v1 battles due to the way the outnumbered morale penalty worked. We don't know if there is an outnumbered morale penalty in RTW. I could find out a lot about morale penalies by doing tests, but it's a lot of work and I'm not highly motivated to do it for RTW. Besides, I'd have to buy a 2nd computer to do the tests.
Erm, no on both accounts. MTW/VI is using the same engine with STW/MI. We know to great detail how the battles work and we can also recognise that upgrades can't be a balancing factor. In all cases, there will be some type of unit(s) that will get a serious advantage that in the end shall make it prevail in players' army lists. You can take as examples chronologicaly the Ashigaru, the Monks, the spear and pike units, the sword units - in RTW you certainly couldn't turn a relatively weak unit into a game winning one (maybe Desert Cav or various assorted archers, but still..), though you could take the elite cavalry ones and take advantage of the blob attack feature.Quote:
RTW/BI simply is different game same as MTW/VI is different game then STW/MI.
BI upgread system from BI aspcet of gameplay is good as VI upgread system is good from VI aspect of gameplay.
Especially in previous games, the fact that people try to use a florin level that appears "right", starting unit morale is low and unit prices are very close to each other, transforms the game into a mathematical/logistical exercise. But if there are some basic mechanics that are working correctly in all cash levels, then you can get a relatively good game based on r/p/s. RTW fails more in the second part than in the first.
BTW, we 're making the above-mentioned mod as a way to have a fun, diverse gaming experience with a small but good circle friends, that will help us refresh a bit the VI experience and present some new challenges, based on some ideas previously presented by great mods such as the comm,sam wars and reconq, and building on them . We are currently thinking of releasing it(we have tho to polish lots of aspects, and only after taking permission from some persons whose work we used, like BKB). But this might be a thing to discuss after a while, now this is a BI thread heh.
One question, is BI a playable multi player expansion or is it just another bug ridden desync fest product with humongus lag bugs?
I am asking this because I am thinking of getting one.
I haven't seen any posts that say the battles are desyncing. I have seen a couple of posts where people said their BI replay did not play the same as the original battle. I haven't seen anything about RTW playback being incorrect. An incorrect playback can be caused by a particular unit type. Since there are no new units types in RTW, I would expect those replays to be ok.
I saw some posts where players said they had severe lag in night battles, but other players posted that they had no lag in night battles. It would seem that severe lag is computer specific.
Good points, yes. Yuuki you are right about time and how people spend it as well about some other issues.
'limiting geometrically' issues in RTW/BI. It is true in 1v1 matches. Team matches are more nearer to MTW/VI gameplay.
You are right as well about other issues as well I don't deny Alexandros issues he pointed out as well. I'm not as much 'in' TW mechanics as you are or AMP, Kocmoc, Bottom and few others were/are, but I know if something is good or not.
BI for example has a lot more army variations then MTW/VI has for example. There as well are few other good point, but yes let us mention all.
AquaLurker you have asked about desync and other bugs. There are few bugs, but you hardly notice them. Desync is not present in battles, but only in replays. Lag is still an issues and depends from time to time.
Now host a game it seems even more reliable then in MTW/IV for example. (at least that are my experiences)
Is it as it is, but despite that I 'like' BI as much as I enjoy MTW/VI. (didn't liked RTW, so there will be no confusion)
As Yuuki mentioned
People have different hobbies and issues in life. Difference in all kind of aspects.Quote:
is worth investing the time and effort required to play it. Once you get away from Total War multiplayer, you realized how many other things you gave up doing in order to play Total War online.
It depends on each person how he decides. It is clear to me that those who get in touch with STW gameplay, didn't like what MTW was later on and many left thought and so on, until VI was out. I would mention that is same with MTW/VI related with RTW and BI expansion, just less interest.
It is more the fact that when RTW has showed somehting what people have not expected and becaus of that uninterest of spending more time in TW serie, they have somehow found other things in life they have put aside becaus of TW. (STW and VI in mind particulary)
Many won't like BI becaus they want STW or VI gameplay for example. Different 'style' of gameplay. Some people don't get used to different style or don't want to and other can or are willing to.
I can effectively play MTW/VI and BI. I simply adopt gamestyle to each of series. BI as well allow much better strategy gameplay then you have know befor in RTW. I even belive that strategy aspect of BI is better then it is in VI. Better unit choise, more variations, more intense gameplay, etc. (my opinion, or as you would mention 'my 2 cents')
There are some players who belive that berseker units are too strong and they don't like them in game. They are quit right, but even this units are able to be beaten. I only have one rule and this is no artillery and it is a relief after all those countless rules from RTW.
This one simple rule gives enough flexibility and you are able to play interesting team matches without being affraid of spam armies. (well at least for now I don't know for any 'effective spam'; we will see what time will bring)
*matches are usually played on 12,5k*
Then on other side you have lag in team games sometimes, few bugs (I have not have any manouvering bug problems yet), replay desync. It is simply on each one how he will decide as mentioned befor. For example many STW and MTW players belive that movement controls are better in those series.
Then those you have played with for so long. Will they like BI for example? How is lobby atmosphere, etc. Factors which decide.
I belive that BI has better movement controls, more simplified and you can be more focused on gameplay. On the otherside this controls might as well permit a bit more faster gameplay which would not be possible with MTW control for example. (mentioned hypotheticaly)
Afterall an individual will make his/her own desicion for which he/she will belive is best to do.
While I certainly won't be as wise as Loinnreach in my post, I'll add my two cents anyway :)
I only bought BI recently, so I can't form a complete opinion on it yet. I played nearly only multiplayer, but I had a great time. I played about 8 matches, but not a single one crashed. None had any issue in it, excluding an horrible, horrible replay desync. Oh, and the night battle was slightly laggy, but nothing worse than that. Too bad, I loved the replays...
The unit selection is varied as had been mentionned, and while I did see 2 "spam" armies (One cataphrac and one huns horse archers), neither were very effective and were easily beaten (Sarmatian virgin cavalry > horse archer).I mainly played 2v2 as usual, but I haven't met a single rude person. In most games my ally and I actually worked together and supported each other: Most of my enemies did the same.
I'm glad that I'm able to have more diversity as playing as the Sarmatians also then as the Scythian before. And yay, more female units. I faced berzerkers, horse archers, roman infantry... Nothing came across as a cheap unit composition. Some horrible yes, but nothing "cheap".
For one, I love the multiplayer in BI, but I can't garantee it will be the same for you :)
This is probably due to a player 'exiting' the game rather than using the 'admit defeat' option. I have encountered this happening on all replays where one or more of the players have exited the game before its conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
It does not happen if the game is played to the end.
The common trend with a lot of the players today seems to be 'I've had enough lets get out of here'.
Jochi
Sadly, this is still the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by buujin
Until your on the battlefield you are not aware of the opponents selection and then its too late.
Jochi
Most players will try to find an army which gives them an advantage, and that means you are going to see a lot of unbalanced armies. The game is supposedly designed so there are counterarmies to every army. It's not designed so that a perfectly balanced army beats all unbalanced armies. So, a certain amount of guesswork is involved when purchasing an army which you hope tilts the advantage back in your favor. If you play the same people more than once, you get better at anticipating what kind of army they'll buy. There is another whole level of strategy involved between players who have played each other many times. If you become too predictable it's a disadvange.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jochi Khan
Of course for it to work like that, every army has to have a counterarmy. I would say the 10 heavy cav wedge has to be stoppable by a 5 phalanx block or else you aren't going to have a diverse game because a cav unit can run around a phalanx unit faster than the phalanx can turn to face the cav. You have to be able to field 2 superior phalanx units for each heavy cav that you face at a combined cost which is not more than the cost of each heavy cav unit. That's the minimum requirement, and commits you to 20 phalanx units when facing 10 heavy cav. It goes without saying that you can't play at a money level that allows the purchase of more than 10 heavy cav. That would seem to be about 10k since a cataphract costs 940 denari.
A very interesting analysis by Loinnreach, particularly the quote above, which I have to say I very much agree with. There are indeed many more varied units and armies that can lead to much more intense, enjoyable battles. BI, in team battles particularly, has introduced an element that was lacking in VI and the outcome of the final stage of battle, though governed in some ways by the previous stages, is less dependant upon them. whether the same can be said for 1v1 I do not know and perhaps this is not the case. The speed issues that were condemned in RTW no longer present a problem and with melee lasting considerably longer, it is not unusual for a battle to last as long as an hour. Hopefully the Replay Desync problem will be addressed and 'Epic' struggles will then be saved correctly. That and the Lobby PM chat, which appears to be broken if you wish to select more than one person in conversationQuote:
Originally Posted by Loinnreach
......Orda
I now have to correct this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jochi Khan
After a battle where every player remained until the conclusion, the replay turned out to be Desynced.
This is something that will have to be corrected by CA, if there are going to be Tournaments (CWC....CWB....etc)
Jochi
Tired of hosting with the same old maps?
The God's Map Pack works with BI also :grin:
http://www.clanwarscomp.org/tools/Gods MapPack.exe
Desync (connection) is very definitely player specific.
Wish there was some way to prequalify folks for larger games.
This single issue is the Achilles Heel of all Total War gamming.
There must be a way to solve this :book:
I just played a 2v2. 2 minutes after the game had ended, I watched the replay and it wasn't the same. We did have one player with connection/lag issues but nothing terrible, the game was fine and we finished the game.
So the replays are off.
Just some feedback for the Devs.
I'm loving BI though, havn't had this much fun in awhile!!!
Later all
Cromwell:bow:
If I remember right we had the same over sensitive connection problems, and replay problems, with the first release of RTW?
And what happened to ‘t & y’ direct chat? Or is there something I am not doing to make that happen?
This is almost like patch 1.1 never happened. Or is it true that memory is the first thing to go :tongue2:
To get the quick Chat, look for the preferences file in BI. There you have to change quick chat from FALSE to TRUE. I also changed it to MIN GUI, for MP it looks alot better. I also changed the resolution to match my LCD. Oh's there's alot to modify in there to make the game more enjoyable.
One thing after playing CS online for so long, I miss/wish that TW had voice chat included for online play. I know you can run Teamspeak ...etc, but it's nice to just load up your game and have it all.
Later,
Cromwell:dizzy2:
I dont think it is player specific. Why could I host countless games with no probs before but now in BI although many are ok, you do get games that the replay is desynced? If it was player specific, surely ALL games would desync or run ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi says
Jochi
Thanks Cromwell :grin:
I think we may be talking apples, oranges and maybe lemons here Jochi :smile:Quote:
I dont think it is player specific. Why could I host countless games with no probs before but now in BI although many are ok, you do get games that the replay is desynced? If it was player specific, surely ALL games would desync or run ok.
RTW v1.0 had a connection desync problem, and replay problems.
The v1.1 patch fixed the problems.
So if you were playing v1.1 or 1.2, everything would be “normal”
For some reason with BI it seems we have the same problems back (not really sure if same, just looks that way).
So if you are playing BI, you will see problems more than “normal”.
Now the problem it’s self seems to be an over sensitivity to synchronization errors.
It seems that some peoples connection (or computer, or both) cause the problem more than others. And it is the same people (player specific) who are causing the problem every time.
You might be able to play with them 1v1, but when they join a 4v4 the game lags and they drop.
They might have been able to play in RTW 4v4s, but in BI they are not cutting it.
This needs to be fixed before we can have any 4v4 competitions with BI, the same as it had to be fixed before when Rome first came out.
Now the replay issue may be a direct result of the sync problem. It would make sense anyway that if the original game was unstable, that the replay would be also.
So far I have not had any bad replays, but at the same time have never saved a game with sync problems, and will have to look into it.
:inquisitive:
What would you people recomand for a smooth multiplayer action for BI.
We seems to have more crazy lags in BI than we have in RTW.
I only played some games which rather smooth actions so far and about 80% of the games I played range from tolerable lag to mad lag.
1. Read the post above yours.Quote:
What would you people recomand for a smooth multiplayer action for BI.
We seems to have more crazy lags in BI than we have in RTW.
I only played some games which rather smooth actions so far and about 80% of the games I played range from tolerable lag to mad lag.
2. Pray for a version 1.5 patch, we need this fixed as soon as possible. I hope they don’t wait too long again, we loose people…
3. For now, find people playing with cable or high end DSL, who are not sharing their connection through a router with another active computer.
You can check your own connection, and learn more about the “very broad” interpretation of “broadband” (required by the game) at :
http://www.bandwidthplace.com/speedtest/