RoM 2.8 MP Game [Archive] - Civilization Fanatics' Forums

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 28, 2009, 02:13 AM

Ok, here we are:

E_Pluribus_Unum and me would like to start a MP game. It looks like some others are ready to join in. The problem is that 2.8 doesn't seem very stable for MP, or, from what I've read, the problem could be RevDCM. If this is going to be solved anyhow, we could start a MP game as soon as it's playable. I'd prefer playing with Rev on, so I'd wait for a fix. Last game we played (E_Pluribus_Unum and me) was with ver 2.52 and it's been ok, but frankly I don't want to fall back to an older version, especially not after having installed 3.19 patch.

So here are some ideas for our MP game:

- Meeting once per week, in the evening CET (GMT+1) --> this means dedicated players: our last game lasted 7 months!
- Possibly using Pitboss also, so that we can play once per week together and then play on when everyone has time to do so
- More human players but I'd stay within 6, since it's difficult to meet every week with more people, I think
- Specific game settings are to be discussed but I'd say, Revolution, Barbarian, Tech diffusion on, no time victory, every other victory enabled. I'd also like Realistic Diplomacy.
- Huge map, type to be discussed
- About 20-25 civs I think should be ok

Open for suggestion, of course. If interested, drop a line! :)

Civ Fuehrer

Oct 28, 2009, 02:41 AM

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 28, 2009, 03:23 AM

Just to say, I'd love to join. Second, RevDCM 2.6 isn't MP compatible so either play without revolutions OR play RoM 2.71. If possible could we have ANM included? I've always wanted to see my own creation in action (always modding instead of playing, but once a week would be nice.)

Eheheh :) I'd also like to see ANM in action, but E_Pluribus_Unum hates nukes, as far as I know (especially having received some 60 nukes from me in the last game... :D - sorry, E_Pluribus_Unum, I couldn't resist... :lol:); anyway we can talk about it. Actually, the real problem could be the time difference but we can talk about it too.

Civ Fuehrer

Oct 28, 2009, 03:30 AM

Just FYI I'm going to be putting together a Multiplayer Edition of ANM... It's 2.71 compatible but with the latest fixes and additions (mostly to get the most fun out of this game with nukes)

DRJ

Oct 28, 2009, 05:48 AM

Hydromancerx

Oct 28, 2009, 06:06 AM

Hey, I would like to join, too, living in CET (GMT+1) as well.
If it could be managed to have a steady, snail RoM 2.8 multiplayer-game with Afforess' coming megamodmodproject "A New Dawn" also in use,
now that would be a really nice christmas present to come...:king:

Indeed! That would be soooo awesome to play! :goodjob:

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 28, 2009, 02:17 PM

Eheheh :) I'd also like to see ANM in action, but E_Pluribus_Unum hates nukes, as far as I know (especially having received some 60 nukes from me in the last game... :D - sorry, E_Pluribus_Unum, I couldn't resist... :lol:); anyway we can talk about it. Actually, the real problem could be the time difference but we can talk about it too.

I hate them before Sitting Bull and you nuked me. It's too powerful relative to the negative consequences. Kill the game balance.

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 28, 2009, 02:20 PM

Hey, I would like to join, too, living in CET (GMT+1) as well.
If it could be managed to have a steady, snail RoM 2.8 multiplayer-game with Afforess' coming megamodmodproject "A New Dawn" also in use,
now that would be a really nice christmas present to come...:king:

Snail? :eek: That is insain. Our prev. normal game speed game lasts 8 month long.
My "fasteset" snail in single player mode lasts 4 very intensive weeks.
I vote for epic.

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 28, 2009, 02:27 PM

...I've read, the problem could be RevDCM. If this is going to be solved anyhow, we could start a MP game as soon as it's playable. I'd prefer playing with Rev on, so I'd wait for a fix.
I don't thing this gonna be soon. I think this means months, so I vote for starting without revolutions. :(

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 28, 2009, 03:01 PM

Civ Fuehrer

Oct 28, 2009, 03:43 PM

Don't worry E_Pluribus_Unum, I've added plenty of anti-missile projects and the holder of nukes will receive heavy maintenance fees as well as requiring a very long time to build any super nukes. On top of that I added limits to the amount of super nukes a nation is able to hold so all hell won't break loose at one time.;) (hint: GO FOR THE YAM ASAP) It's an invisible mind uploading missile so it will evade most interception and convert any city to you, but has a chance of leaving one unit behind so it will recap.

@45°38'N-13°47'E
A New Dawn is what Afforess is calling his megamodmod project

DRJ

Oct 28, 2009, 04:18 PM

I'd also vote for Epic; Rev can be turned off if necessary, that's ok with me.
As for nukes killing the game balance, I think this is true if you don't build them: MAD works good enough, I think, and if not and it comes to nuclear war, both nations have chances to be destroyed: I couldn't have invaded you in our game if you had thrown some nukes at me or on my advancing units.

Ok, I guess Epic is acceptable as a compromise then... :cool:

I would miss revolutions, though - but stability is critical.

Regarding nukes: I never like to use them but it's good to have some secret silos full of them...for retaliation... (damn i shouldn't give a tell about my strategy)

What map you guys had in mind? I would like to play Jeleens 18 civ Earth map, its balanced - and - well, Earth games are always really epic!
Besides, I would not like to play with 25 civs, 18 are enough for me.

One more question about the time/turn: I always hated Vanilla Multiplayer cause they were always in hurry, no deep strategy possible if you only have a few sec/turn.

As I am a micromanaging builder, I like to have time to make decisions, hasty players beside me drive me mad "end your turn!" "faster!", god how I hated it.
I stopped playing Multi back then because of that. I would like to see it to have no turn timer at all, not that I use very long for every move but when it gets critical I like to use my clock like in a chess game. So the others have also time to think about their moves, especially as they know I am preparing something in my backhand...^^

@DRJ; what's "A New Dawn"? link about it? :)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=333478

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 29, 2009, 02:01 AM

What map you guys had in mind? I would like to play Jeleens 18 civ Earth map, its balanced - and - well, Earth games are always really epic!
Besides, I would not like to play with 25 civs, 18 are enough for me.

The game we played in the past months was on a Perfectworld map; I'd also would like to try an earth map (I usually play on it), but that depends on what most players want. If it's ok for other players, it's ok for me too: the problem is that on that map resources are not equally distributed and one can choose his civ knowing where important resources are placed...

One more question about the time/turn: I always hated Vanilla Multiplayer cause they were always in hurry, no deep strategy possible if you only have a few sec/turn.

My idea was no turn timer at all: we didn't use it in our last game and it was ok for me.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=333478

Thanks, I had a quick look at it: if it works and it causes no problem, then why not?

CivEikka

Oct 29, 2009, 04:05 AM

Can I join this? I live in GMT +2 area, and I would like to play this.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 29, 2009, 04:13 AM

Can I join this? I live in GMT +2 area, and I would like to play this.

Of course, you're welcome! :)
When I have some free time (which I don't have now), I'll prepare a list of players & settings proposed and we'll start taking final decisions for the game, if it's ok for everyone! :)

Edit: Don't worry, that'll be in the next days, not weeks ;)

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 30, 2009, 11:45 AM

cheesemijit

Oct 30, 2009, 01:06 PM

Rom 2.8 then? and if that Lite or Full? (affects Leader choices)

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 30, 2009, 03:02 PM

Rom 2.8 then? and if that Lite or Full? (affects Leader choices)
Use the full one. More options are better. ;) BTW which leaders are not in the lite?

cheesemijit

Oct 30, 2009, 03:58 PM

i know Henry VIII is not in the Lite, and he is my favourite.

Having a look at the Modules Folder the others are: AbuBakr, Afonso, Basil, Cetshwayo, Charles V, Cleopatra, Dido, Franco, Henry VIII, Hirohito, Ivan IV, Jayavarman, Joan of Arc, Kangxi, Lenin, Leonidas, Marcus, Masinissa, Nebuchadrezzar. Nerfetiti, Richelieu, Sejong, Wilhelmina.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 30, 2009, 05:52 PM

Hi there!

We're welcome everybody, especially if s/he is capable of running a 24/7 pitboss server with big upload bandwidth. ;)

Looks like beside Revolution Mod we have to forget BarbarianCiv Mod and barbarians themselves also to not to get OOS in MP games.:(

BTW I vote for Perfecword mapscript. Since I've tried it (nearly 2 years ago with BtS) I never left it, it's so great! Don't like premade maps. You loose the joy of exploration.
What aboult leader choice? Random or name it ahead?
Other options : No tech. brokening ON.

Perfectworld is ok for me, I also think exploration is fun. I'd vote for pre-selected leaders and I'd go for Catherine, Russians. I'd prefer No Tech Brokering OFF actually, but then it depends on what other people think about it. I'll set up some polls about options and then we'll decide. The real problem is: can we play at all? Is it sufficient to turn off RevDCM? Anyone knows if a fix for RevDCM 2.6 MP is expected anytime soon? Should it be out in 2 weeks for example, would mean to restart a game after few turns (I guess everyone would prefer to play with a working version of RevDCM). What do you think?

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 31, 2009, 04:01 AM

Suleiman rules! :king:
MP is a major issue in RevDCM, but I think also a very complex problem too, so there's not gonna be a fast patch/fix for it.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 31, 2009, 05:56 AM

Suleiman rules! :king:
MP is a major issue in RevDCM, but I think also a very complex problem too, so there's not gonna be a fast patch/fix for it.

What about 2.8 beta? Somewhere I've read it uses a previous version of RevDCM: is that true? So that version shouldn't have so many problems with MP? I'm playing a game with 2.8beta with my girlfriend (on hotseat, actually) and so far we had no problems (I mean, 2.8beta doesn't show any particular problem, not related to our RevDCM problem which probably doesn't show up anyway on hotseat). Any idea about it?

Edit: Oh Lord, my "girlfriend" is actually my wife since more than 1 month... :crazyeye: :lol:

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 31, 2009, 06:44 AM

What about 2.8 beta? Somewhere I've read it uses a previous version of RevDCM: is that true? So that version shouldn't have so many problems with MP? I'm playing a game with 2.8beta with my girlfriend (on hotseat, actually) and so far we had no problems (I mean, 2.8beta doesn't show any particular problem, not related to our RevDCM problem which probably doesn't show up anyway on hotseat). Any idea about it?

Yep, beta uses the prev RevDCM.
I knew only one major problem with beta, but it can be avoided easily. (Fix CTD when AI discovers Astronomy, so we have to give/trade them.)
Worth to try it. ;) Nice idea!:goodjob:

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 31, 2009, 07:00 AM

Yep, beta uses the prev RevDCM.
I knew only one major problem with beta, but it can be avoided easily. (Fix CTD when AI discovers Astronomy, so we have to give/trade them.)
Worth to try it. ;) Nice idea!:goodjob:

Yeah, right, I knew about the Astronomy problem but that's not a major issue. So if it's ok for everyone, we could play on 2.8 beta.

DRJ

Oct 31, 2009, 07:55 AM

I am with you.

Some organizational ideas:

The game needs a thread, which describes what files are allowed to be used and where you can find them. Then maybe a week for subscription to the game/voting about the settings (and a little connectablity testing/tweaking between two or three people who already subscribed in the meantime).

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 31, 2009, 10:04 AM

Ok, I'd say: let's keep this thread for pre-startup organization; then I'll open another thread after some things are settled, to keep the other thread clean; for the moment we have some interested players:

1. 45°38'N-13°47'E
2. E_Pluribus_Unum
3. Civ Fuehrer
4. DRJ
5. CivEikka

Hydromancerx and cheesemijit, I assume you wanted to join in too, right? :)

Settings to be discussed soon, but I'd say version 2.8beta unless another MP working version comes out before we start.

Planned start I'd say during next month (november).

Multiplayer mode: E_Pluribus_Unum and me were proposing a simultaneous turns, direct IP game, meeting once per week in the evening about 20 GMT playing let's say 2 hours per session (further details will be discussed). That'll be on normal speed about 20 sessions (5 months) - our last game on normal speed lasted little less than 40 hours which, given the fact that we couldn't meet every week due to personal reasons (holidays, my wedding and so on), translated into 7 months of gameplay. I assume that we're all dedicated players that will agree to play once per week and will keep the commitment for the duration of the game: that said, it can happen that someone will have other real-life commitments that could force him/(her? are there girls playing RoM besides my wife? :D ) not to be online for a game-session occasionally. That shouldn't be a problem, we can skip a game session every now and then; keep in mind that playing on Epic speed could mean almost 1 year of gameplay.
I'm also suggesting to use a pitboss server in addition to playing all together once per week: that way we could play as usual on the day we agree, but if someone has time during the week, we could also play some additional turns between 2 game-sessions. I've never actually tried pitboss besides some basic tests but it looks like my old Celeron 800Mhz can be used as a pitboss server; I could run it 24/7 but the problem is I don't have a good upload bandwith (more or less 300kb/s). So if someone else has other proposal, we can discuss about it too.
I'd say that's all for now. Waiting for feebacks and then we'll start talking seriously about tests and settings! :goodjob:

E_Pluribus_Unum

Oct 31, 2009, 12:43 PM

One of my co-worker also interested in MP game.
He's new to RoM (tell him about 1-2 month ago), and until now he is not regstered here.
I send him the forum link, so he might join to discussion and the game itself.

Civ Fuehrer

Oct 31, 2009, 03:30 PM

Ehh, 3AM - 5AM is a tad late for me. If possible, 18 or 17GMT would be better.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 31, 2009, 05:34 PM

Ehh, 3AM - 5AM is a tad late for me. If possible, 18 or 17GMT would be better.

Civ Fuehrer, if you live in California as I suppose you do, your time it's GMT-8 not GMT+7; so 20 GMT is your noon. Here is half past midnight now while you're in early afternoon. Would you consider that to be ok?

Civ Fuehrer

Oct 31, 2009, 06:35 PM

Well that's better, this website said LA was GMT +7... Can't find the site now but that's much better.:cool:

45°38'N-13°47'E

Oct 31, 2009, 06:39 PM

Well that's better, this website said LA was GMT +7... Can't find the site now but that's much better.:cool:

Here you can see every timezone: http://www.worldtimezone.com/ ;)
Now I'm going to sleep 'cause it's getting late here in Europe :lol:

CivEikka

Nov 01, 2009, 02:35 AM

How about we play the game at weekends, so time won't be that big of an issue?

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 01, 2009, 04:42 AM

How about we play the game at weekends, so time won't be that big of an issue?

The problem with weekends is that me and I think E_Pluribus_Unum too are busy most saturdays/sundays. We'll have to agree on one day and stay with that; occasionally if everyone agrees, we can change the day, but I think it's better to agree on a specific day of the week so that everyone can make plans in advance for a long time.

CivEikka

Nov 01, 2009, 05:19 AM

The problem with weekends is that me and I think E_Pluribus_Unum too are busy most saturdays/sundays. We'll have to agree on one day and stay with that; occasionally if everyone agrees, we can change the day, but I think it's better to agree on a specific day of the week so that everyone can make plans in advance for a long time.

Oh.. As I got school 8h/day 5day/week, + homework.. I think friday/saturday evening would be nice.. :)

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 01, 2009, 05:49 AM

Oh.. As I got school 8h/day 5day/week, + homework.. I think friday/saturday evening would be nice.. :)

Maybe we could agree on alternating friday/another day in the week (friday/wednesday, for example). I think I remember E_Pluribus_Unum couldn't be online on mondays too. Let's wait to see what others think about it.

cheesemijit

Nov 01, 2009, 05:57 AM

Oh.. As I got school 8h/day 5day/week, + homework.. I think friday/saturday evening would be nice.. :)

Ditto

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 01, 2009, 08:12 AM

Yep, Monday is not good for me excep few occasions in a year. Football with co-workers.
Tuesday-Thursday and Sundays most of the times are good.
Friday and Saturday are 50-50 %.

DRJ

Nov 01, 2009, 08:17 AM

sunday evening is fine with me, starting 19:00/20:00 middle european time to 24:00.

Don't you guys think if we make the sessions a bit longer than 2 hours it would be more fun...(that way, we would be able to take little breaks to get a snack or a drink or visiting a certain place)?

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 01, 2009, 08:24 AM

...
(that way, we would be able to take little breaks to get a snack or a drink or visiting a certain place)?

Nope, we're so fanatic, that we do not get up... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQOyUCegZaM

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 01, 2009, 01:44 PM

Well since I have college Monday-Thursday, Fri-Sun would be good.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 01, 2009, 02:19 PM

Well, sunday evening could be ok for me too, starting at 20-20.30 CET (19-19.30 GMT). That way I think we could play 3 hours per session and that would surely make the game quicker. So, it seems that's ok with E_Pluribus_Unum, DRJ, Civ Fuehrer and me; cheesemijit and CivEikka, what about you? Hydromancerx, confirm you want to join in too? I'd say to stay within 8 human players for this game, it's easier for organization. On a following game, we can play with more players if it's working fine.

cheesemijit

Nov 01, 2009, 02:59 PM

that sounds good. 7pm-10pm is great actually.
will this be an ultra-formal online game where we all try to win as quickly as possible or are most of you more casual players? i can do both.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 01, 2009, 03:15 PM

that sounds good. 7pm-10pm is great actually.
will this be an ultra-formal online game where we all try to win as quickly as possible or are most of you more casual players? i can do both.

What do you mean by "ultra-formal" or "casual"? I thought that in every game the goal is to win as quickly as possible, before others beat you to the victory... I actually played only 1 MP game with E_Pluribus_Unum and it took us a looong time to get to the victory with many unexpected turns in the process: in the end, I won by Space Race after having (in that order)
1. conquered EPU's capital while his spaceship was 3 years away from the end of the journey
2. razed a korean city because WK was getting a cultural victory
3. razed a carthaginian city near to me because Hannibal was getting a cultural victory
4. razed a viking city on another continent because Ragnar was getting a cultural victory
5. nuked and razed ethiopian capital because ZY's spaceship was almost at destination

Is this ultra-formal or more casual? :D
Speaking about difficulty, I usually play on noble actually and that game was on Noble level; I remember EPU proposed me to play on Prince but I actually seldom play with that level because I've been beaten many times (althoug I play Civ since Civilization 1:blush:)

cheesemijit

Nov 01, 2009, 03:46 PM

DRJ

Nov 01, 2009, 03:48 PM

will this be an ultra-formal online game where we all try to win as quickly as possible or are most of you more casual players? i can do both.

I like the role-playing aspect of a multi game, especially on earth. I usually don't attack others as long as they don't pose a thread to me and rather play builder-style.
I force others to attack that way, I know - but:
as soon as someone attacks me I use the whole power of an industrialized empire and the few elite troops I have, positioned between the possible attacked sited hold on while my empires consripts arrive. As long as I can chose the place of the battle, I can prepare the best for that, having reinforcements near.

Often, once an enemy army is beaten the defenders tend to get momentum, strength promotions and do what the red army did with nazi germany: they follow them home and defeat them. :cool:

I play civ mainly like I would be governed in real life. I hate ultra-agressive play, but that doesn't mean I can't do it, that much I did learn, as it sometimes is necessary, of course, as 45°38'N-13°47'E described in his last post.^^

I'd like to see a half roleplay/half "real" earth game with nations not too close to each other so they can expand or conquer AI...

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 01, 2009, 03:58 PM

i have played some games with vannila bts and there are people who use crazy strategies to get super far ahead, and it becomes less fun that way.

i probally normally play too casual as i try to go for time victory always, sometimes even diable all but conquest, time and diplomatic. but i did learn some of these strategies so i could keep up with MP games but i prefer to play without them, though i think different rules would apply for RoM anyway.

Oh, I see your point: I actually also don't like using "crazy strategies to get super far ahead". In our game we excluded time victory as it doesn't have sense in my view (and I suppose EPU's view too, since he proposed that); I'd personally leave on every victory but time. Conquest, domination, diplomatic, space race and now scientific (never tried that one yet) are ok to me; cultural doesn't make much sense as a victory to me, but it's ok; religious is too hard to achieve I think, but it can be on. The only one I really don't like is time victory: given so many other kind of victories, I really don't understand why I should stop playing at a certain point... :rolleyes:

CivEikka

Nov 01, 2009, 10:11 PM

Well, sunday evening could be ok for me too, starting at 20-20.30 CET (19-19.30 GMT). That way I think we could play 3 hours per session and that would surely make the game quicker. So, it seems that's ok with E_Pluribus_Unum, DRJ, Civ Fuehrer and me; cheesemijit and CivEikka, what about you?

You mean 19-19:30 GMT +0, that means GMT 21-21:30 for me, and if we are going to play 3hour session, that would be 00:00-00:30 when we finish, heck I got school at mondays 8-16. :D (I have to wake up 2hours before school starts.. :F) I think maybe at evening it would be better, since some of us really have to go to work/school early.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 02, 2009, 12:38 AM

You mean 19-19:30 GMT +0, that means GMT 21-21:30 for me, and if we are going to play 3hour session, that would be 00:00-00:30 when we finish, heck I got school at mondays 8-16. :D (I have to wake up 2hours before school starts.. :F) I think maybe at evening it would be better, since some of us really have to go to work/school early.

That's why I was proposing 2 hours per session (and that's what EPU and me have done in our last game since he's in your timezone). I'm sorry but I can't be sure I can be online before 19 GMT. We could play 2 hours or 2,5 hours per session so we would finish at 23-23.30 your time. Is it acceptable?

CivEikka

Nov 03, 2009, 08:04 AM

Bleh, I need to sleep that I don't sleep at the lesson, happened twice.. ;)
But if I'm problem, then play without me.

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 03, 2009, 10:04 AM

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 03, 2009, 10:26 AM

It's an in game option from the BUG menu.

fearthereaper

Nov 03, 2009, 10:33 AM

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 03, 2009, 10:39 AM

May I join to? I live on the East Coast and I'm usually on all the the time. If I can join, I would like to play as Tokugawa of Japan. Oh yeah and I can only PBEM, if theres any problem with that, then just let me know.
Hi!

PBEM meand PlayedByEMail? If so, then is's not possible. Pitboss only support TCP based communication.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 03, 2009, 03:11 PM

Ok, let's say this: if it's ok for everyone else except CivEikka, 20-20.30 CET (19-19.30 GMT) could be final; I'm sorry for CivEikka, but it's difficult to organize a game between so many different timezones.
About religions: I'd also prefer choose religion off, but I think that's a default option. As for "only one religion", that's a BUG option as Civ Fuehrer said; I'd personally have no problem founding more than one religion and I'd leave it that way only because it's a default option and it's better not change too many options to avoid trouble... but if it's working good, one religion is good for me too.
@fearthereaper: sorry but that won't be a PBEM game; we'll play with Direct IP on sunday evening Central European Time and if it's ok for everyone with a Pitboss server during the week (in addition to playing on Direct IP on sunday evening); if you think you can play anyway, you're more than welcome!

That said, I must report that I had my first real problem with RoM 2.8beta in the game I'm playing in hotseat mode with my wife. We're in 2076 and we can't get past this year, no matter what even if we reload 5 turns before. I don't know what's causing the problem but the game doesn't CTD, it just falls in some kind of loop: the graphic is still moving, the clock is still working but the game remains in the "Waiting for other civilizations" phase. Any other experience with that?
One last thing: if we start the game, I will probably not be online one week or two in december because I'm (hopefully) moving to a new flat and I don't know the time it will be necessary to have a new internet connection (hopefully a few days). Just to warn you in advance.

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 03, 2009, 06:53 PM

the waiting for other civs loop bug is caused by the SDK dividing by zero. It's been fixed for most cases for 2.8 official.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 04, 2009, 03:23 AM

the waiting for other civs loop bug is caused by the SDK dividing by zero. It's been fixed for most cases for 2.8 official.

The problem is that 2.8 official isn't stable in MP. So either we ask zappara to fix 2.8beta for these bugs (Astronomy and loop bug) if possible or we play 2.8 official without revdcm (if it doesn't have any other problem); or we ask to merge the previous version of revdcm in 2.8. Or we simply wait for these bugs to be fixed in a possible 2.81 version. Either way, at this stage we simply can't play in MP I think.

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 04, 2009, 03:27 AM

Well you can check with Afforess with his modmod pack, I think he has a lot of the fixes included.

zappara

Nov 04, 2009, 08:11 AM

The problem is that 2.8 official isn't stable in MP. So either we ask zappara to fix 2.8beta for these bugs (Astronomy and loop bug) if possible or we play 2.8 official without revdcm (if it doesn't have any other problem); or we ask to merge the previous version of revdcm in 2.8. Or we simply wait for these bugs to be fixed in a possible 2.81 version. Either way, at this stage we simply can't play in MP I think.Going back to previous RevDCM would be too way too time consuming and difficult. Besides the new RevDCM provided several CTD fixes that are needed for RoM as well (fixes to those bugs in RoM 2.8beta). Glider mentioned he'll make a patch for RevDCM but unfortunately his computer fried and now that patch is delayed a bit so all I can do is sit and wait...

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 04, 2009, 10:59 AM

Hi!
My co-worker also can join the game if it's stats 20.30 (CET) in Sundays.
I'm still luring my brother so maybe he's also join.

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 04, 2009, 11:01 AM

Going back to previous RevDCM would be too way too time consuming and difficult. Besides the new RevDCM provided several CTD fixes that are needed for RoM as well (fixes to those bugs in RoM 2.8beta). Glider mentioned he'll make a patch for RevDCM but unfortunately his computer fried and now that patch is delayed a bit so all I can do is sit and wait...

Hi!
Patch for what? MP game stability? When expectable the patch?

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 04, 2009, 11:07 AM

Is 2.8beta and 2.8 full compatible?
Will the 2.8 full and the patch be compatible?

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 04, 2009, 03:44 PM

Is 2.8beta and 2.8 full compatible?

I don't think so although I didn't try. Since they use different version of RevDCM, I think they're not compatible; I have both installed, I think tomorrow I can try.

Will the 2.8 full and the patch be compatible?

I hope so but we can't know until the patch is done... so it looks like we'll have to wait anyway?

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 04, 2009, 03:46 PM

Going back to previous RevDCM would be too way too time consuming and difficult. Besides the new RevDCM provided several CTD fixes that are needed for RoM as well (fixes to those bugs in RoM 2.8beta). Glider mentioned he'll make a patch for RevDCM but unfortunately his computer fried and now that patch is delayed a bit so all I can do is sit and wait...

Thanks for answering zap; let's hope it won't take too long, but we'll keep on waiting for good news! :)

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 04, 2009, 04:21 PM

Well as Glider1 said it would probably be around Christmas when RevDCM 2.6 MP patch comes out, but now that his comp fried, who knows how much longer it might be.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 05, 2009, 03:16 PM

Well guys, somehow we have to come to a decision. At the moment, I simply don't think it's possible to succesfully end a MP game. Maybe it COULD be possible with RevDCM off, but that would spoil a lot of fun. We can keep an eye on what glider's doing but for the moment we can't have an estimate on when we'll have a mp-working version of RoM with RevDCM. So, what are we going to do? Given the fact that a MP game in the way we meant to play would take months and that probably in the meantime some kind of fix will come out we can either:
1. wait for some time (Christmas? January? beginning of 2010?) to wait for a stable MP version of RoM and RevDCM
2. begin a test-game without RevDCM, knowing that it COULD end in a crash at some time and that some important features will not be working (RevDCM); and that we could end up playing an outdated and unstable game when the next version will come out. It could be useful to test how MP will work regarding pitboss, connections and every other problem not strictly related to RoM, but hardly will be the most enjoyable experience we expect it to be.
So, what's your opinion?

DRJ

Nov 05, 2009, 06:29 PM

1. wait for some time (Christmas? January? beginning of 2010?) to wait for a stable MP version of RoM and RevDCM

2. begin a test-game without RevDCM, knowing that it COULD end in a crash at some time and that some important features will not be working (RevDCM); and that we could end up playing an outdated and unstable game when the next version will come out. It could be useful to test how MP will work regarding pitboss, connections and every other problem not strictly related to RoM, but hardly will be the most enjoyable experience we expect it to be.

So, what's your opinion?

Whithout any real "hard facts" I'd vote for 1.
but I prefer 2. in the sense that two or more people do a test game for a few hours and then tell the technical results...and their own likings.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 06, 2009, 01:24 AM

Whithout any real "hard facts" I'd vote for 1.
but I prefer 2. in the sense that two or more people do a test game for a few hours and then tell the technical results...and their own likings.

That's exectly what I was thinking about.:)

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 06, 2009, 04:01 AM

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 06, 2009, 10:46 AM

I fote for waiting 2.9, with the new RevDCM. I think, it's gonna worth to waith for it. ;)
Until we can start TEST MP games with RoM 2.8 full without Revolutions, and full logging on, to help improove MP game stability.

45°38'N-13°47'E

Nov 06, 2009, 05:00 PM

Ok, then EPU, DRJ, CivFuehrer and me have agreed that option nr.2 is better.
If it's ok for you guys, I think we can start a test mp game: do you all want to join? Anyone else wants to join in? I'd say let's wait until next saturday (November 14th) to see if anyone else wants to join our game; in the meantime we can discuss about this test-game options. When could we start the game? I'd say next sunday (November 15th) but I'm not sure at the moment if I can be online at 19.30 GMT, so I'd prefer the following sunday (November 22nd) just in case I can't be at home next sunday. I'm going to open another thread about this test-game with every needed info.
I'll be away from tomorrow afternoon until sunday evening, but I'll be online again as soon as I get back home. Any other suggestion?

Lord Brooks

Nov 07, 2009, 12:24 PM

2. has already been tried by the RevDCM beta testers and it resulted in a nice and smooth gameplay without OOS errors, but the test WITH rev on did have way too many errors. I'd say just do a game without Revolutions on.

I tried a game with two other players, plus AI's and we turned off Rev Mod via the staging room options menu and it still went oos when we attacked an enemy unit. Is there another way you guys are playing without Rev Mod?

Civ Fuehrer

Nov 07, 2009, 06:50 PM

I tried a game with two other players, plus AI's and we turned off Rev Mod via the staging room options menu and it still went oos when we attacked an enemy unit. Is there another way you guys are playing without Rev Mod?

Well ask Glider1 and Jdog5000, they know exactly what the deal is with MP.

Carwyn

Nov 07, 2009, 10:08 PM

I'm not in on the games you are planning, but we play 2.71 MP with few problems (the occasional random OOS and we have to agree in advance what option to pick if a city goes into revolution and give the player with the city a chance to make his/her choice). If there isn't a good solid 2.8 MP patch, we may continue to modmod 2.71 and just make it our long term mod. It's acceptable and we are making balance tweaks and changes to civics and add modmods until it suits us. We do play with Revolutions and Barb Civs on, with tech trading off (just to make it a bit harder!) at Monarch. We turned off the random events to avoid the broken ones and have tweaked the revolutions so they slow expansion without crippling the AI.

Anyway, if you can't get a good game of 2.8 going (you can try the 2.8 beta - that's based on the RevDCM that is used for 2.71 and should work ok), I'd suggest going back to 2.71 for now and continuing to mess with that. :)

zappara

Nov 09, 2009, 08:35 AM

Have you tested how the multiplayer game works with v2.8 + Hotfix 3? I'd like to know if any of those python changes had any effect to OOS frequency.

E_Pluribus_Unum

Nov 09, 2009, 08:42 AM

Have you tested how the multiplayer game works with v2.8 + Hotfix 3? I'd like to know if any of those python changes had any effect to OOS frequency.
Hi!

The test game start this or next Sunday. We will play 2.8 full with hotfix 3, but without Revolution, BarbCiv and Barbrainas. I think hotfix 3 does not made any changes in this area. Or does it?
Do not worry, if there is OOS, CTD, etc, we'll let you know. ;) It's going to be a test game, so we're planning to enable as many logging feature as possible.
BTW can you post what logging should we enable, and how to do it?

Thanks!