[Capcom]

i'm thinking of downloading this game but before i do, does it have any online features?

[DaBrain]

TBP has full online gaming support. There are a few multiplayer missions afaik.

But there are two problems:

There are only a few players.

The master server is down atm.


The TBP tables won't be valid, so it's easy to cheat if you play without validation.

[Fury]

In other words, multiplayer support is quite pointless because there are rarely players who want to play mp, not enough multiplayer content and PXO replacement only validates original FS2 tables.

[karajorma]

If people want to play it then it's not hard to get it validated as far as I understand.

[Goober5000]

Originally posted by Mr. Fury
PXO replacement only validates original FS2 tables.

No; we have every intention of getting modded tables validated.  However between the bugs in multiplayer and Kazan's sporadic activity on multiplayer it's been tough.

The good news is that once PXO has been re-added into FSO, this process should become much easier.

[karajorma]

Just had a chat with Kazan and there's really nothing stopping you from running a TBP server for multiplayer though.

Well apart from time, expense and the fact that no one would play on it much

[xenthorious]

Originally posted by karajorma
Just had a chat with Kazan and there's really nothing stopping you from running a TBP server for multiplayer though.

Well apart from time, expense and the fact that no one would play on it much

Software is a driving force.  Let me be blunt.  FS2 rocks, but its multi player maps suck donkey balls.  Be honest, compare them with Battlefield 1942 and tell me with a straight face that you prefer FS2 in Multi Player over B1942.

The good news is it’s a resolvable problem.  Like someone already said, there is not enough content for it.  That IMO is the number 1 problem. No good content, no good experience, no good reason to do it.

Well, I foresaw that before you guys even posted this and I been focusing most of my recent time in making some rather dynamic Multi Player Maps.  One such example is the new CTF (Capture The Flag) map I created.

I'm also fine tuning a new Conquest map I created as well.  BTW, these maps work under TBP mod.  I will also be doing the same thing with WCS when it is official released. Too many changes go on in WCS to do a stable map off the project scope so I’m going to wait until it’s done.

I want you guys to know that I’ll be focusing on Team-VS-Team maps because very seldom will you find in any game, a large interest in co-op missions with multiplayer support.  Never the less, I’m up for the challenge and I have a few tactics that would otherwise make a co-op mission work worth being interested in.  One such example is I have yet to see in any game, where a co-op mission requires two players to do something that would otherwise be impossible to do alone.  An example would be, in a first person shooter, two players would have to flip to different switches at roughly around the same time, but the switches are located completely in the other end of the maps.  That is a true co-op mission.  So is automatically adjusting difficulty levels based on the number of players that joined.  I have yet to see a game that does this.  Well, that’s going to end because I’m doing it.

Anyways, I hope any and all of my donations are worth any interests because I would love to see multiplayer support in FS2 and any mod associating with it, flourish.

[IPAndrews]

Originally posted by karajorma
Well apart from time, expense and the fact that no one would play on it much

I dunno about that. The demand for multiplayer games hasn't been huge or anything but it has been fairly constant. The trick I think would be to set aside a sheculed time for an "official" TBP multiplayer session. Of course your problem then becomes time zones.

[IPAndrews]

Originally posted by xenthorious
FS2 rocks, but its multi player maps suck donkey balls.

This is also very true. The need for some new multiplayer missions is desperate.

[karajorma]

Originally posted by xenthorious
Software is a driving force.  Let me be blunt.  FS2 rocks, but its multi player maps suck donkey balls.  Be honest, compare them with Battlefield 1942 and tell me with a straight face that you prefer FS2 in Multi Player over B1942.

Not played it but I'm sure if I had I'd agree. I have also dabbled in making some new multiplayer concept missions but I've always been faustrated by the fact that certain new SCP additions don't work in multiplayer.

My idea was a campaign with shop levels that allowed you to buy new ships. With the right SCP changes I might be able to make that work still.

[xenthorious]

Originally posted by karajorma


Not played it but I'm sure if I had I'd agree. I have also dabbled in making some new multiplayer concept missions but I've always been faustrated by the fact that certain new SCP additions don't work in multiplayer.

My idea was a campaign with shop levels that allowed you to buy new ships. With the right SCP changes I might be able to make that work still.

(AUTOMATIC METHOD)Record all kills in a logical varable.  Use FRED to setup the map so that way if (everytime) the player reaches a speicific value from the logical integer var, change player ship (obviously for the better).

(MANUAL METHOD)Record all kills in a logical varable.  Use FRED to setup a GUI interface which shows the player the kills earned.  Setup a capital ship to respond to interfacial actions through the com system.  Associate a trigger with the (evertime method) to act specifically toward certain requests through that com trigger.  Set a string logical var with a speicific string and get that logical var with a new method.  Use that method to produce the autoamtic change of ship/weapons for the player. Deduct the score from the gui system and insure all coding is free from exploits.

GUI setup can only produce up to 100 at max. If you want over 100, setup the GUI to work under a currency hiarcy (100 pennies = 1 dollar.  Two different outputs).

[karajorma]

Originally posted by xenthorious


(AUTOMATIC METHOD)Record all kills in a logical varable.  Use FRED to setup the map so that way if (everytime) the player reaches a speicific value from the logical integer var, change player ship (obviously for the better).

(MANUAL METHOD)Record all kills in a logical varable.  Use FRED to setup a GUI interface which shows the player the kills earned.  Setup a capital ship to respond to interfacial actions through the com system.  Associate a trigger with the (evertime method) to act specifically toward certain requests through that com trigger.  Set a string logical var with a speicific string and get that logical var with a new method.  Use that method to produce the autoamtic change of ship/weapons for the player. Deduct the score from the gui system and insure all coding is free from exploits.

GUI setup can only produce up to 100 at max. If you want over 100, setup the GUI to work under a currency hiarcy (100 pennies = 1 dollar.  Two different outputs).

Very clever. Nothing really in there that I didn't think of myself. Problem is that only the host machine records variables. The clients pay no attention to them at all.

As for changing the player ship there's the problem that the new change ship SEXPs only work on the host machine too.

If you're expecting the client machines to do anything that can't be directly set from the host machine in your Capture the Flag mission you'll see exactly what I mean very shortly.

You can do things like setting variable dependant on the position of a client's ship, setting the hitpoints to a value determined by a variable etc because the host machine keeps all the clients updated as to things like that but if you're trying to do anything more complex you'll find that the host sees one thing and the clients sees another.

I had one case where I could see an enemy capship as a Fenris while the host was seeing a Deimos class corvette.

On top of that if you include a message that outputs a variable the host will see the current value but the clients will only ever see the default value. Which means that only one player can ever know how many points their team has.

I can get around that somewhat but the fact that change-model doesn't work means that I'd be reduced to complex fiddling around with the set ship position SEXP to even do the capship stuff and that the player changes are right out the window.

[Roanoke]

Originally posted by karajorma


Very clever. Nothing really in there that I didn't think of myself. Problem is that only the host machine records variables. The clients pay no attention to them at all.

bummer huh ?

[karajorma]

It's pretty much fatal to the idea. I have some workarounds I could try but I've not got much enthusiasm for them since they're a lot more work for a much less interesting mission.

[xenthorious]

Originally posted by karajorma


Very clever. Nothing really in there that I didn't think of myself. Problem is that only the host machine records variables. The clients pay no attention to them at all.

As for changing the player ship there's the problem that the new change ship SEXPs only work on the host machine too.

If you're expecting the client machines to do anything that can't be directly set from the host machine in your Capture the Flag mission you'll see exactly what I mean very shortly.

You can do things like setting variable dependant on the position of a client's ship, setting the hitpoints to a value determined by a variable etc because the host machine keeps all the clients updated as to things like that but if you're trying to do anything more complex you'll find that the host sees one thing and the clients sees another.

I had one case where I could see an enemy capship as a Fenris while the host was seeing a Deimos class corvette.

On top of that if you include a message that outputs a variable the host will see the current value but the clients will only ever see the default value. Which means that only one player can ever know how many points their team has.

I can get around that somewhat but the fact that change-model doesn't work means that I'd be reduced to complex fiddling around with the set ship position SEXP to even do the capship stuff and that the player changes are right out the window.

Nothing like this has been added to the CTF mission but it was considered.  Seems however that I will hold that thought.