• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Wow, it is becoming extremely difficult and upsetting trying to get new econ/millitary/diplomacy strategy games of this nature to have REAL multiplayer, and not the tacked-on ghostbusters-ish type of multiplayer.

Port Royale had it, had some bugs but had it nonetheless....
Port Royale 2 and Tortuga? multiplayer removed.

1701AD had it, worked fine
1404AD? multiplayer removed.

In comes East India Company? The great white hope as it were....
Various modes of deathmatch, as if this grand strategy game were merely an Unreal Tournament game with ships.

Wow, just wow. I'm not aware of anything else on the horizon that can take up the torch.

It's always bugged me about the huge chip on their shoulder that devs of these types of games have about multiplayer. It's almost as hard as it is to get true co-op in a shooter these days.
 
One question I have not seen anyone ask or address yet. What about co-op play against the AI? Can my wife and I play it over the LAN teamed up together and vs. the AI?
 
One question I have not seen anyone ask or address yet. What about co-op play against the AI? Can my wife and I play it over the LAN teamed up together and vs. the AI?

I do not think there is. There "single battle" mode that allows one player to fight the AI. There is multiplayer mode which allows you to fight against other players as a team or individually. But I do not think you can set up multiplayer battle with one of the players being the AI.

That is an interesting idea. I believe the Nitro server hosts the game so it would seem like a good addtion for those times when you do not have enough players. Maybe the dev's could add it later.

Greg.
 
While I wish the developers the best of success on their title, the inability to actually play the game in multiplayer (as opposed to various skirmish battle modes) just caused me to cancel my pre-order.

It's really as simple as this. My friends and I want to play Strategy games multiplayer. While we enjoy RTS games (i.e. Real Time Tactical), when we're in the mood for RTS, we'll play RTS. When we're in the mood for Strategy, that's what we want to play. None of my LAN group has a desire to purchase a very intriguing, interesting looking Strategy title only to be restricted and unable to play the portions the interest us the most.
 
The primary problem with online multi-player mode is finding some else to join. Sounds like you already have the group. I do not understand the logic of canceling your pre-order. I did not par-take of the open beta. But the devs have disables multi-player as a carrot for purchasing the game. Or it could be that it was difficult to generate more than a smattering of interest in multi-player during the closed beta, so they decided not to bother with it.;) The single battle tactical interface is fairly close to the multi-player experience just AI's not humans.

Not sure if canceling the pre-order was the best decision mate.

Cheers,
Greg.
 
The primary problem with online multi-player mode is finding some else to join. Sounds like you already have the group. I do not understand the logic of canceling your pre-order. I did not par-take of the open beta. But the devs have disables multi-player as a carrot for purchasing the game. Or it could be that it was difficult to generate more than a smattering of interest in multi-player during the closed beta, so they decided not to bother with it.;) The single battle tactical interface is fairly close to the multi-player experience just AI's not humans.

Not sure if canceling the pre-order was the best decision mate.

Cheers,
Greg.

Well, to explain the battle portion of the game, while I'm sure a lot of fun and definitely something I looked forward to, was not what interested me in the game - it was more of the strategic elements that drew my interest. Now, my single player game time is quite limited, my play time per week is usually spent with my LAN group when we get together on the weekend. So, I want to play the Strategic portion of the game most, but since I'd be playing exclusively multiplayer, I wouldn't be able to. That was the reason for cancelling my pre-order... it definitely wasn't something done out of rage or because I wanted to "get back" at the devs, I really do hope they are very successful in their endeavours. I just wanted to make sure my voice was heard, as if they were to impliment "full" multiplayer support, I'll buy this game in an instant (and they'll generate 5 other sales as well, from my LAN group :)).

I don't expect any dev to cater to me, but I'd still like my voice to be heard as I'd love to become a customer of EIC :)
 
Sorry about that I mis-understood your intended usage. :eek:o Please forgive me.

Playing the campaign mode against other humans would be a very interesting game. Maybe there will be a mod in the future. There was a comment on the original forum from Kim essentially stating they did not feel there would be a large enough audience to warrant the development. One of the major issues that would need to be addressed is the time differentiation between realtime battle and Strategic. In strategic mode months are expressed in minutes.

One way around the issue would be to auto-resolve all battles.
Pro - does not disrupt strategic time frame.
Con - ships fight to death rarely surrender.

Another way round would be to have the other players watch the battle from the sidelines. I believe it would be unfair to let strategic mode play on while a couple of the players spend what could be years in strategic time fighting a half hour real-time battle.

Again, sorry for the mis-understanding.
Greg.
 
No campaign-mode multiplayer?

Agreed-- Total deal-breaker. And here I was looking forward to this game.

Hell, with just naval battle multiplayer... It's just lower quality knock off of ETW's naval battles.

No worries though. Back to EU III and Civilization: Colonization.