Those steps you are referring to are descriptions for playing multiplayer on the stardock servers, if you are many players connecting to the internet through the same LAN.

Maybe i should rephrase since i feel i was abit unclear.

Where does it say that you need to log in to impulse when setting up your own server(that might be available later) to play on LAN? 

He says they need to log in because initially all games will be hosted by Stardock, as in no players are ever creating servers. They went this route to avoid the hell of Demigod's multiplayer. He then later states that they will be releasing custom (dedicated) servers that players can load mods on. He made mo mention on whether or not the dedicated servers would still require logging into Impulse with each client, but it seems entirely possible that these custom servers will serve the game data themselves, like TF2 servers. I guess it depends on if you can connect directly to an IP without having to log into Impulse once the custom servers are available.

I think requiring people to log in to use Stardock provided servers is fine for multi-player, and I don't think they did it for DRM. They wanted to make sure multi-player was better than Demigod, and now are trying to compete with Steamworks. Multiplayer is a lot more about services now, rather than getting a LAN together like it was in the 90s. Yeah people still like doing that, and it's cool, but let's be realistic. Almost anyone who has a LAN is likely to have a decent internet connection. They didn't make this decision to spite LAN guys, or for DRM. They decided to make a multi-player service that is reliable, can keep cheaters/hackers, and coincidentally pirates away. They still plan to release custom servers of some sort, so let's see how that pans out.

I'm also one of the people who didn't buy SC2 due to DRM. Requiring an online connection for single player, and their whole Real-ID thing (and me paranoid about identity thieves hacking Blizzard), was just too much. Requiring an internet connection for dedicated, fast multiplayer servers with community features is one thing I'm willing to sacrifice for, because the ends justify the means in my opinion.

The main thing is really from a support/quality of service point of view. If it's client-server, then 1) you don't have to worry about people opening ports (as most people find that sort of thing confusing and cumbersome at best), and 2) you don't have to worry about Jimbob User trying to host a game on his 486 with 56k dialup and making a horrible game for everyone else.

It just provides a much more uniformly positive experience for everyone than a peer-to-peer system can. That's really the big reason we went the way we did, not as some sort of anti-piracy measure or quest to eliminate offline LAN parties as people seem to be assuming.

As Brad has said, we're doing multiplayer, but Elemental is and will always be a primarily single-player game. So we've opted to focus on polishing that aspect more in the limited time before release rather than investing pre-release resources on multiplayer features that may see little or no use at all. Once the game is out, we can see how people are playing it and what they want, so we can better guide further development.

Yes, I don't think we've ever been anything less than up front that we want the system to be focused and robust so we don't go through that (the multiplayer issues on launch) again. It may not do everything right off the bat, but it'll do it well.

Well I would like to point out few things.

First of all, yes, you were saying that Elemental is primarily Single Player game, but also, you were saying that feature which will not be finished, will not make it in. and because you have MP, you said that you will make it right.  

I would like to point out, that interest in multiplayer can be much lower, because what elemental will offer after the launch. Because you did not spend enough time to finish MP part, this can hurt people who like to play with other people even more. Because of it. it might seem, that there is much lower interest in it.

I am perfectly fine with client-server set up, as it is much less hassle, and I do not really see point to play elemental on lan, there is no benefit from it. FPS games are much better because performance, but for TBS? There is not really need for it. Also, I understand, that stardock can make more money from this way, which they deserve, simply because, they have spent their money and time on making this game.

I actually I do not like some post in here, from people which do not care about MP. I acutally prefer MP more, for chalange, I understand that some people simply like to own AI and use exploits to own them and it makes them happy. But I am not that kind of person, I like chalange, and AI simply is not and for long time will not be offering this kind of challange for me. But this does not make me saying, that we dont need AI simply because, I prefer MP.

Last thing, which I would like to stress is...

You were always saying that you will support MP because its core of the game. It might not be, primary focus, but its there, and you said you will make it right.

You have started with fully developed MP. Then you have started talking about different diplomatics screens for MP just to make it play better (which did not happen I guess). Then frogboy wanted to have leagues (like SC2) which again did not happened. Then you have stated, that we will not be able to play random maps in multiplayer. Then, you have said, that MP will have different rules then SP and after that, you just annouced that you will not support MODs from the start in custom games.

Now to make this straight, this is not what I was expecting, and its not something what I consider finished, or fully featured. To me it feels, like not only you have not developed anything for MP, but at the end, you have stripped it down.

I was not happy about how things turned out, when frogboy talked about balance. But I hoped for MODs to take care of this, now... even this possibility is out of question for MAYBE few months. 

Also I do not want to be limited in multiplayer, I want choices, options and ruleset, which we can save and then use. The ones which we can share, and sooner or later, people will make balanced one for multiplayer. But I want to be the one who decides what I want to have different in MP in custom games. I simply want options to disable spells, artefact, units and all other stuff and save it. 

Also do not forget, that people like to play together agains AI. So why you want to deliberately force people to play it your way? Its fine on your servers, but in custom games? Please do not. If you want to focus on SP, so be it, but at least give us tools, to make it right, on our own. Which means mods, and rulesets, please.

Or you can with a little patience and friendly dialog, they may just decide to support LAN as you hope.

Okay. Over the last year we've been told that it's primarily a SP game. Everybody knows that. But we were also told that if MP was going to be done at all, it'd be done properly. There was a lot of talk about custom servers for MP modding (which since modding is a core and much hyped feature are a requirement since you can't use mods on the official servers). Of different MP modes for different types of games (largely to make it more accessable for short games). (Apparently there's not going to be random maps in MP now? Omnax, do you have a link to confirm that?)

If the premise is what you say, that we'll see how people play with MP and go from there, then it's hopeless. Putting out a half-baked gimpy MP offering is a good way to ensure that nobody is playing MP the second Civ 5 hits (which treats MP as if not equal to the SP game, at least a core feature worthy of being completed). People looking for an MP TBS will look elsewhere, and people who already bought based on what we were told are just stuck?

After reading the various dev journals and posts talking about what features MP would have and seeing none of them actually make release, I feel as a customer that I've been sold a bill of goods. Recall: "Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state."

I don't see how this qualifies as "finished" in any way in the MP area. Things that Stardock themselves talked about aren't in, and there's no indication on when (or if) they will be. Far as I'm concerned, it's a pretty clear violation of the Gamer's Bill of Rights.

Does Stardock have a response to that? What's our recourse for having what some of us bought the game for cut so drastically?

I still want to know exactly what is going to be in Multiplayer (it sounds like a chunk of features/'stuff' is not going to appear).

I want to know so I know if my friend(s) should buy it or not.

But given how many times you've posted the same thing, you do seem to think posting on a forum about a game should be?

For people who haven't bought the game, the best option is to wait. For people who pre-ordered and have already had the money taken based on what Stardock said they'd deliver? Not so much.

man i cant believe that people are complaining over this. You know frogboy and stardock go miles above and beyond every other company to do things the right way for their customers and still people complain. It really boggles the mind. I bought elemental preorder before beta 1 announced because I knew it would be good, and at release I expect everyone to buy it even those who play lan.

Reading through some of the comments was quite disgusting, and the only people crying over LAN issues is because they know they cant give 1 cd key to 15 friends on a lan. Anyone whose EVER been to a private lan party will know that Lans are always a hotbed of piracy. You can play lan just fine, but each person needs to buy it.

As an aspiring game designer myself, I wanted to point out the fact that freeloaders are a dime a dozen nowadays, and It is well within star docks right to prevent cdkey sharing in lanparties. For those who do buy the game, they get working robust multiplayer, even though the game was not really designed specifically for multiplayer.

Frog, dont let these guys get to you, you can never make everyone happy, and its better to make your loyal customers happy than these lan-complainers who you know darn well are just trying to play the game mutliplayer with 1 key. And with the obviously pro-pirate type posts in some of this thread(on stardocks own forums, HOW DISRESPECTFUL)  and held worldwide, I cant really blame the game industry for going the way its going as far as DRM as concerned. In the perfect world people are not cheapskates and just bought what they played, there wouldn't be a need for this discussion right now or DRM or phone-home servers in the first place!

Anyways, ill see you guys at game day 0 when the cult-classic game of the year 2010 is released!

Thank you stardock and team for making great products and interacting with your fans openly, you have my most highest respect, even if sadly, some people do not.

to StormbringerGT

About random maps in multiplayer, frogboy mentioned that in one of his dev jurnals. If it really ended up that way, I am not sure. There is not any definitive info on MP at all. But it was not long time ago, like month, maybe two max. And because there was no other info then that, I take it as the most actual one.

I assume random maps are generated then handed out to the players, like if you host a game in Civ 4 you generate the map and give it to everyone else. This prevents people from having to download the same scripts or even custom maps. I really hope this is the way it works in Elemental.

Honestly though I can count on 2 fingers the amount of giant 12 people civ 4 games I ever finished and that game didnt have tactical combat!

Imagine waiting for 11 other players to all finish tactical combat turns while you alt tab and browse the web....

Yep. I did it on the basis of what they were saying would be in the game, and my past good experiences with Stardock. I don't usually do it. I'm going to stick with that "usually" in the future I think.

I know that. I explained in another post that the LAN issue isn't even my main one: lack of mods in MP is. The two happen to share the same solution in custom servers. LAN play is what triggered this because it was just sprung in the middle of a post about something else and was totally unexpected given their past statements.

People get upset because people get passionate about a game like this, and now it's clear that MP has been put on the backburner due to time constraints. That's a business decision and it's how it goes, but it's not one that lines up with what I want out of the game... so here I am as a dissatisfied customer.

Well I'm glad for you. For people who primarily want it for SP it's probably going to shape up as a pretty good game. But now that proper MP support is "wait and see" with Civ 5 coming out a month later? That's where the MP folks are going to end up.