This is why most other companies do not have this level of public participation.  They don't want to be heckled by someone pointing out an idea earlier in the development of the game and taking that as commandments written in stone.  What is written in a development journal are not promises of what will be and assuming they are is silly.  It is unfortunate you are upset, but perhaps in the future you shouldn't pre-order because software oft times changes throughout its development cycle.

Most other companies also don't have to put stuff like "random map generation for MP" off until later due to time constraints, either. So this has been unusual in a number of ways.

I dunno. I'm going to miss my stacks from Civ 4. But I like how archers and artillery can fire finally! but defending a city with one unit... we'll see...

I take it that you have never worked for a small firm before?  Well, welcome to indie development.  I won't pretend to be an expert on how Stardock does things or whether anything has actually been put off, as there is very little info on multiplayer that I have seen.  However, given the option of delaying the game till Feb. to complete a secondary objective or releasing it in Aug. with the primary focus completed I'd have to go with how they are doing things.    

Besides, if multiplayer is really a big demand it will be polished, as they have already stated.

There was talk about a turn bank, then timer options. No idea if any of that made it in.

Lack of your preferred features does not make the game incomplete or unfinished. It has what we planned for it to have and does what we planned for it to do at launch. The way it is now is the way it's been planned for at least a couple of months now.

You can argue that priorities were set and timelines shifted around re: pre/post-release compared to what was discussed early on or midway through the beta, but given the scope and scale of changes to every one of the game's major subsystems in that same span of time, it's one of the smaller changes between initial and final plans.

From Brad, June 3 journal:

In regards to this, then why not offer a "Site/Home License" or "LAN License" that a person can purchase?  I'm just spitballing ideas here, but if a person such as myself has 3 computers in his house for three different people (myself, wife and son) who live here, then I find it pretty shitty I have to spend say $150-$180 on a single game just so my family can play a "LAN" game with each other within our own home.  Throw me a bone here, let me buy a site/home license that is good for up to 3 copies within one home(IP) for $99.  Or have a professional type LAN license good up to 10 or 15 or 20 licenses for cheaper than what it would cost to buy that many copies individually As long as those keys are all coming from the same IP then you know they aren't just handing free games out to friends and family.  Person gets one key and you have a your license server set that that key has up to "x" licenses and last known IP was "x.x.x.x". You see two or three IP's hitting the server at same time then cut them off.

This isn't rocket science here, if I can figure that out in the 10 seconds I took to think about it, why can't you guys or any other game company?  Although I understand you don't want some jackwagon buying one copy of the game and constantly throwing LAN parties for 20 people to play your game for free, maybe something like this is a compromise we can all get behind.  You get some much earned cash, and people get to be legit and get a deal at the same time. 

Now I could be wrong, but IIRC the custom servers was never something that was going to be in at release. I was under the impression that it was planned from the start to be something added post-release. I was also under the same impression regarding other MP features, like other modes and such.

Also (and again, I could be wrong about this too) I thought that approved mods could be used in MP, as long as everyone has them. You just can't put the mods right on the server, until custom servers are enabled.

After giving up way too much of my life reading this thread. I want to applaud Brad for his conmmon sense and Kryo for careful, cogent engagement.

At this point the only contribution that seems worth making is the following from a group of wise (now) old men... excerpt from The Argument Clinic:

A:   Come in.
M:   Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?
A:   I told you once.
M:   No you haven't.
A:   Yes I have.
M:   When?
A:    Just now.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:  You didn't
A:   I did!
M:  You didn't!
A:   I'm telling you I did!
M:  You did not!!
A:   Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?
M:  Oh, just the five minutes.
A:   Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.
M:  You most certainly did not.
A:   Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.
M:  No you did not.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:   No you didn't.
A:   Yes I did.
M:  You didn't.
A:   Did.
M:  Oh look, this isn't an argument.
A:   Yes it is.
M:   No it isn't. It's just contradiction.
A:   No it isn't.
M:  It is!
A:   It is not.
M:  Look, you just contradicted me.
A:   I did not.
M:  Oh you did!!
A:   No, no, no.
M:  You did just then.
A:   Nonsense!
M:  Oh, this is futile!
A:   No it isn't.
M:  I came here for a good argument.
A:   No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.
M:  An argument isn't just contradiction.
A:   It can be.
M:  No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
A:   No it isn't.
M:  Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.
A:   Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.
M:  Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'
A:   Yes it is!
M:   No it isn't!

A:   Yes it is!
M:  Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.
(short pause)
A:  No it isn't.
M:  It is.
A:  Not at all.

M:  Now look.
A: (Rings bell)  Good Morning.
M:  What?
A:   That's it. Good morning.
M:   I was just getting interested.
A:   Sorry, the five minutes is up.
M:  That was never five minutes!
A:   I'm afraid it was.
M:  It wasn't.
Pause
A:   I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue anymore.
... and you know the rest

I've enjoyed the Beta greatly and I'm looking forward to a fantastic release!

Disingenuous statements like these don't help the discussion. Brad's already said it, but there's nothing stopping you from hosting a LAN party someplace with internet access and having at it. Playing via an external server doesn't make it not a LAN party; the whole point of it is that you're in the same room enjoying the game together, not where the packets are routed.

I know personally when I used to LAN we'd still play Starcraft via Bnet for the benefit of the one guy who couldn't make it; that didn't make it not a LAN party (and that doesn't even touch the hell of trying to make sure everyone has everything you want to play pre-patched to the same level if you were to play offline--that's bad enough even WITH internet).

When you're talking about 1) playing multiplayer, 2) in a LAN party, 3) without any internet connection, you're talking about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the player base. It's nonzero but with a limited budget and limited manpower, we've got to draw the line somewhere about what is going to make the cut for release and what isn't, and polishing the single player experience and the primary multiplayer system ranks a lot higher up.

That is more or less about what's been said. We always tweak and balance and adjust from day one to long after (see GC2 for example). And custom servers haven't been ruled out, they're just not going to be available immediately. If people weren't jumping to misinterpret and get all obtuse about the matter, that would probably have been a bit more apparent.

(i apologize in advance if i'm repeating others arguments, this thread is long and while I've read it all its easy to forget sections.)

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood how this works but many people are complaining about LAN support being false because the game must connect to the server. What you don't seem to be getting is that while you have the resources like images, sounds stored locally the game data determining ai behavious as well as stats for items, people, and anything else stored in the XML is not stored locally its all retrieved from the server. You cannot have a personal server on the LAN because there is no data for the server to work with, it needs the updated data from the internet server.

While this may seem counter-intuitive to LAN style play, you are assuming that LAN means you can play locally with your friends with no connection to the internet. The problem here is not how stardock has setup the game but rather with your assumptions. The only difference between Local Area Network play and internet play is whether the data transfered between players computers is routed through a local network or the internet. In this case the data transfered between player computers is routed on the local network and therefore is LAN anything else is optional to the definition of LAN and you are making faulty assumptions. Assuming that because other games have provided the ability to play on a local network with no internet connection, that it is the standard that defines LAN play is wrong. 

In conclusion the only requirement for LAN play is that data transfered between players computers is routed on the Local Area Network, anything else is optional.

P.S excellent post frogboy, i feel for you and your frustration.

kyro in my reply, I was using the original meaning of LAN ie computers connected together to transfer data and or files WITHIN a restricted geographic area(typically a single building or several buildings in close proximity up to 500metres) ( the implication is that there is no need for access to computers beyond the restricted geographic area for true LAN operation) which a typical home network OR single premises work network would fit

and with the definition of WAN being computers connected together to transfer data IN A WIDE area(often thought as across suburb, town, region, state, nation, planet) with typically slower transfer speeds than in a LAN, which is what I see the internet to be.

just for your information, I have been working with networks of all transport types (ie serial crossover, parallel crossover, coax ethernet(both base 2 AND base 5), twisted pair ethernet(base 10,100 & 1000) AND token-ring (4 & 16)) since 1993, and back then the definitions were very sharp due the high cost of the network cables and hardware and the low speed of modems.

harpo

As interested in the game as I am (MoM!), the community is already showing itself to be a few decent folks surrounded by a plethora of asshats.

The only thing really continuing to draw me to the forum and the game is Brad's honesty, as in this post from a few days ago: https://forums.elementalgame.com/390228/get;2706140

Over the course of about a day and a half, this thread has fallen far into self-parody of why game/gaming forums are so intolerable.  He's right, many of you aren't worth his or the team's time.

The big publishers aren't single-handedly destroying gaming.  Heavy-DRM is not destroying gaming.  Even terrible games, of which there are many, aren't destroying gaming.  The "gaming metagame"* is destroying gaming. 

Stop spending so much time talking about games, worrying about games not matching your exacting individual expectations, trash-talking something you couldn't do in a lifetime [or to be fair if you have the raw capacity, you certainly haven't yet shown the initiative to do], and actually PLAY A GAME.  Wait until this one comes out, see what day 0 changes, plan your assault on what you want changed carefully (figure out what can and should be modded versus what simply needs to be fixed versus everything else - prioritized it in that order) and move forward on those plans persistently but kindly.

These are not magic Santa Claus people on the other end here, they're just guys doing their job, and frankly if I or any of us came up with an end result as cool as the products they've made before, I think we'd be pretty proud of it.  Imagine if you had a forum of trolls like yourselves** bitching and bickering about everything you did, said or produced as you go through your normal day?  If anybody thinks they suddenly bought the right to be a complete jerk because they've given somebody money, they ought to be given a quick refund and a boot out the door.  You're simply not handing over enough individually to make it worth tolerating a steady stream of BS under the banner of "But I'm a Paying Customer."  The customer is not always right, please move on.

* including the idea that everybody actually "deserves" a voice in a context like this.  No, you don't.  I don't.  Especially in a private context like this (versus in the proverbial "town hall") being able to have a say should be considered a privilege not a right.

** obviously I'm not addressing 100% of the population of the Impulse forum.

--

I hardly ever post anywhere, and I'm not sure why I've broken from lurking to posting, but good grief guys...

(And the post above me, by harpo, truly deserves a "dramatic reading" interpretive recording.)