Graviteam

Will be quite interesting know the opinion of you guys  ???

64 players. optimized net code

WOOOO maps are to small for that.  THat would be super awesome...maybe.  Need more space and even running up to date everything having just 32 tanks close in on screen plus the world is a hell of a lot of triangles.  Models would probably need to be reduced in triangle count. 

Yeap. That's why I support first the idea on one vs one with strategic, then when the net code is improved add a limit max of player by default.

Will be awesome and this will jump this game in a pro tank simulator

It is significant that for the most suitable option (2) for the tanksim MP voted the least people :)
As I said earlier, Multiplayer is not needed. Another proof  ;D

I voted 'I don't care about multiplayer' but that doesn't mean 'I love the AI', that is a non-sequitor.

No, that is just a limitation of understanding the term multiplayer.

Plus a 11 sample poll is not significant of much.

I dont like The AI because is all programed. I love the human player mistake, like in real. I use to play against AI only to learn. After that I need players confrontation to test my skill.

I prefer AI because they will not use gamey unrealistic tactics and find exploits to abuse.  :P

When a real player have good skill in a simulator doesn't mean he is doing cheat. The simulator scenery for players is pretty interesting because you are part of the tactic to face the other side is doing the same. Is awesome!

When you become pro egainst AI, most is because you already learn the programed reaction and the weak points. So after that you are going in another level not called real simulation. Probably you gone get sick of your brain because you do the same everytime without mistakes and you want to do again and again.

I think it was easier to make mutliplayer in APOS/GTOS or Mius Front. The simulators is more difficult to implemented it. For this there is no direct control over infantry and artillery, ATGM teams in Soviet-Afghan War, we can play only one side - Soviet Army. It is such an example.

+1. Anyway, de gustibus non est disputandum. Some prefer MP, some SP; just how it is. To me, SP is the whole point of PC games - good or not so good, you have an opponent who's ready, whenever you want one; and he's not going to cheat, whine, camp or otherwise be a twat.

44.4% - Wargame style of MP
44.4% - no MP at all
and only 11% for tanksim MP
LOL

And that's from a grand total of 19 samples.  Statistically insignificant.  

But if you want to play with stats, that's 55.4% for MP and only 44.4% for SP.  LOL back at you.

To each his own.  To me that is a unnecessarily stilted view of PC games.  Some of the most fun you can have on a PC is in multiplayer games.  And who says it has to be one way or the other.  There is no universal law that says you can't have sp and mp in the same game. 

limited resources plus having a vision of what audience you want to cater to.

mp version of this game just won't do very well, end of story. so they will necessarily have to water down the experience to broaden the playerbase, or they can do a tactical version, but deal with limtied budget, and thus, longer dev time.

Can't wait to see a multiplayer mode in this simulator!

 Some one else to choose in this poll?

I imagine multiplayer battles by stages. Only when the winner side get the flag then is activated the next map block by downloading a new file mission with the next and near map block.

This is the only way to get wide and long battles in MP and care the performance limitation. Anyway will be nice increase the max area for map to get better battles in MP. We strongly need better mission editor.