Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[thommerd]

And maybe an idiot proof tutorial to download maps:/ you know with big letters and pictures

[Ben]

Guys what do you think about minigames in lobby like scrabble or cards? Sometimes waiting in lobby is really boring so minigames could help kill time .

I had a similar idea the other day. Maybe playing snake or something. THe nice thing about this is that people would jump around lobbies a little less, making game organizing a whole lot easier.

[Bence791]

Well, game organising is already easy :p

Don't expect "randoms" to join your game when you don't play 70pt x2.

Also, Lewin, could this speedslider be removed? It is so annoying that everyone wants 1,5-2x (or higher) speed and they can't even get 20 soldiers in 70 minutes anyway. There is no chance to convince them. This way we can't even play a decent building game (preferably 4v4), maybe once 2-3 days.

[Krom]

@Bence: I'm not sure speed setup and players skill are related.

[WollongongWolf]

Have to agree with Bence. Those people playing 70pt x2 mainly don't focus on managing the laborers, in which case you can be fast. Biggest shame is people think they are pro because they can play at a higher speed, while seeing them compared to the people on ts, even I could consider myself "pro" whilst I think I'm "noob" (yes I know people might not like the use of noob, I only use it to refer to myself ).
So yes I think there is some relation between skill and speed set-up, also looking at the towns those people build, it seems they didn't read the patch notes.

And to the add-minigame-to-wait idea: not sure why you would add card games while firing up the standard microsoft patience or so is possible as well?

[Ben]

Personally, I would like to see skill increases of x1, x1.25, and x1.5. Anything higher than 1.5 and you'd have to be some extraordinary human to manage your economy properly.

Please consider this. There are so few "good" players in KaM it's sad. We'll never have good players if we are teaching people to be lazy and just watch the game being played, instead of actually playing it.

[Omigoshe]

Idea for the editor:

Premade templates. Like a standard desert landscape, or bushy, or a lot of water, lots of marches, lots of dust/coals, ...

[Menszu]

Hmm, if by template you mean nice randomization of tiles and obiects coresponding to certain biome, well I can agree with that. But absolutely NO for a stamp tool, leeding to seeing similar patterns on every new map. Btw new editor is already so user firendly with brushes that everyone can make a map. (even myself lol) And although I like to have big variety of maps, we should strive for quality not quantity.

And aboud gamespeed. I also vote for minimising it to 1,5. The higher speeds are so tempting to 'randoms' they mostly refuse to play x1. This is dividing the playerbase in very annoying way. Of course you can say we can adapt to the majority. But I gess once again I can say 'quality over quantity'.
I don't really care if we remove the speed up completly. My only fear is that we unleashed the beast, and if next relase wouldn't have it lot of players might stubornly stay with the curent one - spliting the playerbase in half : /

[Ben]

My only fear is that we unleashed the beast, and if next relase wouldn't have it lot of players might stubornly stay with the curent one - spliting the playerbase in half : /

No need to fear that, because when the releases changes, so do the dedicated servers. People will only be able to play games on their own servers if that happens.

Also, I don't think that we should have a randomization tool. It will just further encourage people to be lazy with their maps...

[Siegfried]

x3 is so very good for testing. Keep the current sliders as they are.

[Ben]

If we have a testing slider why not have x10? Seriously, x3 is really pointless. Too fast for actually playing; unless you just want a joke/troll game. x3 is also too slow for testing in my opinion.

Having 1.25 would actually be nice in my opinion. It's not much faster than 1.0, or much slower than 1.5. I'm also assuming that the framerate would look better at 1.25 (1.0 looks a little choppy imo).

[Lewin]

I don't see a problem with letting people use whatever speed they like. Of course the competitive/veteran players probably won't like it, but if casual players prefer playing at faster speeds what's wrong with that? Sure you can't manage your economy as perfectly as usual but if those players are still having fun then why does it matter? Not everyone wants to play in a highly competitive environment and there's nothing wrong with that.

Some people just like to mess around, build a village and have a battle in 30-45 minutes rather than 80+ minutes. If people weren't enjoying games at 2-3x speed then they'd stop playing them. In a poll on our Facebook page faster multiplayer speeds was voted to be the most popular feature of the new release, so I think it very much appeals to the casual majority(?) of our player base.

We will certainly not be removing the speed sliders or reducing the maximum. Why should we tell people how they must play the game? People can try it and play it how they like. I'm not opposed to changing it to 0.25 increments instead of 0.5 though, if people think that will be useful.

Regarding frame rates, the game runs at 10 FPS normally, so to make it nice and smooth you really need 2x or 3x (1.25x is only 12.5 FPS, not much difference).

We don't want to allow faster than x3 since it's likely that less powerful computers won't be able to run the game smoothly. I agree that a x10 mode would be nice for testing, although you can also run your map in singleplayer if you want to test it.

[dicsoupcan]

well the only problem i have with 2x speed or more is the lag some players can cause, for the rest i would not mind it if i decide to go for a casual game although my preference goes to 1x speed offcourse for more competitive playing. but using steps of 0.25 instead of 0.5 sounds nice imo.

[WhiteWolf]

Terrible idea to slow the game hahahaha,


Maybe it's an idea to show the gamespeed when you select a server (so before joining the actual lobby). That way 'random' players can see which game speed is handled and choose for themselfs to join the game or not, same thing for players that perfer x1 or x1.5.

[Shadaoe]

Hi, I have a suggestion.
Sado sent you a bug report for invisible unit when a location isn't assigned, when testing something I did, he had a similar problem but on an sp map, my suggestion is for the map editor :
I'd like if we were able to "activate" a location(player) without having to add one useless unit for that player. For the moment you have to put one unit and then you can chose for it to be an AI, otherwise the location is greyed out.
I'm not sure if I expressed it well :/

Also, more a bugreport, I once had a unit for a location and I couldn't activate it in the player list (where you chose human, default, AI) by putting AI, I had to put another unit, activate it, and delete that unit to make it work.

edit : There are even cases when you put units, and it doesn't automatically check " IA " in the map editor player list, and when you try to add units via script they're invisible, pretty hard to figure if you do'nt know the problem and quite annoying :/