Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[Lewin]

You don't get it. If someone doesn't understand ANY of the languages here, but understands one of them to the point of being able to play the game (and 99% of cases, it will be English) but not to the point of being able to talk at chat, his choice is obvious... see what I mean? Of course it will not solve the problem (the ultimate solution would be to teach these people English ), but it will distinct English players from non-English ones.

Hahah I was once in the Chinese server with 4 Chinese guys (their ping was low so I guess they were from China). They all showed the English flag but 3 of them couldn't speak any English, and one could say a few words like "hello" I think they must have been chatting to each other in another program because they didn't say much on the chat except for hello and that they couldn't speak English.
So I agree with the point that just because someone is using English for the interface doesn't mean they can speak it at all. You can learn/guess/be taught which buttons to press, or Google the words on buttons to find out what the button does.
I've also seen a group of Greek players with English flags, although some of them could speak English ok, and others could not speak it at all.

I was just adding animals to Paradise Island and it occured to me that we don't have any animals for snowy areas. If I'm correct wolves can only walk on grass and dirt. But what about tundra wolves? I'm sure someone can paint the current wolf white and we'd have a new animal in a simple way (that is, it sounds easy to me, I'm not really sure how easy it really is).

It wouldn't be too hard, (increasing brightness/contrast) and I agree it would be nice to see some wolfs on the snowy areas.

[Luki]

Proposal 1:
In Editor KAM:
I would like to be able to lock people in school. (eg, peasants, recruits, etc.), which can not be recruited during the game. Of course.
I have some plans for maps **

Proposal 2:
In Editor KAM/Lobby:
When creating maps for the players (multiplayer map). When selecting players, and "put" them on the map. Now there are 8 players = 8 sites. In Editor Given the opportunity to set additional players ( ex.12 - 14 ?) [= locations in lobby]. In the lobby, players were able to choose from such as 12th/14th location that was available to play by 8th (Of course, it would require the creation of such maps to be able to introduce)

What does this give us?

A lot of settings for players on one map. This will ensure that the map will be more attractive.

and

When the maps are as large as 256x256 no problem set 12-14 on a map where the location possible to play



proposal by : Janosiczek & PAKER

I missed this post ;O

I agre with bot, especially with second option. It will give more tactic/configuration/fun.

[ChrisEggII]

Remake 2012, I think your 1st proposition isn't needful. Normally when someone don't need e.g. Baker, he won't train him. 2-3 months ago I wanted make RPG map, but I didn't ask Krom or Lewin for make RPG mode in Remake.
2nd proposition is good, but not in every map. Many maps, like "volcano valley" don't have other good places to player. Where will you put him? In center? I don't think so, anyway I think authors should add this possibility in game.

proposal by : Janosiczek & PAKER

Hahaha! Give license to your propositions!

[Remake 2012]

Remake 2012, I think your 1st proposition isn't needful. Normally when someone don't need e.g. Baker, he won't train him. 2-3 months ago I wanted make RPG map, but I didn't ask Krom or Lewin for make RPG mode in Remake.
2nd proposition is good, but not in every map. Many maps, like "volcano valley" don't have other good places to player. Where will you put him? In center? I don't think so, anyway I think authors should add this possibility in game.

The first proposal is directed only to the new map. It will not apply to the old maps. Able to block some of the characters in the school should not take a long time for Lewin.

Second proposition: It is also forward-looking option, will have to created maps that will be had so many places on the map where you will be able to place the site for 10-14 players - I mean the map size ex. of 256x256. For such large maps, no problem placing such sites 10-12 where it may be a player.

This option is reserved only for maps of 192x192, 256x256 and larger. Because only one will be more room for the inclusion of additional sites players.

[Lewin]

proposal by : Janosiczek & PAKER

Hahaha! Give license to your propositions!

More like "Blatant self advertising by: Janosiczek & PAKER". There's a lot worse than that if you look around here a bit...

...should not take a long time for Lewin.

and Krom. He might not write here as much as I do (because he's writing on the Russian forum too) but he founded the project and wrote at least half of the code.

Second proposition: It is also forward-looking option, will have to created maps that will be had so many places on the map where you will be able to place the site for 10-14 players - I mean the map size ex. of 256x256. For such large maps, no problem placing such sites 10-12 where it may be a player.

Allowing more locations than players isn't a bad idea, although I doubt even on a 256x256 map you can comfortably fit more than about 10 locations anyway. In the beta of the next version we are trialing an increase of the maximum map size to 256x256 to see whether the game can be played smoothly with 8 players on a map twice the area of the previous limit 192x192. If it doesn't play smoothly it won't make it into the release. However due to recent optimizations I'm pretty confident it will work.

I also think we can look at increasing the player limit to 10 maybe 12 in the future (after the next release), although I'm not sure it will run smoothly on a 256x256 map with 10-12 players because a 256x256 map is already nearing the performance limit, and each player adds a LOT more load to the game. The problem is even if most people's CPUs are fast enough, if just one person in the game can't run it smoothly it will make it lag for everyone, and we don't want that to happen.

[Remake 2012]

Allowing more locations than players isn't a bad idea, although I doubt even on a 256x256 map you can comfortably fit more than about 10 locations anyway. In the beta of the next version we are trialing an increase of the maximum map size to 256x256 to see whether the game can be played smoothly with 8 players on a map twice the area of the previous limit 192x192. If it doesn't play smoothly it won't make it into the release. However due to recent optimizations I'm pretty confident it will work.

I also think we can look at increasing the player limit to 10 maybe 12 in the future (after the next release), although I'm not sure it will run smoothly on a 256x256 map with 10-12 players because a 256x256 map is already nearing the performance limit, and each player adds a LOT more load to the game. The problem is even if most people's CPUs are fast enough, if just one person in the game can't run it smoothly it will make it lag for everyone, and we don't want that to happen.

As to the first proposal, I would like to make a map on which the player from the beginning of the game, he will have strongholds in it for example. 150 recruits ... therefore it is important that the school was blocked recruitment of the next recruits. Gamers will be even more care about their soldiers. Who is worse in the tactics to quickly run out of recruits.
imo - great !
The idea with more locations on the map than the number of players, I think is very good. I hope that Levin did not forget about this idea and introduce it soon.

[Krom]

I like the idea about limiting recruits count What about other ways of achieving this? (e.g. limit schools capacity to train only 100 recruits, or like Starcraft - you need that much food to be able to train more units)

[Remake 2012]

I like the idea about limiting recruits count What about other ways of achieving this? (e.g. limit schools capacity to train only 100 recruits, or like Starcraft - you need that much food to be able to train more units)

IMO Good.

[Leeuwgie]

I don't know if someone brought it up before but I see you're discussing limited recruits. What about limited builders? In the original the manual states 8 builders is enough. I used to train 12 or sometimes 15 on large maps in the original. Playing online now 20 builders is standard to start with. If you really want to build fast you can train 30 and I've even seen players train 40+ builders. If the limit will be set for 20 or so we see less tower spam and you name it. And ofcourse likely the builder rush will be eleminated also. Almost anyone agrees a builder rush is lame but people rather sacrifice their builders then their soldiers, which is understandable.

[Private.NL]

I don't know if someone brought it up before but I see you're discussing limited recruits. What about limited builders? In the original the manual states 8 builders is enough. I used to train 12 or sometimes 15 on large maps in the original. Playing online now 20 builders is standard to start with. If you really want to build fast you can train 30 and I've even seen players train 40+ builders. If the limit will be set for 20 or so we see less tower spam and you name it. And ofcourse likely the builder rush will be eleminated also. Almost anyone agrees a builder rush is lame but people rather sacrifice their builders then their soldiers, which is understandable.

You can build a lot of towers in 60 minutes with 20 builders

[Luki]

I don't know if someone brought it up before but I see you're discussing limited recruits. What about limited builders? In the original the manual states 8 builders is enough. I used to train 12 or sometimes 15 on large maps in the original. Playing online now 20 builders is standard to start with. If you really want to build fast you can train 30 and I've even seen players train 40+ builders. If the limit will be set for 20 or so we see less tower spam and you name it. And ofcourse likely the builder rush will be eleminated also. Almost anyone agrees a builder rush is lame but people rather sacrifice their builders then their soldiers, which is understandable.

I think, it wont solve towers problems. With 20 builders on many maps you wont be able to build leather+ iron before PT ends.

[The Dark Lord]

I'm against any form of limiting buildings and/or units. This is not Age of Empires, nor Starcraft, nor Settlers.
@Luki I always have 20-25 builders.

[Lewin]

I'm against any form of limiting buildings and/or units. This is not Age of Empires, nor Starcraft, nor Settlers.

Agree 110%.

[Remake 2012]

I'm against any form of limiting buildings and/or units. This is not Age of Empires, nor Starcraft, nor Settlers.
@Luki I always have 20-25 builders.

Dear TDL...
I do not intend to introduce a limit to all the maps! Only for some. To spice up the game. I think that if they enter a 1-2 map which is the limit of individuals (recruits) (previous course in the early strongholds of the 200 recruits) - and blocking the recruitment of new ones. meant to make players more engaged in tactics.

[The Dark Lord]

I know that was not your intention, don't worry. Sure, if it's going to be some sort of scripting command I can live with it and maybe I'll even use it myself, who knows... But it shouldn't be an option for the game lobby.