New Town Hall Idea

[H.A.H.]

I'd like to suggest a new use for the Town Hall sprite: it will give you detailed economic and political (read on) reports and allows you to control these elements.


Something I'm pondering over is to create a game mode I'm always playing with friends. Start with just a few players on a huge map. We agree on a few simple rules: players are allowed to extend to other starting locations. Players must try to build these city as independent as possible (own food supply, own barracks, etc.). This is similar to the "controlled regions" concept of the new Settlers 7 game, but better: here it is possible to destroy, build and extend these regions. In that game, however, players can only choose to send resources back to their capital, but not build or control the regions at all, i.e., they are independent.

Overal these games are quite long (4 hours), but great fun: there is building after fighting, instead of a direct win. The same city may be conquored several times by several players (burning down the city, rebuilding it with your own buildings!). Other concequences of these rules are: the real hunt for resources (as the capital runs out of iron, there will be a conquest for the last bucket of iron ore on the map, when we agree on not using the market). The need to demolish other settlements (else you can't profit from the region by building your own workshops and farms).

Other forum users made similar suggestions to this one, but in a different form. For instance, the idea of regions. This idea can also be extended with regard to piece time (not allowed to attack capital first 2 hours, for instance, but this allows for rushing to protect interesting expansion areas).

However, we experience some major problems. Namely, the access roads to and between settlements (let's call them settlements, and your starting city is the capital) are overused by serfs, somehow. Also, it is possible to change alliances mid-game in Joymania's KaM, unfortunately not in the Remake: this option is fun when playing with trusted players (the enemy of my enemy is my friend is often used to prevent one player from becoming too strong).


Now, let's get back on the Townhall track. Firstly, to implement these "rules" in actual game logic, we need to have real regions (I'm actually working on highlighting regions, and will continue with this development during this summer.) that are determined by building range and possibly by troops. Battles are always happening on "region clashes", where both players' regions meet. Secondly, we need some control of seperating economies, e.g., seperate a starving and bad economic settlement from other settlements. Thirdly, we need some political controls: to which settlement do serfs belong.

The Townhall sprite can be used precisely to add additional controls: it shows the region of the current settlement the Town Hall is built in. It shows how many citizens are actually in this settlement (and possibly remove the statistics panel from the sidebar, or somehow link it to the current Town Hall). Hell, we could even give the Market a realistic use: the transfer of goods between (allied) settlements.

What y'all think about this?

[Krom]

I think if you are serious we should ask Tom to split this into a separate topic

Overall I like the idea that can extend KaM nicely. There are some big changes design-wise and code-wise, but given a determined desire to make it - it might just work )

[H.A.H.]

Tom, could you split this into a seperate topic?

This summer break I'm dedicating myself to doing coding, so I suppose that a lot of work can be done in one summer.

On a side note: is it also possible to create a sub-forum for development/code related posts? I find this forum a great tool for communicating. The sub-forum can also be a great place for storing documentation or code explanations.

[krisdw]

This sounds like a very interesting game concept to play. It would offer KAM players an entirely new game-mode. Could be great fun, but I think lots and lots of work for Krom & Lewin

[Krom]

Given that HAH designs a gameplay and well documents it, we can adapt KaM to it (possibly as a separate branch).

There are 2 main problems I see:

1. Designing the gameplay around settlements
2. Bringing MMO touch to it

[Bence791]

I hate to be so negative...

The things you mentioned really don't fit KaM, those are for Settlers.

Overal these games are quite long (4 hours)

This is already a problem, no-one will actually play that long. 2 hour games are okay-ish, but still, they don't usually last that long since our games are fast, usually they end before 1 hour and 30 minutes (mostly because we rush at the enemy at around 1:20, that's the time when our at-pt's-end-trained-soldiers get hungry, and since we can't feed them, we attack instead). And also note, not everyone has 4 hours just to play 1 single game. Same with this:

(not allowed to attack capital first 2 hours, for instance, but this allows for rushing to protect interesting expansion areas)

2 hours of peace time? Where are we supposed to build then? We'd need 3-4x this big maps for that use. And you will become bored after 1 hour and 30 minutes that there is no fun like fighting or being afraid of an enemy attack or anything.

(as the capital runs out of iron, there will be a conquest for the last bucket of iron ore on the map, when we agree on not using the market)

No, if our city runs out of iron, we already have huge bases, that way we can abuse imba trades for iron (or in other cases, gold ore / gold chests / coal). If it would be like you suggested, the market would become useless, so that is 1 building minus.

Also, it is possible to change alliances mid-game in Joymania's KaM, unfortunately not in the Remake: this option is fun when playing with trusted players (the enemy of my enemy is my friend is often used to prevent one player from becoming too strong)

I laughed so hard at this one. I know that it was like that in the original game, but although I didn't play multiplayer in TPR nor TSK, I suppose there were separated bases. These days, most maps have "connected bases" for the same teams, for example, Dead of Winter has small passages far north and south between a team's bases. So it's like I decide it, I don't fight, then I change my alliance and kill my ex-allies? Just because they have no troops left and I want to destroy a city.


I kind of dislike the things mentioned above. Sorry.

[Ben]

Bence, if any of this does get implemented, it won't be for a very long time so the game's mechanics might be a little different by then(especially the marketplace), but for the most part I agree. These just don't seem appropriate for KaM. They are for a different game. Some people might have time for four-hour games but most won't (not to mention sitting in front of a computer for four hours with no breaks is very unhealthy).

[H.A.H.]

@Bence, I have the impression I was not clear on some points. However, I won't be discussing them here in detail, but please bear with me. I think it's good that you don't like my gameplay idea; everybody must have their own way of playing the game. Multiplayer is only fun if everybody has fun playing it. But generally, my idea more introduces the concept of "build-fight-build-fight" etc., and piece time will only hold for specific regions, not for the whole map.

I'd like to generalize. Let me work on detail later, but here is an overview:

The introduction of game modes (which this idea clearly is, as it extends the "base" gameplay) can be implemented as scripted multiplayer missions. I've read many posts on "modifiers," such as "no market!" or "faster building, more fighting." Additionally, the gamestyle I favor is a focus on building and economy, and fight only when necessary (pieceful).

First things first: basic game dynamics must not change. In fact, this solution must be compatible with every multiplayer map there is now, and all campaigns people already like now. With basic game dynamics, I mean: fighting system, building system, economy on the current scale.

I'm seeing the Scripting Release as an initial step in this direction. We should redesign the game to able for more modifications, but disallowing anyone to tamper with the basic game dynamics. Or to say it differently, whenever someone has an idea that Krom & Lewin regards as "does not fit the style of KaM", then it must not be possible to create a modification that allows it. Or to say it even differently, all possible extensions should fit KaM style.

I will return and elaborate on how to do this. I'm not sure yet either, at this time.

[Ben]

Krom & Lenin

...

Anyway, back on topic, I think that perhaps this will indeed make an interesting new gamemode, but I think that there are better ways to make the game more-- dynamic, shall we say?

[Jeronimo]

My opinions about your suggestions are the same as Bence.

I'd just reintroduce Town Hall as it was before: For recruiting cheap weak Army.
Army diversity is better if you want to expand KaM variables by now.

Is it possible to have back this building as it was in the Peaseant Rebellion?
Doesn't break balance because Town Halls need to be refilled of chests all the time, so it's a kind of slow recruiting.

Vagabonds FTW.

[Ben]

I'd just reintroduce Town Hall as it was before: For recruiting cheap weak Army.
Army diversity is better if you want to expand KaM variables by now.

Is it possible to have back this building as it was in the Peaseant Rebellion?
Doesn't break balance because Town Halls need to be refilled of chests all the time, so it's a kind of slow recruiting..

http://www.kamremake.com/faq/#townhall

My guess is that Krom and Lewin's opinion on this hasn't changed yet.

[Krom]

I was hoping HAH meant something a lot different than what he described in last post...

It is quite impossible to keep the KaM dynamics while adding new dimensions to the game, that will bloat the game. As said earlier - average 4 hour sessions are just not acceptable. In a tightly packed wardrobe (like KaM), in order to add something you need to remove something first. But I would start from the other end first, I think HAH should describe the game from the birds-view perspective first, how it it playable in general, what players do, how do they interact (given player logins 2 times by 2 hours in 3 days on average), how does it scales for 2 and for 200 players, etc.

[Siegfried]

I support you.
For the moment only mentally, but I really like this idea. Sounds a bit like the "global conquest" mode in "C&C:Kane's Wrath", right?

[Krom]

@Siegfried: I havent played C&C:KW, could you please outline basic ideas here, maybe HAH can use them too )

[Siegfried]

Global Conquest is separate modus in KW.

There are two levels to interact. One level is a big overview panel of the whole earth. There you can see where you have a base and where the opponents have their bases. There you can order troops in your base and send them all over the world. If you order a mobile construction vehicle, you can set up new bases.

The second level of the game mode is the usual C&C game style. Whenever your troops come near to opponent troops or opponent bases, a level is started where you play like you usually play C&C. You start with the troops that you had on the overview screen. So if you had a MCV, you can build a base. If you did not, you just have your troops.

After the level is finished, you go back to the earth overview. The damage done is kept, so if you've lost half of your troops in the second level, they are gone. If you destroyed the opponent base, it's gone. The survivors are kept and can be further moved in the overview level.

There are some possibilities to win: you either destroy all enemy troops and bases, or you have control over the 2/3 of all land or you've build enough super houses.

However, global conquest in KW is singleplayer only, because the overview level is round-based, the second level is realtime. So you can't be attacked in a different base while you're fighting on a second level.

HAH's idea sounded a bit like this, although it is clear that it needs some greater adjustments to work with KaM.