Idea for Multiplayer Game

[Ben]

So! I thought I'd make a thread for this so we can talk about it.

Lewin said he is adding "economy" objectives later on for the Remake. However, until then, would anyone like to play one right now?


Here is my idea: everyone sets themselves to the same team, so there is no combat. Then, we set a goal. Say, first person to train 10 knights wins. So, when a player gets ten knights, he claims victory, and he can prove it since everyone can share his line of sight.

Sounds like a cool idea. Anyone want to try it? We could do other things, too, like first one to build every type of weapon/armor making building, etc.

[CuDi]

If I had the time right now I would. I'd definitely be willing this weekend or something though.

[Ben]

I play on Fridays and/or Saturdays in the morning (9AM-2PM Eastern Time)
I know you live in the USA also so the time should be pretty close. How's this sound?

[mucormucedo]

we gonna have objectives in multiplayer games?

[Lewin]

we gonna have objectives in multiplayer games?

Eventually yes. For now the only objective available is kill your enemies.

[Remake 2012]

we gonna have objectives in multiplayer games?

Eventually yes. For now the only objective available is kill your enemies.

No no .. Lewin see this ideas :

Ideas for multiplayer:
1. [Capture the Flag] Set in 3 locations on the map flags. Players with the soldiers "took over" to control them. (the same pattern as in Battlefield Play4Free). Points are counted by the scoring Teams (The more flags the team has acquired the faster points are counted), which earns the winning team was the first 1000 points. (options points: 100,200,500,1000,2000). Graphic need to do two posts that served as a graphic to show the advantages of teams.

2.[Economy Battle] Collect the player or team, for example, 500 pieces of bread. The winning team which accumulates more rapidly. To increase the attractiveness of adding table games to the amount already accumulated loaves of bread by the players / teams.

3. [Killing Spree] Team or player get the raw materials (eg, 1 piece wood, stone, gold) for killing the enemy. This will ensure that the game will be more dynamic.

4. [Big Battle] Players will be able to recruit the army at the time when the weakest player accumulates in his stronghold 100 ready troops. (Of course better players at the same time they can have more troops ready) This option will "protect" players who have been attacked while he had no army.

5. [High Time] Every 3 minutes players get 5 pieces, raw materials (selected randomly)

6. [Defender] Players are divided into 2 teams. One of the teams will defend, the second attack (after 50 minutes of play) for 20 minutes. When you win or lose the conversion takes place. (need to created specific maps for this type of game)

7. [sword or crossbow] Players are divided into 2 teams. One of the teams playing only archer and Crossbowman units, the second team Axeman, swordfish

8.[Kingdom] Recruited for each soldier, the player gets a piece, random material.

[Lewin]

Economic objects (such as production 500 bread) will be added, but I don't like any of the other ideas really. Some of them will be possible when we add more objectives and commands to the script but most of your ideas don't fit KaM or won't work in my opinion.
I'd like to point out that Battlefield Play4Free is a first person shooter, and KaM is a real-time strategy. I don't really think capture the flag could work in the same way.
Waiting for each player to have 100 soldiers will just cause the game to drag on for ages because some players are really slow or wouldn't train the soldiers just to annoy everyone, so I don't think it could work with random people. If a group of friends want to do this they can agree on it by talking, the engine doesn't need to enforce it. (I've done this when playtesting with people)
I don't really like the idea of giving players random raw materials, I don't see how it would add to the game.
Defender/attacker maps are possible now. The Citadel is an example of this, although it's a poorly balanced map.

[ExecutioneRRRR]

I really like the sound of these objective games!

[Krom]

Looks like I missed this topic - these are nice ideas really )
Maybe we can choose the best one, think it thoroughly through and implement it?

[ExecutioneRRRR]

I vote a capture the flag.

[Da Revolution]

The best one is the economic one.

[Nayot]

I vote for economy Battle

[Lewin]

I think just one economic goal wouldn't be so fun, e.g. who can make 100 bread fastest. I mean, imagine if you played that game, someone got to 100 bread, everyone quits. I don't think that sounds all that much fun. I think economic goals would be great for improving your economic strategies and discussing different build options while you play. I think something to encourage this would be good, but I'm not sure what that might be...

[Krom]

This is very good point raised. Economy goals are not competitive really, you don't see any feedback on how you doing until BANG and someone else won.. It does not looks like a battle you can control in MP.

Economy goals in SP are doable because you are competing with defeat, Either you focus on production and get overrun by AI, or you focus on defences and have slower production. But in MP when everyone is in the same position (hidden under FOW) - you just can't compete properly.

[The Dark Lord]

There are ways to make it more competitive. You could set a short peace time. Then you'll have to decide whether you rush for your goal or also set up defences. Or, and that's what I prefer, everyone can see the other players' towns so you know how far your 'enemy's' are.