General Category > AI War II - Multiplayer & Variants

Ideas for cleaner multiplayer

<< < (2/3) > >>


--- Quote from: Cinth on September 10, 2016, 12:16:24 pm ---Also killing a completely viable way to play the game shouldn't be a goal.  It was never considered balanced and a do at your own peril kind of deal.  I enjoy it and I know there are others who do too.
--- End quote ---

With the new idea of having mobile home-things, I'd like to revisit this.

I won't return to the stuff around cap and difficulty. (I still believe the best, clearer approach is to have a constant level of power for AI and Human teams no matter how many players are in them, but...)

I would like to see one home-thing (mobile or not) in multiplayer games. I would like to have players to all care about one objective (destroying the AI) and one "king" piece (their home-thing). I always found that particularly strange to have one player's home being destroyed but not lose. I'm not criticizing the "nobody lose before everybody lose" principle; I absolutely love it. I'm criticizing the half-solution that multiple homeworlds were. "This is your home thing; you allies also have one each. You don't loose if it's destroyed but if you and all your allies loose them all." That's much more confusing, IMO, than "This is your common home thing. You have one for the team. You loose (all) if it's destroyed."

But with that new mobile home-thing idea, that raises the question of who moves it. Ah.

All in all, I would like to see cooperation more supported by the game. In the philosophy, it's "win together, lose together"; then, please, embrace it in the game: make one "king piece" for the entire team.


--- Quote from: Mckloshiv on September 17, 2016, 03:24:56 pm ---If you wanted to, couldn't you simply have one normal player, and the others all be helpers? That would give you one "king piece" for the entire team.  Then the main player can gift control of the first worlds they capture to the other players, allowing them to play like normal players all over again *without the bonus ships though*

--- End quote ---

--- Quote from: Pumpkin on September 10, 2016, 05:17:51 am ---My simplest idea was "absolute sharing": players are all basically helpers for a single "player".
* This has the huge advantage of simply removing all problems of shared/not shared resources and the AI's power scaling with the number of players.
* However that completely removes the differences in specializations that the players may pursue. (And the upgrades were aiming at better distinguishing players.) Sad.
--- End quote ---

To approach this in a completely different direction...

Home command stations are mobile right? So they are like a modern champion but it has morphed into an administrative role?

What if a player wanted to jump in, rather then going through all this complicated stuff about power sharing, they instead get a ship with a similar hull but instead of administrative stuff is pumped up for military roles? And it recovers like a champion? [In short these are champions but with less xp grinding and more pew pew now].

The power sharing could be done if an extended game is purposed, but I think the auxillary players should at least get their own "personal" HW that can act as a combat flagship.

Sorry, i have NO idea how I missed that part 0.0 guess i was too tired when reading lol


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version