|
| Thread: Idea for new multiplayer features |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
Icon
Adventuring Hero
Tower Loving Criminal
|
posted November 08, 2001 12:04 PM |
|
|
Idea for new multiplayer features
From the posts Ive read, especially on the ToH board, there is quite a big problem of cheaters and ppl who are falsely acussing others of cheating.
Ive came up with two solutions to this problem.
Spectator:
This feature allows the host of the game to invite a given nummber of spectators. People who can observe everything that happens in the game. But have no impact on the game whatsoever.
This might be helpfull with important tournaments, when the outcome of a game interests lots of ppl. On the other hand that would allow spectator to send IM to a player who he/she favors in order to help him/her win  .
This might also be used for a learning purposes. Imagine friendly game between two top 10 players. Newcomers can learn a lot just by watching.
Log:
This feature means that every action you make in the game is described at the moment youre doing it. The data is stored in autosave.
Example:
20:15:03 Player1 hired blabla hero.
20:15:25 Player1 Hero blabla died in a battle with blabla
Player1 'accidently' hit RESET button (not included in the log)
20:17:46 Player1 has joined
____________
|
|
Jenova
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 09, 2001 03:02 PM |
|
|
The problem is that games typically last for hours. What kind of spectator would have the patience to sit through such a long game, and not actually be able to play or do anything other than watch? Ever played a player who just took AGES during their turns? It can sometimes really frustrate you, having to wait, especially if there's more than 2 players. Now just imagine the poor person spectating. They basically have it even worse off than someone who's opponent is so slow they get coffee between each turn.
The bottom line is, there are other ways to stop cheating, and even a spectator may not pick up a cheater. And games last too long for spectating to be practical.
|
|
Icon
Adventuring Hero
Tower Loving Criminal
|
|
posted November 09, 2001 06:42 PM |
|
|
Jenova:
Not all games last that long. But youre right, most ppl would get bored in less than an hour, not mentioning watching the whole game.
The only option would be possibility for a spectator to leave and come as he/she wishes.
Im pretty sure that there will be some expansions to H4. Itll be very nice if 3DO included some new featuers not only new monstes/spells/artifacts.
The point is that AI will never (at least not in the forseeable future) be able to win against any human being (even 13 year old). That means that more and more ppl is going to play online. Wouldnt that be nice to have more friendly multiplayer interface with lots of options.
____________
|
|
Jenova
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 10, 2001 03:06 AM |
|
|
|
The AI can win if the map is designed to give them an advantage, or if it's at a higher difficulty level.
|
|
Icon
Adventuring Hero
Tower Loving Criminal
|
|
posted November 12, 2001 01:32 PM |
|
|
AI never wins because its superior to human mind. It wins cause at Impossible lvl it has much more resorces/money than a player (who hase nothing) and some maps are hard/impossible to win without good deal of resources.
____________
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
posted November 26, 2001 01:21 AM |
|
|
Yes, more multiplayer options are really needed. I almost never play single player. Me, alnog with several friends have set up our own LAN, only for private mulitplayer gaming(where I live the internet is so expensive and slow, that we can't use it for MP). And playing with AI, doesn't even comes close to the playing with humans.
But I would like also to see things that are in there only to cut your time whle you're waiting for your turn. Something like an Arcomage card game would be great.
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
posted November 27, 2001 04:43 PM |
|
|
How silly of me that I didn't said this one right from the first post 
One option that I wanted to see in the game was the Multiplaer campaign.
Imagin this. Two player sides. Battleing in map by map system Of course that this system must be flexibile. This meaning that the both player should have homelands, and land between them. So if player 1 win the first map, than the second map that is played is closer to the homeland of the player 2. There must be than lots of maps. And some would remain unplayed in certain campaign games. But this will add to the replayability of the game, as this can make you play the camapigns again, and again. And all the new games can have differenth path, and plot.
This was the most basic example that I was able to present. But think of the opportuinities that can grow from such concept. Multiplayer allied campaings, with split campaigns, broken alliances in middle of the game, where in the next scenario you face your former ally. This will lead the campaigns to more open structure, and many possibilities for endings. But again this means replayability. I know that something like this will be hard to implment in HOMM4. The developers have many new problems to handle with the new game right now. But I really hope for something like this for the next sequel. We'll need somthing new than.
So how does this sound to you?
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
StormWarning
Promising
Famous Hero
Archmage of Thunder
|
|
posted November 27, 2001 09:47 PM |
|
|
Definitely a noteworthy idea, Svetac. Multiplayer campaigns would be lots of fun (although they'd take forever). Maybe first to win 3 scenarios more than the other person (advancing the battleground to the enemy homeland and winning there) wins?
____________
The calm before the storm is about to end.
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted November 27, 2001 10:17 PM |
|
|
If you want multiplayer campaigns, then you could have scenarios with a time limit where the objective is to survive for say two months, and then you get to carry over say your 4 best heroes to next scenario.
Another thing to consider is the ability to carry over towns and the builds you have made in them to the next scenario. This would make sense if you place the town in the far corner of the map and make it difficult to capture before time expires.
The town would then be in one corner of the next map you play, and eventually you'll face a map where you have to square off with the opposition.
It would even be possible to have a death-match. The first map you play alone... The second you play against three human opponents starting in one corner each.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Undead_Knight
Known Hero
Hero of Chaos
|
posted November 27, 2001 11:49 PM |
|
|
|
What I want in heroes 4 is simultaneous turns.I played Age of Wonders multiplayer games and this option works fine, so I want it in heroes.Dont know why NWC didnt make it, even in old Master of Orion 2 it was made.
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
|
posted November 28, 2001 12:44 AM |
|
|
I kinda don't like simultaneous turns.
Imagine this situation:
You are on your way to enter your capitol and buy the reinforcements that are un-recruited. But there's a enemy army that's about to attack the capitol. New turn begins. What will happen? Who's faster on click will enter the town first?
That's why this option wasn't and shoouldn't be implmented. HOMM is not nor it shouldn't be in any term real time.
Leave that to other games
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
Undead_Knight
Known Hero
Hero of Chaos
|
|
posted November 28, 2001 01:37 AM |
|
|
2 Svetac
In Age of Wonders turns can be classic or simultaneous, so you can chose I want the same in heroes 4. I think that more opportunities can make game only better, btw we all like democracy more than forms of government that dont allow to chose anything like monarchy, fundamentalism or dictature And situation that you described can be fixed by no attack in first 20-30 sec of turn by agreement, in classic turns we have opportunity 1st player to attack on 1st day capitol of 2nd player with army of new week (first day rush) and it can e fixed by agreement to not do it So problems are the same and ways to fix it the same too.In addition I cant spend now 6-8 hours for multiplayer heroes games and I quit ToH that is very sad . Simultaneous turns can make game 1,5 times shorter without any decreasing of fun, more games for same time= more fun for same time and its good
|
|
Svetac
Promising
Known Hero
Saintified Paladin
|
|
posted November 28, 2001 03:01 AM |
|
|
Well I must admit that I must withdraw here
Please forgive my ignorance. And yes, you're right. More options can't hurt anybody. And I seem to forget that not everyone has much time to play MP games. I say yes, this thing is worth implementing it.
____________
--- Paladin of the Macedon ---
|
|
Shae_Trielle
Honorable
Famous Hero
of Heroes
|
|
posted November 28, 2001 03:08 AM |
|
|
If time is really a problem
Then I don't see why you play Heroes at all. It's a turn based strategy game, the majority of people who play the game appreciate the chess-style gameplay. If you don't have the time to play a 6-8 hour ToH game then maybe you should find something quicker to play.
I don't like clickfests. I used to until I learned that my mouse was slow (lol shae, good excuse!) and I like the opportunity to think things through without any pressure. Simultaeneous turns will just ruin the game. I think that if the ideal Heroes is to go that way then I may as well start playing RTS games right now.
Anyone want a slow mouse?
*smile*
|
|
Undead_Knight
Known Hero
Hero of Chaos
|
|
posted November 28, 2001 07:26 AM |
|
|
:)
Greetings to another person who doesnt like more opportunities but those that good for you can be not so good for others and I want only more than 1 way to play heroes 4, is it too much?
|
|
Djive
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Zapper of Toads
|
|
posted October 26, 2002 01:17 PM |
|
|
Cross posting this from other topics...
... which I'll clean way.
*sigh* wishes for that tool with which to merge post/threads to another thread...
Post by Usul:
Quote:
Greetings. I would like to state a couple of minor problems I have experienced when playing H4-multiplayer.
- First of all, I can not understand why it is impossible to play a campaign with multiplayer, when, in fact, a campaign is little more than a series of maps linked together by the advancement of a particular hero! It should be a foreseeable problem; one you as a campaign-maker should have no problem facing.
It is possible that multiplayer campaigns can be downloaded from somewhere. If so, please inform me of the site...
- Second, it should be possible to trade with players who are not your ally. That would give the game a slight touch of realism (not that a fantazy game needs it).
- Third, one should be able to break and create alliences when in play. That would give the whole multiplayer thing an edge. Now there is no possibility of any sort of backstabbing. Too bad.
Well, that's all for now.
He who hesitates.............
Post by afm:
Quote:
Hi!
Multiplayer in Heroes 4 is a fine thing, but similar to Heroes 3, it consists of
- a much too short period: you can move your troops, trade resources and rearrange your troops
and
- a much too long period: you wait and wait until your opponent has finished his/her turn
Heroes 4 is not a realtime game, but why not make a few changes to make the waiting time a little less boring? While your opponent makes his turn, why not
- purchase equipment
- give order to build structures or to hire a hero in your next turn
- rearrange your armies
- visit the marketplace
I think these changes will not affect the gameplay too much, but they will speed up the game.
____________
"A brilliant light can either illuminate or blind. How will you know which until you open your eyes?"
|
|
Largo_LeGrande
Promising
Known Hero
from the Carribean
|
|
posted October 26, 2002 02:22 PM |
|
|
I think that you could prepare the movement cources while waiting for your turn. It would make the game faster: enter-h-enter-h-enter...
____________
 -Largo has spoken-
|
|
shaowei
Adventuring Hero
|
|
posted October 28, 2002 12:25 PM |
|
|
quote
While your opponent makes his turn, why not
- rearrange your armies
end quote
Rearranging armies during the opponent's turn would be against chess-style play. Imagine that you are going to attack the hero of your opponent. He/she has finished the turn, and you have a right to believe that you know the tactical positions of his troops (as shown upon right-clicking the hero). Then you enter the combat, and the game has not updated the fact that the positions were changed during the inactive turn. You are surprised and worse off than you thought (maybe you would have changed your positions as well?).
The same with castle sieges (if "rearranging armies" also means buying more troops).
Otherwise, all propositions for making opponent turns more easy to bear are very welcome.
Although, once I indulge myself into a multiplayer heroes' game though, I like the fact that you get short breaks to go make some tea etc.
____________
|
|
Largo_LeGrande
Promising
Known Hero
from the Carribean
|
|
posted November 02, 2002 08:57 PM |
|
|
What I meant was so that you could arrange the position of your armies, meaning that you switch one of the armies on the top of the army list by just dragging it while the opponent is playing. You should also be able to prepare the movement cources of your armies in the same time. The game would be faster if you move your armies just by clicking enter then h then enter h enter h enter...
Also I'm not sure if this is in the game but you should be able to watch what your allies do (you would see the battles, even the cursor) by clicking a certain button. You could of course be able to switch to the normal.
I also agree with the spectator and log ideas.
____________
-Largo has spoken-
|
|
hobgoblin
Known Hero
captain hobgoblin
|
|
posted November 04, 2002 06:37 PM |
|
|
Hm... well, another idea for simultaneous mode would be that the two (or more) players give orders at the same time. Then the turn would be played when both players would have clicked on a submit button. Ofcourse it would break the chess style, because you would for example move your hero without knowing what the ennemy hero (which is very near from yours) does. So it would give a random side. But there can be other features that limit the random side, like for example a "poursuit" button. When you ask your hero to purchase another given hero, your hero would follow the movement of the other, and if he's fast enough, he would attack his victim.
Hmmm... I'm not sure of what I say, but this idea could be thought and explored deeper, it would, in my opinion, be much better than the clickfest option.
For the idea of preparing some stuffs during the opponent turn, I think these options could only act in the next turn. In this case, there would be no surprises for the opponent during his turn, it would just give you a possibility to think more concretely of your next turn instead of waiting, and, if your expectations match the acts of your opponent, to play faster.
For the spectator idea, I've not thought a lot of it, but maybe it would make the game slower, I mean if you play with a slow connection.
|
|
|
|
