Askthepizzaguy
08-09-2007, 20:07
I had an idea regarding online multiplayer versions of this game (for 2 people).
Suppose instead of waiting for your opponent to complete his turn, you both take your turns at the same time, and your movement is shown on the other computer and vice versa in real time. In other words, spies could watch how your opponent moves as he moves. But the game would still be turn-based.
If you wish to attack the opposing human player, you must wait until he is finished with his current battle, if he is in battle. But then he must participate against you in the battle you started.
So if he's attacking rebel fortress A, in a few minutes he will be available to defend his stack against your attacking force. You fight battles head-to-head in real time. (Fast connections required)
There may be a strategy involving when to make your movement, do you wait until the opponent moves as you predict he might? Or do you move first and attempt to land in a good defensive position? When you are done with movement, hit the "end movement" button. (New feature) Of course, if the player takes too long to make his movement (say, he is idle for more than 2 minutes) he is warned to make a move in 30 seconds or his turn will end.
After all movement has been made, you are each given a set amount of time (3 minutes? 5 minutes?) to complete your building and recruitment. Then you hit the end turn button, and if your opponent doesn't make all his moves or recruitment in the given time peroid, his turn ends anyway. For the sake of fairness, each side must agree on a time limit.
Games will be fast-paced, and of course would require both parties to meet at a designated time of day, so you would probably want to set the schedule for predictable off-days and weekends. The objective would be to accomplish as much as possible in the given time frame of several hours, and then put the game on hold until you both are available again.
For this reason, it would seem that 2 player games would be best for this system.
Alternatively, there could be an "abandon campaign" feature. If you are part of a 3 player or more campaign, and you have to leave, you could simply abandon the campaign and your empire becomes controllable by the AI.
Additionally, all playable factions could be accessible to those who wish to join the game if the game is an "open game" (agreed upon at the start).
This way, if I wish to join a game, I can pick up where an AI left off in the middle of the campaign, and I have the thrill of not knowing what my empire looks like or if I have a reasonable shot at winning before I take my role as the leader of the empire. I might volunteer to take Russia, in the middle of an Egypt/Milan game, and there could be an option to alert the players that another player has joined the game.
There may still be some details and kinks to work out, but the ability to join games-in-progress, play in real time, and have time limits for turns would allow a better multiplayer experience.
Your thoughts, comments, additions, criticisms are appreciated!
Suppose instead of waiting for your opponent to complete his turn, you both take your turns at the same time, and your movement is shown on the other computer and vice versa in real time. In other words, spies could watch how your opponent moves as he moves. But the game would still be turn-based.
If you wish to attack the opposing human player, you must wait until he is finished with his current battle, if he is in battle. But then he must participate against you in the battle you started.
So if he's attacking rebel fortress A, in a few minutes he will be available to defend his stack against your attacking force. You fight battles head-to-head in real time. (Fast connections required)
There may be a strategy involving when to make your movement, do you wait until the opponent moves as you predict he might? Or do you move first and attempt to land in a good defensive position? When you are done with movement, hit the "end movement" button. (New feature) Of course, if the player takes too long to make his movement (say, he is idle for more than 2 minutes) he is warned to make a move in 30 seconds or his turn will end.
After all movement has been made, you are each given a set amount of time (3 minutes? 5 minutes?) to complete your building and recruitment. Then you hit the end turn button, and if your opponent doesn't make all his moves or recruitment in the given time peroid, his turn ends anyway. For the sake of fairness, each side must agree on a time limit.
Games will be fast-paced, and of course would require both parties to meet at a designated time of day, so you would probably want to set the schedule for predictable off-days and weekends. The objective would be to accomplish as much as possible in the given time frame of several hours, and then put the game on hold until you both are available again.
For this reason, it would seem that 2 player games would be best for this system.
Alternatively, there could be an "abandon campaign" feature. If you are part of a 3 player or more campaign, and you have to leave, you could simply abandon the campaign and your empire becomes controllable by the AI.
Additionally, all playable factions could be accessible to those who wish to join the game if the game is an "open game" (agreed upon at the start).
This way, if I wish to join a game, I can pick up where an AI left off in the middle of the campaign, and I have the thrill of not knowing what my empire looks like or if I have a reasonable shot at winning before I take my role as the leader of the empire. I might volunteer to take Russia, in the middle of an Egypt/Milan game, and there could be an option to alert the players that another player has joined the game.
There may still be some details and kinks to work out, but the ability to join games-in-progress, play in real time, and have time limits for turns would allow a better multiplayer experience.
Your thoughts, comments, additions, criticisms are appreciated!