MP Campaigns...Isn\'t Anyone EXCITED??

[Toranaga_Sama]

The news of STW:MI is what brought me back to the Dojo and to start playing STW again (or perhaps more regularly). I'd been playing a lot of RRT2 after recently discovering it.

MP Campaigns was and is my MAJOR want for STW. Along with some others I posted several rants in the old Dojo about it (or the lack of it I should say).

But, now that its on its way, there doesn't seem to be much excitement here in the new Dojo. What gives?

STW is a "strategy" game!!! Despite the greatness of the battle engine, MP Battles are just mindless fighting lacking in thought. [I worded this a little strongly just to make the point.] The point is this is supposed to be a "strategy" game and you guys are supposed to favor strategy games vs mindless first person shooters.

Granted, the battle engines brings true Tactics, but if you break that down its still mindless real-time first person shooting.

Doesn't anyone agree that the true, depth and dimension of STW will only be exhibited in a good implentation of MP Campaigning?

Shhhesh, there hasn't been ANY news regarding MP Campaiging save its mention in the MI announcement and noone is screaming for any.

How have they chosen to implement MP Campaigning????????????????? Is it going to work?

[horatio]

we don't know how they plan to implement it, and that is probably one source of the problem. I too very much wanted to play multiplayer strategic wars in shogun, and was fairly upset that it was left off. But till I hear how it is going to be implemented, my real confidence in more advanced play lies with having object oriented battles...

basically, i will be excited WHEN I see it.

[solypsist]

Has anyone seen or been to the Command & Conquer Tiberium Dawn multiplay site? They have a huge map and basically you pick a side and fight whoever and at the end of the week the winning side is announced (good guys or bad guys) depending on who has the most wins in whatever area. I wonder if that's how it will be with the STW. You pick a daimyo to follow, and then battle whoever else is in your selected province that is not on your side for control of that province by week's end (for example).
But it is strange that few people have bothered to speculate on this new MP feature.

[Toranaga_Sama]

Hey, are the archives for the old Dojo not online? I did a "name" search attempting to find one of my old post re MP Campaigning and all I came up with were my recent posts in the new dojo.

I'm not a C&Cer, so I'm not familiar with the map, but from the way you describe it I don't think it would stir my boat.

Sounds like simply a new twist on MP Battles. I sincerely hope that's not what they'll call MP Campaigning.

[Fatboy]

We are all VERY interested in the multiplayer campaign game but there has been almost no hard information to discuss. I guess like most STW players I will believe it when I see it ...

[Magyar Khan]

well stated guys
sadly we just have to wait and see

[Shiro]

The master minds behind the Shogun Public Relations program think it's a great idea just to let us try and guess what the hell they're doing when, if we knew, we could generate excitement and attention to it.

[wigwam86]

when the board game Axis & Allies came out for computer i bought it right away and started to play multiplayer. the game takes a loooonnggg time to complete and has the same type of setup (board game). you did have the option to save your game (if every1 else agreed to save). i am sure that will be an option due to the longevity of the game. i would also assume that there would not be the option to take control of a battle (that would take away from the game) since it would disrupt the turns of others (you are in battle still durring your turn so no1 else can play while you are in a battle). maybe there would be an option to turn take control off and on. i also hope there is a timer for how long a persons turn is since some1 could force every1 else into quitting if he decides to just stop playing or there could be a boot button if some1 does't come back within a certain amount of time. but overall i am very excited. this will be the first time you can trust alliances and not worry about the AI backstabbing you. lets x our fingers and hope it works out.

[Anssi Hakkinen]

Originally posted by Shiro-san:
Quote The master minds behind the Shogun Public Relations program think it's a great idea just to let us try and guess what the hell they're doing when, if we knew, we could generate excitement and attention to it.[/QUOTE]On the other hand, if they told us too much, the game'd be spoiled.

Think about all the speculation going on around here. It's mostly (70-80%) about things that have been mentioned, but not explained in detail. If they told everything about everything, we'd still have to have something to talk about, yes? So, whatever we speculated about after that would be about the *other* cool things the devs could introduce... Except that, as they'd have already told us everything, those *other* things wouldn't be in the expansion, and people would be dissappointed and complain that "the pack wasn't what it could have been". (I think this is what happened with the original game.) So it's better to leave the expansion in the dark, let us speculate and then have our speculations appear in the released version... Everyone's happy!

Note: Please don't take that too seriously. Months will pass before the expansion is released: the Shôgun and others have plenty of time to ascertain what will be in the expansion and *then* tell us. Patience is the virtue of daimyô.

------------------
"Kullervo, Kalervo's offspring, / With the very bluest stockings, / On the ground the haft set firmly, / On the heath the hilt pressed tightly, / Turned the point against his bosom, / And upon the point he threw him, / Thus he found the death he sought for, / Cast himself into destruction."
-The Kalevala, Poem XXXVI, verses 335-342

[Shiro]

LOL Anssi Hakkinen-san.

[Toranaga_Sama]

>>...but overall i am very excited. this will be the first time you can trust alliances and not worry about the AI backstabbing you. lets x our fingers and hope it works out.

holding my breath for now...

one thing i'm afraid of is that it might in a way become stopwatch-rushing fest as RTS games even if it's turn based...

------------------
the great lord jd

[Rodhern]

Quote Doesn't anyone agree that the true, depth and dimension of STW will only be exhibited in a good implentation of MP Campaigning?
Toranaga_Sama[/QUOTE] Yes, exactly so. Ironically, the fact that there will now be an official MP campaign mode might actually lower the priority for adding MP campaign support .
Guess we have to hope for a downright brilliant implementation first time around .

[Magyar Khan]

i am still excited and the add on allows u to have just 2 sides playing so u can do a 1 vs 1 mp campaign which will ensure fast games.

if they mess up the mp campaign i will programm myself. sadly i cant programm it to work on the internet.

[Satake]

Lol i'm just curious about how far back they will push this release date. last time it lasted like , what , 18 months?

[Ronin]

It can be VERY COOL if the development team can find a way to make it practical!

------------------
"yama yama tani tani"- Oda Nobunaga.
on every montain and in every valley!

[Hirosito]

toronaga if you are saying that humans are more treacherous than the AI you are right however in a campaign i'm playing i have all the land east of mori i took me a while but whilst i was fighting the 3 clans to the west had alliances. it's like they are waiting for me to boringly destroy them. humans would ally and ATTACK not wait around or at least on of them would take supremacy and take me 1on1.
waht i'm saying is that with real humans the it will be more fun whatever and i don't think a weaker opponent would mindlessly attack when in an alliance

------------------
Hirosito Mori

A warrior's wisdom is shown in the treating of his defeated opponent

[Rodhern]

Quote if they mess up the mp campaign I will programm myself. sadly i cant programm it to work on the internet.
Magyar Khan[/QUOTE]That is the point, we can only program it properly ourselves if they facilitate real custom 'scenarios' with campaign effects on EA Play or otherwise.

[Tachikaze]

I think a multiplayer campaign would add greater dimension to the game, but I am not bored by the tactical game. I am still trying new ideas, and the games sometimes have unexpected twists.

I expect any multiplayer campaign that may be in the works to be quite buggy. The single player has quite a few, and adding more humans and variations would increase the complexity a great deal.

I would be content if they had to compromise and and make it two-player only.

------------------
Weapons are not auspicious.
He who beautifies them,
Enjoys killing others.

[Magyar Khan]

yep, i agree. better have a 1 vs 1 campaign working with minimal bugs than a 8 player option with too many bugs too handle.

still imo a campaign can be easily done...

[Toranaga_Sama]

Quote Originally posted by Hirosito:
toronaga if you are saying that humans are more treacherous than the AI you are right however in a campaign i'm playing i have all the land east of mori i took me a while but whilst i was fighting the 3 clans to the west had alliances. it's like they are waiting for me to boringly destroy them. humans would ally and ATTACK not wait around or at least on of them would take supremacy and take me 1on1.
waht i'm saying is that with real humans the it will be more fun whatever and i don't think a weaker opponent would mindlessly attack when in an alliance

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I do mean that humans will act like...humans!

I don't know why I never thought about precisely the situation you describe. It outlines accurately an area the Campaign AI needs strong improvement.

Unless they plan on "continual" improvement, we'll probably have to wait until TotalWar 2: Whatever.

[Magyar Khan]

why no news about the campaign? i feel sick about this

[bonzosan]

ive been poking around trying to find out i am totally curious as to how this will work.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Hopefully they will shed some light on this subject when the Question Times 3 are answered.There were many questions on the multiplayer campaign asked.
Tito

[Puzz3D]

wigwam86,

I would speculate that the online campaign will be implemented the way you suggest with a turn timer and automatic battle resolution. The strategic gameplay would be just as it is now with the possibility of ai controlled clans if you didn't have a full 8 humans playing. If one computer is the host, only that one would have to save the position. That's assuming a save option is even included. At a later session, the joining computers could pick up the current position from the host. If a player were to drop, you would have to provide a way for that player to get back into the game or have the ai take over that clan. I don't see a 1v1 campaign with realtime battles being as interesting as an 8 player stategy game with automatic battle resolution.

Toranaga_Sama,

I hardly find the MP battles as "mindless fighting lacking in thought". However, the monk rush is pretty close to that. I think STW is primarily a tactical game, and the strategic campaign was secondary but could be developed into a highly complex game.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

[edRonin]

All the "speculation" so far has been that the online campaign would be between the clans. I hope (not speculate) that they will allow for Mongol vs any clan in the online campaign. That way you can play OC with 2 players without the AI playing any other clans or Ronin. Plus you can play the cool Mongol units or the Samurai.

------------------
All your base are belong to us

[Puzz3D]

edRonin,

The new strategy screenshots at the official site show Mongols/Koreans vs Hojo. Also, the tactical screenshots show Hojo's colors. It would be easier to implement an online campaign as 1v1 like that wouldn't it.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

[edRonin]

The strategy screenshots might be for the SP campaign. Logistically getting 2 players to show up of an online campaign is easier than getting 8 to show.

It would be really cool if they set up a scheduler where a online campaign game would only be active at predetermined times agreed to by all the players when the campaign is set up. It could have protocols in place to allow the other players to advance the turn even if a player is missing and not able to hit end turn. But it would also not allow the game to proceed outside the scheduled time unless all players are present. That would allow the game to move ahead when someone is missing while guarding against people cheating by purposely advancing the game outside of agreed campaign times. That actually might be tougher to implement than the OC itself. I think we are going to have to make our own rules and abide by them.

------------------
All your base are belong to us

[Toranaga_Sama]

Quote Originally posted by Puzz3D:
wigwam86,

I would speculate that the online campaign will be implemented the way you suggest with a turn timer and automatic battle resolution. The strategic gameplay would be just as it is now with the possibility of ai controlled clans if you didn't have a full 8 humans playing. If one computer is the host, only that one would have to save the position. That's assuming a save option is even included. At a later session, the joining computers could pick up the current position from the host. If a player were to drop, you would have to provide a way for that player to get back into the game or have the ai take over that clan. I don't see a 1v1 campaign with realtime battles being as interesting as an 8 player stategy game with automatic battle resolution.

Toranaga_Sama,

I hardly find the MP battles as "mindless fighting lacking in thought". However, the monk rush is pretty close to that. I think STW is primarily a tactical game, and the strategic campaign was secondary but could be developed into a highly complex game.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

[/QUOTE]


Puzz3D,

I shall repeat:

"...if you break that down its still indless real-time first person shooting."

Borrowing a term, THERE IS NO CONTEXT!

For what purpose do you fight? What is gained? What is lost?

Can you name one battle, fought at any time, any where on Earth, that was for the FUN of it. Wars are, virtually, ALWAYS fought for either political, religious, or personal gain. Sometimes, war was fought upon some principal.

Has there ever been a situation where a few hundred or tens of thousands of men got together in some field just to see which of their leaders was the better field general?

The "monk rush" is "close to that", you say? Wait til you see the "Sensai Rush"!!

I don't believe that the Campaign was secondary.

I believe the designers intended to create just what they described a long time ago; but the task proved to be a gargantuan effort. Look at the battle engine, its a "whole" game unto itself and could have been sucessfully released as such.

The Campaign, "when", completely implemented, even w/o the battle engine, similarly "will" be a game unto itself. Obviously, an effort equal to the creation of any game is required.

I surmise CA ran out of time and maybe money. DT/EA probably put the screws on to get the game out.

I'd wager that the Campaign is a fleshed-out "prototype"; or with the Campaign they probably ran into many of the problems that have been discussed in this forum and the decision was made to focus on the battle engine and complete the campaign "later". Later never came! Unitl NOW, I'm hoping. [Just My Thoughts.]

A highly complex game? Hell, Shogun has the potential to become the Chess of the future.

[Kage]

Well yes, I was excited about multiplayer campaigns, until I realized that all anyone was talking about were the new units for the mongol version. Not a word on how the multiplayer campaigns would work or what features it would include.
At this point if I had to speculate I would expect the multiplayer campaign will probably be nothing more than a series of tactical battles strung together over several maps (ie. mini campaigns)with the outcome of one battle determining the set up for the next (start on even map, next battle the loser gets to set up on a more defensive map and so forth etc. blah blah blah).
Hey, thats just my guess.
I still hold out a small but dying hope that we will get a multiplayer version of the single player campaign game (but I aint holdin my breath).

We will all just have to wait until someone figures out what is really going on and tells the marketing department so they can tell us.

No longer excited, just waiting now.

Have a nice day.