Multiplayer Settings

[Wijitmaker]

What kind of options are you looking for to start your multiplayer games? What did you like from other games? How many players do you want? What kind of styles of winning? What game play modes?

[ZeZar]

What kind of options are you looking for to start your multiplayer games? What did you like from other games?  How many players do you want?  What kind of styles of winning?  What game play modes?

First of all, i love questons like that, i dont know 0.A.D project very much, but i WILL download it when you are done.

Nr 1. I want Regicide (like in AoK), Normal mode (like radom map or something), eh, maybe a "not attack for 5 minutes" style, like nobody can be able to attack anyone for 5 minutes! (like in RoN)!!!! MIWTAYG, its an idea i got, it stands for: MakeItWithTheArmyYouGet... Every player begins with like 2-400 units (I dunno the POP limit).. and they must make it with those, NO building,it would have been cool, then you will have to use some tactic, so you dont loose all your soldiers, but you still have to attack, if you will win, and get score! Its just an idea, dont laught!

"How many players do you want": I dont know, 8-12 its the normal, 8 actually. In LAN its cool to be many, so i would have picked 12 or something!

I gotta go, sorry if its a short and unreadable post, but im from NORWAY...!

Can you answer these question:

What is 0.A.D (maybe an address to a website for info)...

When does it release??

Is it a mod, if yes, for what game??

If NOT, is you Grafic Engine good, some pics??

Good Look! From ZeZar!

[Widukind]

In game browser.

Definitly. Aok options are pretty good too, it was probably the best RTS game ever released...

[CodeOptimist]

Wijit: I really liked AoK's multiplayer setup. Very simple with just enough "customizability". Normal/Deathmatch/Regicide is good.. I didn't use many of the AoK x-pack extra settings (Wonder Race, King of the Hill, etc), although I think alot of other people liked the King of the Hill feature.

As for objectives, it would be nice to have some sort of "economy" or "diplomatic" victory. Many games have "claimed" (including AoK) that you can win by economy, but it usually comes down to military. I wouldn't use the economy/diplomatic victory much ( I'm a military guy I guess) but I think other people would.

Pop Cap: In this area, I think I liked EE's method. If I remember right, you could select a "world" pop cap and it would be divided between the players. I.E. in an 8 player game, if you selected 800 for the world cap, each player's pop cap would be 100. Obviously, the hardware available when 0 A.D. will be (exponentially) much better than the hardware available today, so large pop caps in the thousands (or closer to "no limit" maybe) will be possible. With that said, to be fair, the game should allow for lower pop caps, etc, to accommodate lower hardware.

Whatever is appropriate at the time (hardware-wise and bandwidth-wise) is good for number of players. I really didn't like AoK's 8-player limit. I can't remember EE's player limit (I think it was 16) but it was good enough. Unless the maps are HUGE, more than 16 players is just not practical.

I may post later, sorry for the long post (love the emoticons here BTW)!

CO

[Wijitmaker]

"MakeItWithTheArmyYouGet" - Zezar thats a cool idea? It would be like a battlefield exercise? I think thats pretty cool, and origional too The 'no attack for 5 min' idea is good to. Some people really hate rushing.

Widukind what do you mean by in game browser? You mean like an internet browser?

CO - good point about the victory conditions. I'm a millitary guy too

World pop cap is a neat idea, especially because that would help with the computer resources. I hope we can have 1000's of units on the map, but we will just have to see.

BTW if you guys want thousands of units on the map, would you prefer them all being individual units or groups of say.. 2,3, or 4?

16 players, Yikes that would be allot! Like one of our programmers said in a programming meeting said "I don't think I have that many friends" lol

Oh and remember, long thoughful posts are welcomed, and in fact... ecouraged!

[Wijitmaker]

What is 0.A.D (maybe an address to a website for info)...

When does it release??

Is it a mod, if yes, for what game??

If NOT, is you Grafic Engine good, some pics??

Oh, forgot to answer your questions

We are shooting for a beta release in December of next year. From that point out, the release will depend on how many problems the testers see we need to fix, and how much time we want to spend 'balancing' the civs in the game.

It is not a mod, it is a standalone freeware game!

The programmers are working on the graphics engine, and we do not have any screenshots currently availible for the engine version they are working on now. But, the engine is called Prometheus and it should be very good.

You can visit the website (which we will be updating within the next 2 months) here:

http://wildfiregames.com/0ad

Or the link is at the top of the forum under the banner

[Klaas]

Yep, ingame browser would be really helpful. It's like with those shooter Wijit, you simply get a list of servers/people hosting games and select the one you want.

Something else I would like is something to set player experience (optional). That way beginners can play against beginners, etc.

[CodeOptimist]

BTW if you guys want thousands of units on the map, would you prefer them all being individual units or groups of say.. 2,3, or 4? 

16 players, Yikes that would be allot!  Like one of our programmers said in a programming meeting said "I don't think I have that many friends" lol

I'd prefer individual units, along with "control groups" (aka Ctrl-1 to set the selected group of units to the 1 key, etc). For some reason, I like individual unit games (AoK, EE, etc) more than group unit games (Shogun Total War, etc). It's a different feel.

One other thing I forgot to mention about the multiplayer. This is more of an internal code issue, but it really needs to take advantage of the DX8/DX9 NAT features. For example: In AoK, you couldn't play if both people were behind routers. In EE, you could, because it automatically "sensed" the NAT/router. Very useful!

I'm sure 16 players games would only happen on LANs But if it's possible internally, I think 16 player support is a good goal because it's a lot less restrictive than 8 player support.

CO

[CodeOptimist]

Ingame browser: That would require some type of central server. I don't think that's a good thing to require

I guess it could be done with a peer-to-peer solution, but it probably wouldn't always work.

[ZeZar]

The thing about 16 players (EE only has 8) is a good idea, but a bit to may i think. 12 is good. Just what i think. Have anyone tryed EE2, Empires: Dawn of the Modern world (You could learn something from there Wijit). Just DEMO, but still great. Like in WW2, Engeeners can place Mines, pretty cool i think! But about 0.A.D, is the Engine 3D?? Not required but still with good grapix you will draw more atention!

And isnt it VERY hard making a game?? I really wanna make games, and MODS, but i am really a N00b, onlu "experience" i got, is making maps in EE, AoK, Battlefield 1942 and a bit CS, is it C++ you need to learn?? What else to learn to make a small easy mod or game??

Sorry if: My English is BAD, im Norwegian-...

I am bothering you, is i am asking to much, tell me!

[DarkAngelBGE]

Well, I think some economy competition should be there like Wonder Race. I don't know, but at least I want that.

Also I got the idea of expanding to other genres a bit, like Capture the flag (with build up...the last flag would be guarded by a 300 men army ) or the fight system of Battlefield 1942 where you have to guard certain strategic points on the map and tickets will be decremented if one team holds all... If a certain point belongs to you, then something like a Teleport portal would be opened so you can send units immediatly to that point. To prevent from unbalanced battles I'd disable building in a certain radius around every point. So people can't build garrisons of 20+ buildings around them.

[Tonto_Icy_Tripod]

Seeing as I'm a multiplayer only player, I guess this is kinda my type of thread

I guess you could try asking any company that hosts games to host your game.(the zone, ESO (uh, maybe go for BNet first ) Seriously, it's worth a shot, no matter how bad the odds are

I don't think there's anything wrong with having options that require huge system specs. Just as long as you don't use them for marketing your product Hardware constantly improves, so why not I guess? Aom has a max of 12, which nobody uses. The normal is 6, though sometimes you see 8. Now, if you were at a LAN, or if you know people have good comps and such, it'd be tons of fun to play a 12 player game. I just think the option should be given, especially seeing as circumstances change I guess.

You were talking about units and grouping and such, right? My take on that is that there's a limit where it's just impossible to keep track of your units in any effective manner. In aoc the max was 200, and that was relatively easy to do, seeing as you had atleast 120 of those working as vils, meaning you did very little with them. If you instead had 200 military units to control, that'd be a mess (assuming you have approximately the same type of control as in aoc).

Then again, if you have a huge poplimit, it'd be almost impossible to reach it, giving a feel of a game without a poplimit. If that is your goal, then you might as well hide the pop-counter.

From a multiplayer perspective, you will never see a game reach pop limits in the thousands. It just won't happen as long as the units are individual (and not grouped as you said). This would then indicate that it's of more interest to a single-player. Correct me if I'm wrong here though <_<

I could go on and on about different victory conditions, but I'll just leave it at this:

Options rock! Get as many as you can, then perhaps choose the 10 or so most popular (you could have a vote here on the forums for example)

If it's possible, why not allow triggers in RMS scripting to allow the scripter to make his or her own victory condition?

T_I_T, aka toast

[The_Avenger]

The usual stuff, like map size, at least eight players, deathmatch, of course. I'd appreciate a "speed lever" - from, say, -100 to 100, with 0 the default, where you can adjust the speed of the game (by this production/building time) to -100% (half) or +100% (twice) the speed. Heck, why not a special 5x or 10x speed fast mode, much like AOM's lightning? It's not very popular in AOM, though, but you could simply throw in the speed bar and not bother balancing the game at different speeds, like ES.

Regicide from AOK would be a nice idea, or utilising the potential border system to have a territory grab mode, where the more territory you have, hmm, faster resource gather, a pop count bonus, or something along those lines. I also like Zezar's idea of starting out with your army, to recreate some historical battles or have the extreme DM fun.

Hmm... from my experience, Tripod, most econ modes in games fell apart because they were boring to everyone, even most econ/boom lovers. Unless WFG wants to cater to the type of gamers that align their sheep in a row and sort their cows by colours, perhaps a more dynamic sort. Out of ideas there, though.

[Tonto_Icy_Tripod]

I'm not sure what you mean avenger. I didn't mention any specific victory modes. All I said was that in aoc, the standard vill count was 120 or more. If that's what you mean, then I agree with you, it was a bit too much, but I think I also stated that in my post... I'll have to re-read it though to make sure.

[ZeZar]

Seriusly. I hate DM. I dunno, but i thinnk its because i like the building fase, and stuff. Dont know. But The BF1942 idea capturing different points on the map, would might been an option to "MakeItWithTheArmyYouGet" (a bad name, Wijit may come up with something) or just fighting, or maight capture the flag. So that not everybody just defend, something might happen with my idea, just defend! Well, its up to Wijit.

[CodeOptimist]

I agree on the player limit: 8 is too few and 16 may be too many. 12 is probably just right.

[Marcus Petrius]

The selection thing should be something like in cossacks, I guess, especially if formations are going to be as important as I would like them to be.

Of course, the pop cap should be very high too. I want to see huge armies of hundreds of units on both sides clashing in epic battles, not minor skirmishes of 12 swordsmen and 4 archers against 6 cavalry units and a catapult.

Some real battles would be great.

[ZeZar]

Not if the ZOOM is bad, like in WC3, couldnt had 1000 units or something there!

[Tonto_Icy_Tripod]

Minor note in here:

wouldn't it rock if in teamgames you actually didn't start next to your allies, but rather diagonally or just randomized? In a 2v2 you'd be set up diagonally, and more than that it'd be random.

[ZeZar]

Minor note in here:

wouldn't it rock if in teamgames you actually didn't start next to your allies, but rather diagonally or just randomized? In a 2v2 you'd be set up diagonally, and more than that it'd be random.

NO. I dont think so. Whats the point of team, if there is no teamwork??

[Tonto_Icy_Tripod]

That's the point...if you start in positions like that you get a lot more from doubling (since then you'll be attacking from two directions instead of just having twice the amount of units in one place), winning land becomes more important as you can then connect with your allies, resulting in better trade (I assume there's trade here of course ).

Of course, you could always end up with two 1v1s, but that's almost the standard today, so I don't see how you would lose anything?

[ZeZar]

oh, i see. Not bad. Want borders you or not??

But i still would prefer a good old nice 3v3 game, were me and my allies start near!

[The_Avenger]

Tonto, that was supposed to be to Dark.

wouldn't it rock if in teamgames you actually didn't start next to your allies, but rather diagonally or just randomized? In a 2v2 you'd be set up diagonally, and more than that it'd be random.

I've seen this in some custom RM scripts, and it is a nice change from the usual and allows for more active games. However, I"m not sure if this should be for every 0AD team game.

[Wijitmaker]

About the in game browser.. not sure if we will be able to do that... but we could possibly do something that connects to some 'game server' computer - IF we had a dedicated server computer. But from my understanding those are quite expensive to 'rent' and maintain. It is something to think about though.

CO: I agree, I also think that if your going to have so units, why would you want to loose your control for strategic millitary movements. Basically if a group of '3 units' in RON are acting as '1 unit' then when you are viewing 3 units, its basically just eyecandy to make it look like there are more. You really aren't adding anything to the game besides more polygons.

The programmers are talking about NAT so I think they are going to do that.

ZeZar: Yeah in other games engineers can place mines, like RA2 Deezire. The problems with mines in 0 A.D. was that there wasn't any explosive mines till late 19th century? Way out of our time period

Believe it or not, but some people love Death Matches... they just like to fight and they hate doing ecconomy. So we don't want to loose those players by not giving them a Deathmatch option.

DA: Economic Compitition... thats an interesting idea? What about maybe a city building race? Right now 0 A.D. doesn't have any 'wonders'. Maybe a resource race?

Capture the flag idea would be cool Good idea!

T_I_T - Yeah it never hurts to ask, the thing is we need to get a playable demo for any of those places to take us seriously. That probably won't be made for a while.

The normal is 6, though sometimes you see 8.

Right, this is what our design team was estimating.

Of course we will do control groups for millitary movements... if we didn't it would just be one big mob mess. What I was making reference to was in the game Rise of Nations, when you create say... and infantry from the millitary center it isn't just one infantry - they come out 3 at a time and they are all stuck together as one unit the entirety of the game (unless one or two dies).

There are two opposing theories about pop limits. On one extreme you have games like Total War and Cossacks where you have to use groups and use them effectively. But say you have 6 groups of 20 banded together, you just decreased your controled unit count from 120 to 6. The other extreme is games like Warcraft or Generals... the game is usually played with lots of stratagy with using small groups or bands of units or just units individually. AoK and AoM are typically somewhere between these two extremes.

Options rock! Get as many as you can, then perhaps choose the 10 or so most popular (you could have a vote here on the forums for example)

If it's possible, why not allow triggers in RMS scripting to allow the scripter to make his or her own victory condition?

Yeah, so thats why we are trying to find the victory conditions that everyone likes the most Interesting idea about the triggers in RMS... we should look into that. I think the designers have talked about that in the past.

wouldn't it rock if in teamgames you actually didn't start next to your allies, but rather diagonally or just randomized? In a 2v2 you'd be set up diagonally, and more than that it'd be random.

I think there is the ablity to do that in AoK? Isn't it an option called "teams together"?

Avenger: You right game speed in an important one. What do you think about doing something slightly different tahn Regicide... I mean that is a mideval term isn't it? A little out of our game's time period? Maybe something like 'guard the princess' Or something like that...

Marcus: Unforutunately we have had to 'wish list' the formations ideas of the game for now because of technical difficulties in programming them. We will be doing grouping for sure. If we have time later on, we will re-add them.

[The_Avenger]

For the Roman Republic, since generals were nearly always propraetors or proconsuls, you'd think they're important men. In the Principate, well, some emperors did go on campaigns themselves; and you'd see leaders in the front of battle among the Celts, Germans, Persians. Regicide may be a medieval term, but it does fit in well anyway. And it's fun.