Multiplayer Quests + diplomacy ideas

from Elemental Forums

This post is mainly directed towards Brad / other developers.

I've been reading some of this thread here: http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=48528&page=64

 

You were saying that the core reason that the quests and quest items were taken out was because beta testers got furious over being defeated by a human opponent that had managed to collect a powerful item.

I would imagine this being a huge issue for balanced, 1 vs 1 play. However for a game comprising of more than 1 players this is where diplomacy comes into effect. The "power" level of each civilization is displayed at the center bottom of the screen. If players (or the AI for that matter) see a single powerful civilization, they should attempt to make (at the very least) temporary alliances in order to fight that one civilization.

And to ensure 1 vs 1 games are fair for those who wish it: make quests an option (like they are for single player).

One other possible issue is that there is the freak chance that the beta test group does not accurately represent the game's market.

3,410 views 6 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

Yes, if AI and/or human players team up to fight those who have a sudden jump in their power level, this could be a good compensator for one side being lucky.  I think the ideas such as suggested by the OP make a huge amount of sense.  Good stuff! :thumbsup:

What do other people think?

Best regards,
Steven. 

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

I think... that's why its called a strategy game  :grin:

Yes it would be galling to be beaten 1vs1 just because your opponent got lucky. And vice versa if you're the one about to smash that piffling rival kingdom into tiny pieces with your brand new dragon it would ultimately amount to an empty victory, even while laughing your sadistic little head off.

But I thoroughly applaud this sort of thing in a full on multiple player game. It stands to reason that if you're getting bullied by the big guy you should try and get some others on your side. However if they're simply using you as a buffer to grow a power base of their own... oh well! Such is life in love, war and magic ;)

 

So in summary: Yes I would say that this needs to be looked at for 1vs1 play. In a perfect world I would love to be able to toggle the quests in such a way that the mighty relics of yore are not present, so at best the rewards for undertaking such an adventure are worthwhile, but not the crux of a game turning event.

This would also benefit those guys and gals who don't really enjoy these sort of 'random events' in larger games too. But as I said this is a perfect world scenario really, since rebalancing everything like that would presumably take a lot of time.

Ultimately though if the really big rewards are as rare as I've been led to believe, while it may be irritating when it happens to you, I'd just chalk it up to experience and carry on. It wouldn't be nice to see Quests removed all together, after all!

Curtains - Customize Windows with additional styles
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Chromatism, reply 2
I think... that's why its called a strategy game 
Ultimately though if the really big rewards are as rare as I've been led to believe, while it may be irritating when it happens to you, I'd just chalk it up to experience and carry on. It wouldn't be nice to see Quests removed all together, after all!

Exactly my thoughts as well.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

well there is a flow in general if 1 quest can change  entirely the game

 

i dont want 1 player getting a demon slayer sword 1shotting everything nor in a mp game but neither in a single player game

 

whats the fun ?

 

ofc we have to see better how quests work in the release but i dont see how removing completely a funny feature from a game is better

 

and i still remember that civ 4 SUCKED TOTALLY

there was no balance at all, it just sucked in multi

 

but since we love to play our 4x online we just did, like we would with elemental full even if not balanced/suited for online gaming

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

see i  believe that when everyone has the same chance to find the demon slaying sword that is balance..

however I do understand the difference between my interpretation and what most people mean when they say balance.. tis why I support options/custom servers  in mp so that a group of folks can all play by certain rules so they get the experience they want..

I really do want to see a strong version of MP with tactical battles for this game.. But I understand that will take time,effort and patience on Stardocks and our parts..

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

An example, Civ has wonders that are costly and risky to build that give a pretty strong advantage if you get them. They're not game breaking but their noticable. Maybe in competitive play, quests/quest items need to be removed or replaced with less advantagous items, in co-op it shouldn't matter because you're not using them against other human players. Make the AI strong and give humans a chance to risk something to get these items.