Not that obvious. If you are playing with friends, things like pause, and turn length aren't an issue. There are really two different crowds being addressed, and their needs are different. I've played with friends where we took an 30 minute break, just left the game on pause. Who cares. No big deal. The coop, know each other group doesn't need a bunch of handholding or "protection".

why would  you not play with time limit with friends? i dont get it

anyway time limit is a thing, PAUSE is another

ofc the game like every other games should have time limit AND the possibility of an agreement pause if some friend has to pee, answer phone etc etc

That happens when I'm playing coop with a friend... when, exactly?

Oh right. It doesn't.

This is what options are for, not just ripping large swaths of the game out entirely.

I'm not really understanding the logic of taking out a feature that has already been implemented and a lot of people seem to want pretty passionately just because a few people are going to belly ache about some stranger on the internet wasting their time. I'm really looking forward to playing this game single player but a really large percentage of the reason i would like to buy it is so that me and my brother can play it online together. We both love tactical battles and spent a huge amount of time back in the day playing age of wonders shadow magic versus each other, it is true that the tactical part pretty much doubles the amount of time we would have to put in the game but that is what we loved about it. I think you should just treat us like adults and give us the option to choose whether or not we would like to have that feature incorporated into our game and stop worrying about the opinions of players who can not figure out how to uncheck a box before they start playing a game.

The Dominions saga (Illwinter Games) solved the issue by making the game playable via "play by e-mail" and the tatcical battles be generated automatically based on the general orders and the army set up when submitting his/her turn. The battle itself would be pre-scripted and "played" on the screen for the players on load up of their new turn. The script itself and the result of the battle ultimately decided by the troops and the orders given initially, but giving a full tactical "movie" of the battle.

That was a great compromise between tactical full control and MP capability. Devs of this game should look into it as one of the possibler options.

Now, in the Dominions saga, a game can last typically up to around 100-200 turns max before a clear winner is had... it can also last much less depending on how the game goes. Depending on the rithm of e-mails that can be anything from 2-3 months and up to 6. In elemental I am not familiar with how many turns a typical game would be but if we are talking similar ballparks then pbem and pre-scripted battles (based on army set up and general orders) should be definitely considered.

Well because they are my friends. I am playing with them because I like playing with them, and I accept that  none of us are kids anymore so things happen. If someone gets a call from their mother on sunday, and they tell us hey, I got a call from my mother brb. We're going to just shrug and say okay, go for it. It's a good chance for me to go water or mow the lawn. I NEVER use time limits with friends.  We could technically play, on a weekend, for 10-12 hours straight but we're pausing the game, walking away during our turns. Hell Civ IV doesn't have tactical battles but if someone is in a war, their turn can take 10x as long as everyone else's, so what. When you play with friends, you deal with interruptions as they come and communicate what's happening, what you want. Whatever. I know them, I don't need some clock ticker telling me they've taken too long to play. By playing with them I have already accepted that I don't mind how they play.

edit: I should add I don't like the pause featurs much. They often pause the game where you can't do anything in game. If you just let someone rest on their turn for a bit, you can still explore in the game, look up stuff, check things out you might not normally focus on. No time limit turns is a must as an option.

I'm actually buying Elemental primarily for its multiplayer potential. Don't get me wrong, I plan on playing the hell out of the single player, as I still play GalCiv2 and Sins regularly, so I'm a big fan of sandbox, but right now my friends and I are really excited for the prospects of what Elemental could mean for our D&D crew. Also, as far as playing MP against "strangers", we most likely will not. We play enough strangers in DoTA and LoL, so Elemental can be us against the AI, and we'll take all the time we need to play the game how we want and enjoy it thus!

So I'd like to say that a SP-style MP would be 10 levels of awesomesauce! It isn't a game mode you'd want to play against strangers, but a group of friends that are used to lengthy battles, there can be nothing better for us. Just thinking about the grand campaigns to be had is thrilling/nerdLvlUP.

Anyway, I look forward to see what you Stardockians do to make MP awesome. Turning tactical battles back on is a good place to start though imo..

Well, I didn't read through all of the postings but I do agree that there needs to be tactical battles available in multiplayer.  It should simply be an option... allow players to make the decision to use them or not.  Everyone's happy - those who want tactical battles have them and, those that don't can turn them off.

While Player A and Player B are locked in a tactical battle, the other players can be allowed to look over their holdings and plan out their next move.

For the last few days, my friends and I have been having the exact same discussion as I'm sure others on here have with their friends.  "Wow, this game looks great.  But there are no tactical battles in multiplayer??  Well, there goes the value of MP down the drain..."

To finish off on a good note, though, I have always liked how you all are more interactive with the community rather than simply putting everyone on ignore.  I look forward to seeing the changes this game gets in the future.

In case people haven't read the latest Dev journal, there is good news on tactical battles,

https://forums.elementalgame.com/391747

Hoping for quests too!

You didnt have a tactical battle option because someone might turn them on and then complain about them? This really doesnt make the slightest bit of sense to me. I must be missing somthing.

Are they coming back? An option with a disclaimer maybe?

EDIT: NEVERMIND READ THE ABOVE... PHEW!!

I think it would be a mistake to go the competitive tournament style multiplayer with this game, youd have to compromise on too many things in the name of balance. Long TBS games like this are for playing single player or with friends, that way fun and depth can take priority over balance. Obviously a bit of balance is nice, but friends generally develop house rules anyway.

Competitive games with randoms are best left to short games, rts (SC2) and the like, and even they struggle with balance! (atleast in some peoples opinion)

First of all, I'd like to thank Frogboy (Brad) for sharing his opinions and concerns about the MP game mode for Elemental.

I'm probably way too late to even get my post noticed by anybody at Stardock, but I had to speak out. So here goes.

QUOTE FROM FROGBOY:

There is one exception: Playing 2 people as part of a team vs. AI players is fairly fun. But playing against random players is just an exercise in frustration. This is a game that requires a significant amount of time investment and too many random games will end in dissatisfaction in my opinion.

MY REPLY:

Just like in any Turn Based Strategy game, if you dare to venture in the land of Multilayer, you need to play games with people you know and can plan sessions with. This is definitely not a quick match type of game, where you can play with some random stranger for 20 minutes and be done with it.

I wouldn't even consider using a peer matchmaking for a serious game. Unless Elemental can be beaten down to 30 minute game sessions, there is no way you could start a game with a stranger, as it would require you to schedule another session with them. (And if beaten down to be played so, it's either going to be a completely different game or extremely 'dumbed down'.)

QUOTE FROM FROGBOY:

I do think the game has potential with a group of friends playing together. But I don't think it's there  yet. I think it'll take more time and more thought to do this.

MY REPLY:

If anything I would believe that this would be the Multiplayer mode's sweet spot, rather than a side attraction. I don't see Elemental catching on to be part of competitive gameplay, like SC2 for example. It's not a fast paced action game, and shouldn't be seen in this light. If anything I'd prevent myself of considering competitive play in the multiplayer's design and focus on delivering the SP game directly into MP.

Should "wizard duels" or "other MP game modes" be added, they should not be holding back MP, as I really don't think this would be as catchy or time worthy as Frogboy seemed to imply.

QUOTE FROM FROGBOY:

I would like to see the tactical battles take on a life of their own.  The day 0 multilayer does not have tactical battles in them. We took them out. Yes, in an ideal world we could have made this an option, but anyone who has been on a forum for any amount of time knows that you'd still have people flaming us who found tactical battles boring because while the other guy was fighting some drawn out battle, they were stuck watching it.

I don't have any ready ideas on how to make this better except to say that I would like to see tactical battles made into a separate game mode where players pick their units before the game and then go up against other players with those units.

MY REPLY:

This is probably the part that hit me the hardest. Not as much as the feature that is truncated, but the reasons behind it. Especially the part where Frogboy points out that although it would of been nice for Tactical battles to be turned on/off, due to the forums posts he feels uneasy of implementing them.

If there would be an option to turn them on/off, and someone is playing with them on and complains. That would make NO sense and shouldn't even be heard or considered. As the easy fix for that type of player would be to... turn them off. I really don't' understand the logic behind completely removing them. For example, the Singleplayer campaign can already turn them on or off. I'm going to sound like a broken record... but I don't get it.

So seriously who cares if you are being flamed by some ADD kids who took a day off COD4 to try an MP game of Elemental and realized that it's not as fast paced as their usual first Person shooters. Again, the fact that they could be turned off makes this whole problem irrelevant. I really wish the team would reconsider this promptly. I don't want to have my gaming experienced marred because someone didn't like Tactical combat and didn't turn it off... Again, makes no sense. If someone tortures themselves by driving a screwdriver into their head, I don't think the best solution is to remove the screwdriver.

Also, in a world where TBS games have taken a backseat to FPS & RTS games, it shouldn't come as a surprise that when having a taste of a TBS MP Game a lot of gamers (Accustomed to FPS/RTS) will find it bogged down and not fast paced enough. It's normal, you are talking about a turn based game, nothing is fast paced about that.

QUOTE FROM FROGBOY:

My advice would be this: If you are buying Elemental primarily for MP, don't. It has it. It works. But IMO, it's not worth $50 to play the game MP primarily.  If you like MP in ADDITION to having a fantastic single player game (and make no mistake, Elemental, as a single player game, is awesome in its release form) then absolutely, get it.

MY REPLY:

I find this statement a little late if anything. This was posted what, 2-3 days before "pre-release", a little late I must say to turn around and tell everyone "Yeah.. this MP thing we've been talking about all the way through launch... we don't feel so hot about it anymore... so if you were looking forward to it, don't be so eager anymore."

If the gaming community of Master of Magic created a fan patch that allowed for it to be played in multiplayer, that alone should speak for itself. Please, don't hold back, let the MP game be the same as the SP game, and sure, go ahead and make a compressed version of the game or wizard duels, anything you like. Just don't prevent people who understand the ramifications of playing a MP TBS game, enjoy elemental as it could be and not as a few would like it to be. (Again, I'm not asking to add stuff for me, to leave what's already there and let others "remove" what they don't' like)

Hopefully I'm not only speaking for myself, since this game is basically the spiritual successor of Master of Magic, there are a lot of old geezers like me that HAVE the patience to play a full 50+ hour skirmish game with friends. Sure it's not going to be in 1 sitting, but I'm fine with that. I've done so with past civilization, or Colonization games. It's normal and to be expected.

I have 3 friends I grew up with and we are all Master of Magic fans, since we learned of MP we have only been talking of when we would schedule or coop games and such. Don't take away our hopes and dreams! Please!

Anybody who made it here, I appreciate the effort.

Regards,

V.

An old timer who has been waiting for a Master of Magic sequel for about 15 years

AoW Shadow magic is not rts, it is turn based. Simultaneous turns. I have no problem at all watching the other players battles, in fact it can be quite strategic. We all know quick battles are risky at best. But to do a tactical battle can show troop strength and in the case of Shadow Magic, can give up your location and if you are underground. You can also pick up on the other players tactics.

All the hype of a "new" Master of Magic game, and the one part that was missing from Master of Magic ie multi player, seems to be an after thought at best. In my opinion, turned based strategy games are only good when played against a real person. Computer chess sucks. LOL