Multiplayer: A Strategist's Perspective

from Elemental Forums

Hello Elemental Dev Team and Players,

I normally don't post very often on forums, but I felt the need to voice my opinion on this particular topic for these types of games. I love turn-based strategy. I have loved it since the day I first learned how to play Chess. These style of games are simply more advanced versions of the same game. What made Chess so enjoyable though was playing with a friend and trying to match wits with them. I understand the current reasoning behind a lot of these style of games not having multiplayer on release or at all, but I would like to point out that this genre is suffering because of the current marketing ideals. Yes, multiplayer in these games isn't a main selling point for the masses, but there is a market out there for at least lan or hotseat multiplay.

Personally, I have not seen a turn-based strategy game that was enjoyable and multiplayer since the days of Master of Orion 2. It saddens me that the market has not had another decent multiplayer turn-based strategy game since 1994. The simplistic style of 4X with ship design was amazingly fun and easy to learn. It had flaws, but overall I felt it was the most pleasurable turn-based gaming experience I have ever had. I still play MOO2 today whenever I have my friends over to LAN. Sure, the game may take us the whole weekend, or several weeks depending on work schedules, but we all feel that it is worth the time invested for the experience.

I only mention MOO2 because Elemental has a lot of the elements I enjoyed about MOO2 available in a different setting with some of its own flavor thrown in. I have very high hopes that Elemental will take the mantle from MOO2 in turn-based multiplay experience. It is certainly long past due.

Know that I am not a marketing guru nor that I do not really have a firm grasp on the business world for the gaming industry. I know that a game needs to be profitable for a company to succeed. However, I do not prefer to see the focus of multiplayer be on people connecting to play on servers with other random people. Rather, I think that multiplayer should be focused around hotseat and/or LAN play. Because of the lengthy play and the propensity of people to cheat when playing against strangers, I have never attempted to play a game such as this online.  Often a game will not be finished in one sitting, allowing for the full spectrum of strutting, posturing, whining, complaining, and meta-gaming as jibes are exchanged between game sessions. Often the post game conversation is just as enjoyable as the game itself.  It is hard to imagine having the same depth of enjoyment with a battle.net style experience.  The games take too long, and the turn based strategy fan base is too small and fractured for a dependable positive online multiplayer experience to be practical.

I enjoy a Nintendo game, Star Tropics, which is widely lauded among my peers. The game's critics complain about it's rigid, grid based, controls.  When Nintendo made the sequel they tried to address those complaints, by making the controls more fluid.  In this attempting to please everyone, they broke their own system, and the sequel flopped.  What could have been a profitable game series, instead faded into oblivion.

I plead with you to reconsider the focus of multiplayer in your game. Turn-based strategy is its own niche. One that has been waiting a long time for a new, sharply balanced, suspenseful multiplayer experience. I want to be able to control who I play against.  I don't want to worry for one second about cheaters.  Please put forth a multiplayer system that allows me to directly connect, via IP address, to whichever of my friends is hosting the game.  Leave the battle.net style mutliplayer to the real-time crowd.

4,222 views 5 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

Personally, I have not seen a turn-based strategy game that was enjoyable and multiplayer since the days of Master of Orion 2. It saddensme that the market has not had another decent multiplayer turn-based strategy game since 1994.

That's kinda a lie.

Cvilization 3 and Civilization 4 still have an active multiplayer communities, good for some classical 4X TBS fun (be it online, PBEM, democracy game or whatever). Actually, even some mods like Fall from Heaven are being played online.

Heroes of Might and Magic 3 was relatively popular.

Spectromancer is a very nice remake of Magic: The Gathering with the game specifically designed for a short 5-7 minute online multiplayer matches.

Massive Assault Network 2 is an online multiplayer version of Battle Isle 2 (a wargame).

 

So, that's at least 4 multiplayer TBS i played, all of them are/were popular (AFAIK more popular than multiplayer MoO2 ever was), and every one of them was good in it's own right. If you completely missed them, tough luck, but that doesn't mean they are bad.

The games take too long, and the turn based strategy fan base is too small and fractured for a dependable positive online multiplayer experience to be practical.

Try Civ 4 (league games), Spectromancer or Massive Assault Network 2. And do your research before you make statements like that.

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

Yeah, your totally missing the COLOSSAL Civilization series. Otherwise, I mostly agree with everything stated.

The Political Machine 2024
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

I guess what I should have said was decent turn-based multiplayer that incorporates a tactical combat system with the ability to fully customize your units utilizing a form of research. All the research in the Civ games did was grant you access to new units and Heroes of Might and Magic didn't really have a research system at all. They are both fun in their own rights, but MOO2 took the cake for me with the combination of customizable units, research, and tactical combat.

Another thing I should add is that most of enjoyable multiplay experience was had in a LAN setting. Essentially the equivalent of inviting a friend over to play a board game. Having something available online is only nice for me if I want to play with a friend who lives far away or doesn't have time to LAN. I am not suggesting Online Multiplay not exist, I am just suggesting that even something designed with single player in mind can be modified to at least allow for hotseat.

I apologize for not stating that in my initial post.

Elemental has taken the best elements from both Civ and MOO2 and combined them in a fantasy setting like Heroes of Might and Magic. If we could just get LAN/Hotseat added in, the game would be even more amazing than it already is.

It occurs to me that there really is no point to this thread. I know they intend to add a LAN option eventually. I mostly just wanted to voice my opinion on the state of multiplayer in TBS on a thread for a game that is made by a company that I respect.

 

Also as a sidenote, I just played a quick game of Elemental and it placed me and the computer right next to each other. The game was over in 15 turns. That's kind of disappointing in itself. A human would have at least moved to take my city when I took theirs if we had started that close to each other. Probably would have just been a stalemate though.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

@Artemuscn:  Based on your comments about the games you like to play, I would highly, highly, HIGHLY, mind you, recommend you check out Sword of the Stars: Complete Collection.  It's a fully fleshed out turn-based 4x style experience (though the tactical battles are real-time, not turn-based).  You design your own units/ships and fight them in real-time.  What's really nice about tactical is that if you don't like "twitch" RTS play, you can just give broad "behavior based" orders to your ships (like get close to attack or stay at maximum range, find ideal range, or "Normal" which means you have full control of the ships). Set these in the beginning moments of the battle and just watch them duke it out, adjust the behavior of your units as needed if something suddenly changes.  The micro-ai is very good, I just set the orders and mostly watch...very rarely do I intervene.  You have a wide variety of random galaxies to play in (galaxies will have a set shape, but what's in them is always different), full diplomatic options and so forth.  It also has active and fully-playable multiplayer.  I'm on there all the time playing with my friends.  A sequel (Sword of the Stars 2, often written "Sword of the Stars ][" is due out early next year also).  It would be well worth your time to check out.

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

@Scourge012: I do actually own the entire Sword of the Stars collection. I was not impressed at first glance, but to be fair I haven't given it enough time to make a complete judgment. The style of the human ships turned me off right away and I did not really like the fact that the tactical combat didn't give you any numbers or easy to see indicators to tell you how well you were doing in the battle. You simply send your ships in to do their thing and hope they win. It feels as if the control is lacking. Where as with MOO2, you can outsmart someone with ship movement and weapon utilization.

As I stated though I haven't given it a fair shot so this really isn't a complete judgment, just an initial assessment.