PDA

View Full Version : Is it only me excited about skirmish mode?


Pilgrim
02-10-2010, 09:53 PM
I think roughly 100% of the in-game related topics I see here are referring to the MMORTS mode.

I admit its new and exciting, but its not what attracted me to the game.
I'll definitely try the world map mode, but every time I read about it it seems so complicated and ambitious a feature that I can't help wondering if it will work out at all.

Personally thats never given me cause for concern, since there will presumable still be the normal RTS skirmish server and surely DoF will still be the most exciting RTS on the market, even in normal RTS mode.

A few questions:

1) Am I the only one here who sees themself spending most of their DoF time playing standard RTS skirmishes?

2) Is the game doomed to total failure if the MMO funtion doesn't take off as well as people hope?

3) Is it just me who is attracted to this game mainly because its an epic (more than 14 units) fantasy RTS at last? (and less because of the MMO idea)

Aametherar
02-10-2010, 10:10 PM
I never was 1 for pre made skirmish modes. I prefer being able to build up my city and manage my economy while fighting in that mode rather than just micro managing armies. I'm sure there will be mods eventually with some sort of skirmish mode that has city building, which i'll love, along with other custom maps which i'd actually be interested in making, though I usually need a template to work off (other peoples maps) to learn map making.

In short i'm pretty excited about both modes, but pre-built army vs pre-built army just isn't my thing.

Pilgrim
02-10-2010, 10:13 PM
Skirmish mode is the standard mode of all RTS.

E.g. town center and 5 peons. You all build from scratch.

The other mode, in DoF is MMO

Darvin
02-10-2010, 10:31 PM
Yeah, I'm in this for skirmish mode primarily as well. You're not alone.

Aametherar
02-10-2010, 10:35 PM
Skirmish mode is the standard mode of all RTS.

E.g. town center and 5 peons. You all build from scratch.

The other mode, in DoF is MMO

Ahh I see, I have been a bit out of the loop I admit, anyways sounds fun, I love fast paced tournament style competition, so yes i'll be very into it.

Alex Walz
02-10-2010, 10:43 PM
I'm glad you're excited for skirmishes, although it is kind of ironic as the whole intended purpose of the skirmish modes is simply to serve as a training field for the MMORTS mode - a means to test various strategies in an instant battle.

sneaky_squirrel
02-10-2010, 10:46 PM
Don't worry friend, I too look forward to skirmish mdoe for two reasons:

Strats and quick battles (Tactical and short term economic strategy)

Custom Scenrios :D

Aametherar
02-10-2010, 11:08 PM
I'm glad you're excited for skirmishes, although it is kind of ironic as the whole intended purpose of the skirmish modes is simply to serve as a training field for the MMORTS mode - a means to test various strategies in an instant battle.

It's, well i guess as you mentioned, also the perfect way to see what you want to aim for in MMO mode. It doesn't mean we won't be as active as possible in MMO mode, it just means we'll be in both...Zombie mode! Who said this game doesn't have zombies? We're sitting right here behind the monitors controlling our armies!

Darvin
02-11-2010, 03:54 PM
I'm glad you're excited for skirmishes, although it is kind of ironic as the whole intended purpose of the skirmish modes is simply to serve as a training field for the MMORTS mode - a means to test various strategies in an instant battle.

I don't find it surprising at all. Many people just aren't interested in building a persistant empire, and want a one-off battle.

For me, there's nothing yet that has me sold on MMO mode. I'll give it a try, but if I don't find a hook that draws me in, I'll probably just fall back to skirmish.

Swift sword
02-11-2010, 04:37 PM
I'm sure plenty of people will play skirmish-I'm going to if I'm having trouble with strategy methods in MMORTS. And the entire DoFH is going to be making scenarios I'm fairly sure, myself included. I'm betting a fair few multiplayer maps will be in the mix there ;)

Wizaerd
02-11-2010, 05:03 PM
I'm not completely sold on the MMO aspect either... What draws me to this game is the skirmish mode, single player campaign, and more importantly, the editor. I'll probably check out the online thing, but I don't much like playing competitvely nor with other players. I like to take my time, and tool around as opposed to be overly serious about winning, and then there's the final aspect, I typically suck at games. Doesn't bother me since I'm in it for fun, but playing others and losing all the time would be depressing... Much rather play by myself, then when I lose to the computer, I don;t feel so bad (knowing they "think" much faster, and respond much faster than I do...

sneaky_squirrel
02-11-2010, 05:21 PM
If MMO were not instanced it would really be a lot more fun (In tactical and rolepalying aspects), but with non instance comes many problems, which is why this ended up instanced.

MMO is kinda like persistent skirmish, with no meaningful PVP, the MMO part will probably lose its fun if not spiced up with special PVP zones or something.

Alex Walz
02-11-2010, 05:30 PM
If the MMO weren't instanced, you'd need a government super computer to play it. :p

Swift sword
02-11-2010, 06:14 PM
I kinda agree that MMO will need PvP zones to fully use it's potential. After all, it'd be very costly and risky to ever attack an enemy city-defending is almost always easier than attacking. However, too much PvP and too many rewards, and people will only play it once they get a decent amount of the quest done and a sizable army. There is definitely a fine balance between perfect and losing the MMO persistent essence.

Kire
02-11-2010, 08:06 PM
I cant wait that someone create a minas tirith/helms deep siege defense scenario =P + many others ... so beside practicing i also look forward to play skirmish stuff. But at skirmish (comp vs. you), i dont like at them if comp is cheating x.x (aka having much money while it doesnt even collect it and the part like he can control every soldier on its own grrrrr -,,-). Hope here wont be so cheaty (money and production wise).

Aametherar
02-11-2010, 10:20 PM
I cant wait that someone create a minas tirith/helms deep siege defense scenario =P + many others ... so beside practicing i also look forward to play skirmish stuff. But at skirmish (comp vs. you), i dont like at them if comp is cheating x.x (aka having much money while it doesnt even collect it and the part like he can control every soldier on its own grrrrr -,,-). Hope here wont be so cheaty (money and production wise).

I never likes oversized epic battles in RTS's. Just normal ones, even large ones.

As for computers. They pretty much have to cheat after a point, you can only make them so smart. After that they need an advantage if they are to be difficult enough. Even then it isn't always enough. Take WC3 for example, the computer gains normal gold per second minimizing, unless you up the difficulty, then they get it faster. It's also laid out so how many heroes they build is based on difficulty. They can only be made so smart. Even with all the effort put into it and bonuses, on the hardest a skilled player will still stomp them. So i'm fine with AI advantages. Examples being, them not using certain spells at weaker levels, and their spells being a little stronger than normal at higher ones, or even how far they're willing to tech up for example.

Kire
02-12-2010, 06:14 AM
Oh oh forgot to say the worst cheating that breaks gameplay vs comp for me .... if you play with fog he always know exactly where you are or have workers .....
Edit: its impossible to play robin hood stile if you had a bad start =P and it breaks games diversity.

Supreme
02-12-2010, 07:14 AM
Yea but you have other advantages.

Pilgrim
02-12-2010, 07:36 AM
I haven't been able to look at single player for around 10 years, since I first decided to try AoK multiplayer.

I never likes oversized epic battles in RTS's. Just normal ones, even large ones.

Is there any game, other than Total War, where you see epic battles?

Negthareas
02-12-2010, 08:44 AM
I do a lot of skirmishing, and some onlines play. I hope the MMORTS mode will be wicked awesome, but if it is not I will still treasure the game because of its skirmishes, multiplayer interaction, editor, and campaigns.

Editor - I cannot wait to get my hands on the thing.

Jonathan Werk
02-12-2010, 12:03 PM
I'm sure all of my old RTS cronies would be most interested in Skirmish.
Competitve RTS players are used to the idea of independent matches where you win with skill alone and each game starts on a blank slate, not influenced by how much preparation you did yesterday. It's treated more like sport.

welshie
02-12-2010, 12:25 PM
ive always prefered the multiplayer in the RTS' just because you cannot predict the players move. I love the option for skirmish but for me it will only be for perfecting my seiges rather than doing it full time as that will be spent on sacking cities!

Henry Martin
02-12-2010, 06:21 PM
Skirmish is fine. I am looking forward to the mmo aspect, but I am one that looks forward to the RTS's campaigns/single player. I was hoping this game was going to have one, but I just want to try the game how ever.

ash12181987
02-12-2010, 06:27 PM
"A game should be able to stand up on Singleplayer alone"... And if someone can say whose quote that is, I'll be very happy.

I can't wait to get this one on my desktop for something to kill time with, I'm not a MMO person at all... limited communities are good, too many people playing at once and it gets to be a wear on my nerves.

Negthareas
02-12-2010, 06:50 PM
I agree with Ash, which is why I am very happy to know that despite bing the first true MMORTS [a focus for DOF], DOF still will have a standalone soloplay option.

I have no idea whose quote it is.

DarkMaster
02-12-2010, 07:02 PM
Me, I'm only gonna play MMO if my internet connection copes with the game well...

I too am looking forward to skirmish, as well as the singleplayer modes.

Aametherar
02-13-2010, 07:43 AM
I'm sure all of my old RTS cronies would be most interested in Skirmish.
Competitve RTS players are used to the idea of independent matches where you win with skill alone and each game starts on a blank slate, not influenced by how much preparation you did yesterday. It's treated more like sport.

I agree, I get very competitive. But at the same time I also love building up my castle, army etc. in MMO modes, it makes both modes perfect for me. I've just been waiting, and trying hard to find the perfect MMO mode. It's very hard to find good ones. I swear though, if blizzard makes the first majorly successful MMO i'm gonna be ****ed. I'm thinking more... Dawn of Fantasy 2 :D Not that 1 won't be great, but there needs to be time for the hoards of "casual gamers" to find it.

omgitswhite
02-28-2011, 05:14 PM
Im excited

Dracus
03-01-2011, 01:56 AM
I don't find it surprising at all. Many people just aren't interested in building a persistant empire, and want a one-off battle.

For me, there's nothing yet that has me sold on MMO mode. I'll give it a try, but if I don't find a hook that draws me in, I'll probably just fall back to skirmish.

You could always have a ladder mode for people that are just interested in a starcraft 2 style of gameplay. make every match a 2/3. The challenged opponent picks date and defends first. 2nd round you can have the challenger defend and the tie-breaker be random. I'd definitely be interested in some serious ladder action like this. Anyways its this or your basic rating you get and lose arbitrarily when you win or lose.

Wizaerd
03-01-2011, 02:21 PM
I wasn't excited (and still am not) about the MMO aspect, but I was really jived for the same gameplay in the single player, which was removed and altered dramatically. So now the only thing I'm excited for is strictly the editor.

Henry Martin
03-01-2011, 02:46 PM
I was really jived for the same gameplay in the single player, which was removed and altered dramatically.

What do you mean? The singleplayer campaign is still in the game and is the same as when it was announce. It was never made/meant to be just like the MMO, but a slightly altered version. Think of the singlplayer more like TW's singleplayer campaign.

Wizaerd
03-01-2011, 04:55 PM
No, way back (well over a year and a half ago) there were dramatic changes announced for the single player aspects of the game. When DoF website first came out (that book theme) it stated that the online and the single player would play identically. Full empire and stronghold building, epic campaign only against AI as opposed to online players.

Then it was announced that the single player would mostly be nothing more than skirmishes. There would be no empire building, and more importantly no stronghold building. If this has changed once again, so be it, but it's partially the reason I stopped coming by here daily.

I don't want anythig to do with the MMO aspect, but I did want the empire and stronghold building, something more than a quick skirmish. If that's changed, great, I'll still take a look.

Either way, it's still the editor I'm interested in.

Dracus
03-01-2011, 06:37 PM
No, way back (well over a year and a half ago) there were dramatic changes announced for the single player aspects of the game. When DoF website first came out (that book theme) it stated that the online and the single player would play identically. Full empire and stronghold building, epic campaign only against AI as opposed to online players.

Then it was announced that the single player would mostly be nothing more than skirmishes. There would be no empire building, and more importantly no stronghold building. If this has changed once again, so be it, but it's partially the reason I stopped coming by here daily.

I don't want anythig to do with the MMO aspect, but I did want the empire and stronghold building, something more than a quick skirmish. If that's changed, great, I'll still take a look.

Either way, it's still the editor I'm interested in.

Ummm dude apparently you have not been keeping up with current events but single player will have many game types, and one is the one you want empire building against multiple npcs.

Baxter
03-01-2011, 06:42 PM
Kingdom Wars. You decide how long of a game you want to play.

Henry Martin
03-01-2011, 07:31 PM
No, way back (well over a year and a half ago) there were dramatic changes announced for the single player aspects of the game. When DoF website first came out (that book theme) it stated that the online and the single player would play identically. Full empire and stronghold building, epic campaign only against AI as opposed to online players.

Then it was announced that the singlevplayer would mostly be nothing more than skirmishes. There would be no empire building, and more importantly no stronghold building. If this has changed once again, so be it, but it's partially the reason I stopped coming by here daily.

I don't want anythig to do with the MMO aspect, but I did want the empire and stronghold building, something more than a quick skirmish. If that's changed, great, I'll still take a look.

Either way, it's still the editor I'm interested in.

As I mentioned the singleplayer (aka kingdom wars) was never meant to be identical to the MMO part. The MMO is the main focus of this game, but the singleplayer was added for something to do offline. Stronghold building was and is only for the MMO and in the offline singleplayer you can control other territories which you can't in the MMO.

Hyroshi
03-07-2011, 04:31 PM
I am only truly interested in the MMORTS aspect, if I were into single player games I would play Shogun.

nord
03-18-2011, 12:30 PM
I mostly care for skirmish

Zardoz02
03-19-2011, 04:01 PM
Any kind of PvP is what I'm after. What has long plagued RTS's is boring single player against the AI. PvP may have a lot of annoyances, but it does add multiple levels of complexity and unpredicability to the mix, and keeps things fresh.