I was reading over nightovizard's post about Multiplayer Suggestions, and I have my thoughts about the possible solutions. With 8 years and 30 different games somewhat similar style to dawn of fantasy these ideas based off what I have liked and not liked.
First off all let us be aware that this game has player versus environment and player versus player mechanics and content. Continuing with not everyone plays games for same reasons, some want to it for the PvP and others for the PvE. I feel like the goal was to have both PvE and PvP without alienating either audience.
Player versus Environment:
A player could mostly play for the PvE aspect, however become frustrated and quit because their questing army keeps getting killed by other players. You could say that they could just buy protection but not everyone can manage that, whether it be to time and or skill. I am not saying that game has to make everyone happy, but it would be nice to have a larger player base.
Co-op has a very limited number of fight in which it can be used. I would add a queue system where players could sign up to do multiplayer PvE fights. No matter what instance a player was entering there would be a multiplayer option. If the instance has limited number of units allowed, the units would divided even between the players, with up to four other players. There should be options to invite friends and alliance members, and then open joining to the public queue.
Player versus Player:
Again I would suggest a queue system, as much as I hated them in the past I come to see their beauty. The system should allow you party with up to four other players. The queue should have match making function that should keep the opposing army strengths somewhat close, 100 against 2000 is not much fun.
Scenarios that you could queue would be: skirmish, battle, stronghold, and city siege. All with option of being 1v1 2v2 3v3 4v4. Should be able to queue multiple armies at once, maybe a 200 strength for a skirmish and a 1500 strength for stronghold and city siege. Fights should be kept to 15-30 minutes and 60 at very most. Anything above that can make the game far less appealing for the causal player.
End of fight spoils should be base off total loss of army strength suffered by all in the fight. That is suggested to stop people from trading wins. You retreat and I will retreat next time type thing.
Skirmish: You queue with a single army. Armies spawn on oposite ends of the field of battle. Victory is granted to the last owner(s) of the last units standing whether it be bloodshed or an enemy retreat. Winning side should get double spoils.
Battle: as skirmish, however you queue with three armies. Every 10 minutes your next army enters the field of battle, until all three are present. Chance at large scale battles to test your endurance and army managing skills. Winning side should get quadruple the spoils and the losers double.
Stronghold: think of quests to destroy a stronghold. One person would pay for an stronghold, palisade wall with gate and a few towers. With multiple players there would still only be one stronghold but they would be all defending the single stronghold. Owner of stronghold units spawn in the stronghold. Additional defenders units spawn around the stronghold. The attackers would have 20 minutes win. An addition 5 minutes add for each attacker there is. So 35 minute limit in a 4v4. Defenders win if all enemies retreat, die, or the time limit is reached. Attackers win if all enemies retreat, die, or the stronghold commander is killed. Defenders win they get double spoils as they have defenses and attackers get base spoils. Attackers get quadruple as they were going against defenses and defenders get base spoils.
City Siege: As stronghold, however a player queue with their city. Time limit is 30 base with 10 additional minutes per attacker. Owner of city gets five times the spoils that rest of defenders would get as their city is being used.
Thanks for your time.