The Master Thread

[SPARROW94]

thanks Ryan i appreciate your comments

[Darvin]

AI - I don't know if Darwin was mistaken, or if I'm looking at this the wrong way. As far as AI, you most likely will be able to fight an AI opponent co-operatively or on your own in mulitplayer. However I don't believe we will have an option to replace your own person with an AI during the game, we may have a feature where if a player leaves they are replaced with an AI concurrent to their ranked skill level.

You summarized it correctly. I interpreted him as saying that players should be able to allow the AI to play for them, and then argued against that. I'm happy with an AI taking over for a player if he leaves, but a player should not be able to stay in the game and use such a feature.

No Command Points - I'm unsure of this term, as I am not a typical RTS gamer. I would assume your talking about Unit Caps, such as only X number of units allowed. This will be determined closer to release, where we have an idea of how many units can be placed on screen with all the features and graphics we want.

It's one of the things that the genre has failed to get a standardized term for. Population points or command points are common ones, but I've also heard supply and support before. In any case, all those terms refer to the maximum number of units a player can support on the battlefield.

Make an Alliance While in Play - This will of course be included in MMO play as there isn't a point where you would join one before you start your MMO experience. Similarly, this shouldn't be a problem during a skirmish gametype, though the idea of using a messenger unit instead of a menu screen is a good idea.

I am opposed to messenger units, as I do not feel that any game should inhibit communication between players. Contrary to the stereotype, gamers are not anti-social misfits (well, most gamers, at least), and one of the most important aspects of multiplayer is that interaction. Anything that makes communication more difficult (particularly casual communication) is a bad thing in my books, and a messenger unit incorperates both a considerable delay and a failure rate to conversation.

[Alexander Flegler]

Originally Posted by Darvin

It's one of the things that the genre has failed to get a standardized term for. Population points or command points are common ones, but I've also heard supply and support before. In any case, all those terms refer to the maximum number of units a player can support on the battlefield.

The most standardized term is "pop" (for population). There are a few who don't use these terms, though. Like the BFME series (command points), Dawn of War and Company of Heroes.

[Ryan]

Originally Posted by Darvin

I am opposed to messenger units, as I do not feel that any game should inhibit communication between players. Contrary to the stereotype, gamers are not anti-social misfits (well, most gamers, at least), and one of the most important aspects of multiplayer is that interaction. Anything that makes communication more difficult (particularly casual communication) is a bad thing in my books, and a messenger unit incorperates both a considerable delay and a failure rate to conversation.

Although I believe a messenger unit would be a good inclusion to the game, to keep the realistic feel of the game, this doesn't mean we will limit conversation. We will still be providing in-game chat, to all, alliance, or whispered to a specific person. The messenger unit would just be the formal way to form an alliance. Also it would present another strategy, that if your enemy intercepts the messenger unit, you wont be able to form the alliance. Again the designers will have to play around with this idea.

[Darvin]

Ok, I misread that as a messenger unit to send text communication.

I still don't think much of the feature, but I'm not opposed to it in that form.

[SPARROW94]

lol thats just plain stupid who eva thought that the messanger was a text communion...i meant that it should be llike if you want to quit the team your on and join abother team

[Darvin]

Believe it or not, that was a serious discussion about just that on another forum for another game at one time.

[The Witch King of Angmar]

Originally Posted by SPARROW94

lol thats just plain stupid who eva thought that the messanger was a text communion...i meant that it should be llike if you want to quit the team your on and join abother team

Yeah or if you were to send a message to another team mate and the messenger got killed or intercepted the message would never reach the other player.

[SPARROW94]

Originally Posted by The Witch King of Angmar

Yeah or if you were to send a message to another team mate and the messenger got killed or intercepted the message would never reach the other player.

it was an anciecnt tradion not to kill your foes messangers...unless your a smart @$$ and looking for war

[Joseph Visscher]

Good brain storming guys, good ideas. keep em coming. I like em all.