Party activities

[raving]

Originally Posted by MrBlack103

Given the world is persistent, I'd guess things continue to be built while you are offline.

i think the same, and i love the idea of co up missions, when i played ra3 and could play it with my mates i was thrilled.

[LiTos456]

Playing a co op mission in battleforge for the first time with some kid who had to go somewhere with his mom was fun. Yeah it was.

[Grizzlez]

I like the idea of co-op quests, playing on your own all the time could get pretty boring and repetitive and nothing beat's messing around with your friends online.

[MrBlack103]

I was just thinking - in a lot of MMORTS games, online activity resricts coordinated movement of armies by allied players. How about make an option of letting trusted players have (limited to an adjusted extemt) control over your armies? For example, you are to be one of the armies attacking so-and-so player's base. You hand over control to whoever is in charge of the attack, so all armies attack at once. It would also be great if "guild-camps" were implemented (more than one army camping in the same spot). These ideas would stimulate different players in the guild having different priority jobs. For example, Guildmaster sets some players to concentrate on building armies and sending them to designated rally points for the players who have been tasked to commanding armies. *dreams of an entire guild's coordinated army owning a bunch of smaller, disorganised armies*

[Andy Joslin]

No one but you is going to control your army, sorry.

However, the other ideas might be workable.

[LiTos456]

yeah, that's what teamwork is for.
Maybe there will be voice chat

[raving]

Originally Posted by MrBlack103

I was just thinking - in a lot of MMORTS games, online activity resricts coordinated movement of armies by allied players. How about make an option of letting trusted players have (limited to an adjusted extemt) control over your armies? For example, you are to be one of the armies attacking so-and-so player's base. You hand over control to whoever is in charge of the attack, so all armies attack at once. It would also be great if "guild-camps" were implemented (more than one army camping in the same spot). These ideas would stimulate different players in the guild having different priority jobs. For example, Guildmaster sets some players to concentrate on building armies and sending them to designated rally points for the players who have been tasked to commanding armies. *dreams of an entire guild's coordinated army owning a bunch of smaller, disorganised armies*

i like ur ideas goddamn ... * starts dreaming of guild coordinated army too ><

[Grizzlez]

Originally Posted by Andy Joslin

No one but you is going to control your army, sorry.

However, the other ideas might be workable.

Perhaps a unit tribute would be better, so you can give your ally some of your units-to both help him defend if he needs it and to also attack-but they cannot be returned afterwards. Would also allow two players of different races playing together to use units not normally avaliable.

[Andy Joslin]

Oh yeah, definitely. You can transfer resources and/or units between armies.

[Kell Aset]

Between armies or castles of same player?