Co-Op?

[Riobux]

I'm sorry in advance if this has already been done. I've tried to use the common suggestions sticky thing but the links don't seem to work for me.

I was wondering if it would be possible, even through a mod (if one exists, it would be great) for there to be a co-op campaign where two, or more, human players can play with each other in campaign mode either independently or work together, depending on what they feel like doing. It would function like a normal campaign, just with more humans but with still the exact same set up.

Thanks for any responses, including any links to any already existing co-op mods (preferably for the Warband edition of Mount And Blade).

 

[Volksgrenadier]

I like the idea. The entire campaign could be persistant even if only one of two players is actually online and playing.

 

[Thunderwolf]

It SHOULD be able to be done, but that probably won't work in a mod, but in a complete new expansion (like warband having multiplayer), because it would be a lot of work to get something like that work out well. There's syncing issues everywhere.

consider 2 players, one enters a battle with another (not player) faction.. what's the other person supposed to do?
1.) Wait until the other finished his/her battle?
2.) Or should it be forced that neutral fights containing only one player were automated instead?
3.) Should the players instead be part of one band (player #2 and up) being like the npc's, forced to move along with the main player?
4.) Should it be an different version of calradia with every player (probably 2 only) being king or queen of his or her own faction with fights only possible with both people at the site?

These are only a few of the possibilities. Discuss what is best or add another suggestion.

 

[Lance Tankmen]

it could be where both move around as normal and if one fights then the other player sees it on the map the same as he would two AI fighting with two swords and the noise, he could join if he wanted or not, of course i think this would only work for lan cause in order to pause both would have to agree, though im sure if both players plan on making their own kingdoms he'll probably join and kill his friend lol, still i think there would be too many problems to work out besides that

 

[sumguy720]

I think the reason why this hasn't been done is because the engine can't really support it. There are problems with managing time, and there are zillions of ways the game could get screwed up by having more than one player controlled army on the map. Furthermore, multiplayer games would take AGES and there is no reasonable way to save progress or prevent castle sieges/fief loss while players are not online.

The only acceptable way to add multiplayer coop is if both (all) players were forced to be in the same party as companions. That way people could converse with one another as the appointed party leader makes decisions, and everyone would fight when there was a battle.  This wouldn't be much different than multiplayer except players would be able to watch the host as they move around the campaign map and everyone would be able to free roam while visiting cities, castles, and villages to buy their own equipment.

 

[Th-th-th-Three-some]

It SHOULD be able to be done, but that probably won't work in a mod, but in a complete new expansion (like warband having multiplayer), because it would be a lot of work to get something like that work out well. There's syncing issues everywhere.

consider 2 players, one enters a battle with another (not player) faction.. what's the other person supposed to do?
1.) Wait until the other finished his/her battle?
2.) Or should it be forced that neutral fights containing only one player were automated instead?
3.) Should the players instead be part of one band (player #2 and up) being like the npc's, forced to move along with the main player?
4.) Should it be an different version of calradia with every player (probably 2 only) being king or queen of his or her own faction with fights only possible with both people at the site?

These are only a few of the possibilities. Discuss what is best or add another suggestion.

I think the other player should beable to move around as if there is no battle. Seems only reasonable? Just like if a lord gets in a fight you can watch the numbers on either sides decreasing?

 

[Gregor Eisenhorn]

It's not as crazy as you guys think. A great example of how it could be done correctly can be found in the game Patrician:

-forced time rate, set at the beginning of a match. The host can also vary the time passage in LAN matches because we can assume they are in constant communication and won't annoy the other players by varying the time.

-when battles occur, the game world goes on as normal. Reinforcements could arrive, too.

-players can choose to compete against or help each other.

-saving works like this: anyone can save at any time, except in battles. Anyone can load a game at any time, with or without the original players. You can select any lord you want whenever you load a game (including AI lords!) AI lords will take over the original players if one chooses to play the co-op save alone. When you play a saved game and save again, it won't affect the other players' saved games who aren't present.

In non-LAN matches, objectives and quick start options should be available so games don't continue forever.  For example, conquer one town; amass 100,000 denars; conquer all of calradia; capture all players; whatever.