Singleplayer Co-op mode?

[Psiphoon]

If you want a multi-player campaign map you could manage the time problem the same way total war and defcon did it- have time move very slowly by default and let it be sped up by mutual consent from all players. Otherwise, we already have fully customisable co-op battles, which is pretty cool- I really wish those bot servers hadn't mysteriously disappeared, they were godly.

 

[ghostgold]

i think a coop would be fun to have a friend help you out in a fight against a overwhelming odds

 

[Rawrzalot]

then there would be problems with some things like say you get into a battle ut your friend is faraway, what will happen? Will time just continue like normal for him but youll be engaged in battle? The only prolems i can see are basically ingame timebased. But there are ways around it like having time never stop and making it to where time only pauses for neccesary things. They could have it, but still alot of problems to fix

 

[Baron Conrad]

Not going to happen in Warband,

Maybe it will happen in M&B but it's too early to speculate about it.

 

[Ceolwynn]

Maybe Taleworlds can use the same method the Creative Assembly used to have multiplayer grand campaigns.
I think the save-games are saved on your or your friend's computer.

 

[Rawrzalot]

I just remembered my old game: star wars empire at war.

Whenever u played campaign against som1 else Whenever you fought the ai you were forced to auto resolve. Although this feature may make your losses too much (or too little in some cases) it does fix the time problem.

 

[Seawied86]

I just remembered my old game: star wars empire at war.

Whenever u played campaign against som1 else Whenever you fought the ai you were forced to auto resolve. Although this feature may make your losses too much (or too little in some cases) it does fix the time problem.

would not work for M&B

 

[Rawrzalot]

Im just tossing out ideas so dont expect it to be completely thought out.

Another thing they could do is have each player have one companion (assuming coop woud be for only 2 players) and they MUST be in the same faction and share faction relations. The one companion would e exactly like the controlling player's real stats (so the companion is basically a clone of the other player). Whenever engaged in a fight the other player MUST control that companion. So in a way, they can control their own war partys but when confronted they must both be there.,

 

[guilemaster]

The difficulty faced in coding this would be tremendous. I don't think it's going to happen this M&B. Maybe if they make a new one with co-op friendly campaign play, but for now, I don't think it's going to happen. Even the companion idea is shaky at best. Even that would be very hard.

 

[Rawrzalot]

Yea i know XD

When i was typing that i started thinking coding would be enormously long and hard XD

 

[Cznielsen]

Guys.... old and kinda dead thread.

 

[Ceolwynn]

today i start playing cRPG!

 

[lilrock]

I just got the answer to the problems everyone was having!!!

Yes you can not have two people on the same overmap

Yes there is a chance someone can be in the same battle as you (Against or with)

Yes there is a solution to making this happen

Solution:

1) Have a connection setup, like a server.

2) Once started, Load or start a new game for each individual player

3) Every time someone gets into a battle everyone in their own overworld map gets a message at the side of their screen

4) The message says:


*player name* is going into battle with:

3 npc companions (can be Zero)

against

2 npc companions (can be Zero)

Timeout in 10 seconds

<button> Join *player name*'s team </button> <button> Join Opposing team </button>



5) The timer goes down, and the numbers are updated each second

6) If they press the button the numbers are updated and they join ether group

7) If there is no companions or if the timer runs out they continue with their own game

8 ) Each player is playing their own game and cannot see anyone else on their own worldmap but can 'SPEAK' to each other by pressing and holding a button or function

9) If you have any more doubts or questions, Descuss it with eachother... It will work!!!

Thanks for the inspiration Ceolwynn

Lilrock

 

[siprus]

hmm... what if during battle other goes on pause and one who doesn't battle can surf in internet.

 

[doomy]

I can see it working if the game moves at a contant speed (probaly the map moving speed by default).

Battles would be done by only the person in a certain area can join or not (as they would have to move at the game speed time).
And castles and town seiging ould be done by the area when they start the battle not just click besiege the castle.

There would be no pausing, and if somebody recruits from a village somebody else can do so straight after.

And if somebody goes afk in a castle or maybe leaves the game, the AI could just play for them (they would wait in a castle I imagine).

Presuming you were playing LAN it may be easier, if it was online there might have to be some form of anti-lag in battles..

For companions I guess you would have one of each for every player, though it may be better to add in a few more and make the max each player can have to be 5 or 6?

Eh all just ideas -  trying to keep the original game but replace some of the lords with actual people, OR have it only 2-4 players and have you all start as normal?