Improvement suggestion

[Solstice47]

Good Evening,

 

I have been playing with my brother in a co-op campaign, we were disappointed to find there was no way to complete a "manual" battle, where our armies could be controlled. 

I wished that an update would be completed, that would allow/disable manual battles in the settings of the multiplayer lobby. I would appreciate a manual battle, as it would add a lot of value to the game. If a player would launch a manual battle, then the other players could be gifted units to join in, if they do not have an army inside the battle. It would allow everyone to play. Im not sure what is the percentage of players that are playing with friends. But it would be amazing for players like me.

 

Please reach me by email, if you find the idea interesting and if you want more information.

[Lighthope]

16 minutes ago, Solstice47 said:

I have been playing with my brother in a co-op campaign, we were disappointed to find there was no way to complete a "manual" battle, where our armies could be controlled. 

The problem with that is how do you stop the game for the other players while the two combatants fight it out?

Unfortunately, it is unworkable with mutliplayer unless you limit it to just two players.

17 minutes ago, Solstice47 said:

If a player would launch a manual battle, then the other players could be gifted units to join in

Absolutely not. Defeats the whole purpose of having to raise armies as well as numerical superiority.

[Solstice47]

Well what about giving the other player the computer army? it would not be possible for 8 player multiplayer campaign, where the option to allow manual battle would come in. Or if there is to many players the option could be simply disable. Or could be allow but the other player could spectacle the game.

As for the gifting, unit, I do not see the down side of it. Maybe I did not explain my point correctly. What I mean is that if I have 8 infantry unit in my army, I, as the leader of the army, could gift 4 of my infantry unit to the other player, so that they can play as well in the manual battle. The numerical superiority would not change at all, as the units are already there in my army.

[Lighthope]

8 minutes ago, Solstice47 said:

Well what about giving the other player the computer army?

Not a good idea.  Perhaps the other player wants that country to lose his army so he can move in and sweep up uncontested.

9 minutes ago, Solstice47 said:

Or could be allow but the other player could spectacle the game.

That would be boring.

9 minutes ago, Solstice47 said:

As for the gifting, unit, I do not see the down side of it. Maybe I did not explain my point correctly. What I mean is that if I have 8 infantry unit in my army, I, as the leader of the army, could gift 4 of my infantry unit to the other player, so that they can play as well in the manual battle. The numerical superiority would not change at all, as the units are already there in my army.

Why would you want to do that?  That is the whole point of building an army better than your opponent.

Even if we take your idea, what units would you "gift"?  The peasant ones while you keep the Tier 2 units?

I get the motivation behind your idea.  It's just unworkable in this type of game.

[Solstice47]

I don't agree with you, from your point of view, you take the worst case scenario, if a player wants to throw the game, he will find a way to do so. The only way that the player could control the army, would be in the manual battle, no in the campaign map. In the manual battle, the player choosing to complete a manual battle, is the one in control on the location and time the battle is completed, not the enemy player. It could happen, but the likelihood of it happening is extremely low.

It would be boring, this is why the option of gifting an unit would be there.

Why would you not want to gift an unit, like I said I play with my brother, if you play with randoms, it would not be the best case scenario, this is why there would be an option to allow manual battle or not in the multiplayer lobby. And if you play with friends/family, why would you only give peasants to them, you could share and play as a team in your own army. He/she could control the cavalry, while the other control the infantry, same thing with archers. 

 

And it is sure workable Total warhammer did it, and its great. 

[Lighthope]

1 minute ago, Solstice47 said:

I don't agree with you, from your point of view, you take the worst case scenario, if a player wants to throw the game, he will find a way to do so. The only way that the player could control the army, would be in the manual battle, no in the campaign map. In the manual battle, the player choosing to complete a manual battle, is the one in control on the location and time the battle is completed, not the enemy player. It could happen, but the likelihood of it happening is extremely low.

It would be boring, this is why the option of gifting an unit would be there.

Why would you not want to gift an unit, like I said I play with my brother, if you play with randoms, it would not be the best case scenario, this is why there would be an option to allow manual battle or not in the multiplayer lobby. And if you play with friends/family, why would you only give peasants to them, you could share and play as a team in your own army. He/she could control the cavalry, while the other control the infantry, same thing with archers. 

You say that the chance of your opponent throwing the game is extremely low, but then you present a scenario that doesn't happen often either and includes actions that throw the game.  (Gifting good units to an opponent.)

1 minute ago, Solstice47 said:

And it is sure workable Total warhammer did it, and its great. 

Never played Total War: Warhammer, so don't know how it does work in all that.

[Solstice47]

why would you gift units to an opponent? If you play online with a friend in a coop scenario, why would you not gift an unit to have more fun. If you play in a free for all, there is no reason to gift unit. But then if you start a free for all campaign you as the lobby leader, can decide if manual battles are allowed or not, and if someone joins the campaign, it is his/her responsibility to check the settings of the campaign. If that person does not agree then he/she can join a different lobby.

 

The gifting unit would be great for players that play in a coop scenario not free for all or other competitive ones.

[Rukoso]

To be honest i think both of you are right in their own perspective. I would appreciate the option to play manual battles with a friend too, because it adds a whole new coop or even versus aspect to a multiplayer campaign. I know this from Shogun 2 Total War (haven´t played the following titles). There you can have an only 2 player campaign, so that you can share the same army in coop by gifting some units or fight each other with the opposing armies (either your own factions army or that of an AI faction). I´d really love to see something like this in Knights of Honor II so i agree completely with you Solstice.

However this would only work properly with people you know and with which you can communicate AND in small lobbies. As Lighthope says this option would lead to some players being bored by having to watch or exploiting this mechanic by throwing a match for their own benefit with a big 6 player Lobby for example.

So i guess this can (and should) probably be added as an option for multiplayer campaigns, so that you can play like this with friends and without that with strangers so to say.

[Cosmic]

A fix would be just both players would enter the battle map, one would observe and the other would fight. This would stop the campaign map from moving while the battle takes place.

Edit - The battles don't go for to long imo, and if players dont want to wait, you have the normal function they currently have.

 

Edited December 10, 2022 by Cosmic

[RTSfanatic]

18 hours ago, Lighthope said:

You say that the chance of your opponent throwing the game is extremely low, but then you present a scenario that doesn't happen often either and includes actions that throw the game.  (Gifting good units to an opponent.)

Never played Total War: Warhammer, so don't know how it does work in all that.

You are saying none of his idea's would work but they do work in total war. If 1 person starts a manual battle then the other player just spectates or like the other guy said the engager of the manual battle can gift some of his own units to his friend so he doesn't have to just watch the fight.

Don't shoot someones idea down if you don't know anything about it.

Edited December 10, 2022 by RTSfanatic

[Lighthope]

3 hours ago, RTSfanatic said:

You are saying none of his idea's would work but they do work in total war. If 1 person starts a manual battle then the other player just spectates or like the other guy said the engager of the manual battle can gift some of his own units to his friend so he doesn't have to just watch the fight.

And how boring is that?

3 hours ago, RTSfanatic said:

Don't shoot someones idea down if you don't know anything about it.

Not liking it doesn't mean I don't know anything about it.  Don't use personal attacks to try and augment your argument.  That doesn't work either.