Capitols & multi player

[Apomonomenos]

I was looking at some of the topics posted and it just hit me. Ok, maybe not all at once, I did take some time to think about it, but any way, why not have a main town for the empire?

There could be groups for Multi~player, were the head of a Group gets to choose his main faction & branch, and gets to chose a name for the town (can only contain A-Z, -, ', and spaces). The group leader is the baron of the town. The group is called a county, and will be like counties verses different counties.

But first let's start out with some Basics:

1)A player in Multi~player must first chose their main civ., which will be getting exp points for fighting in battles. When a player raises a level, the player gets a free shipment from the County Capitol (which will be explained later). The more points a player gets in a game, the more EXP. he/she will get. You can only get points by playing a random map type (so no one can make a map giving each player a ton of points) on their main civ. (if a player wants to try out a different civ on multi player, the player can chose to delete the town and start a new one or start a new character under a different name).

2)A player will start out in the county of the faction they chose. If they chose Macedonia, they will have their capitol set as Thessaloniki (Capitol of Greek Macedonia).

Now to the Group:

3)To start a group, a player will get a registration form, allowing to start a new county once if a certain amount of people accept to sign it.

4)Once a Group is formed, the group leader will be able to get a certain amount of land in the country of the faction, such as Macedonia, they will be able to chose any area in Greece. When the town is bigger, more gold will come in. With enough Gold, a player can purchase more land for more buildings for better shipments.

5)There will be servers that a player will play on, so that a player will start a colony and people will be able to see how much land is conquered from them. A player can conquer another player by capturing their Capitol. After that, the players in the group can decide to whether

A) Change their capitol to fight back.

B ) Accept defeat and become a player in the conquering group (player stays same faction)(only available if group leader choses or if town player owns has been captured)

C) Accept defeat but move back to Country Capitol.

D) Accept defeat but stay in group while working for conquering faction (player stays same faction)(only available if group leader choses this)

E) Accept defeat but be absorbed into an allied group's area to fight back (player changes to a temporary faction of the group)(only available if group is adjacent and/or leader accepts same choice).

6)To invade a county, a group or their ally must be adjacent to the county to invade.

7)A player will get some gold for starting the group to buy some land. There will always be some gold leftover from buying the land, but certain places will be more expansive then others.

8)Technology can be researched for the town. For example, to have a dock for Naval Shipments, a player whether has to be adjacent to a river/ocean or research canals. Researching does cost gold, but buying naval land is more expensive and you'll get less land (you can't build on water, but you have to have some area out in sea to be able to extend the dock.

9)If a player joins a group, then his rank will decide on the group leader. If he/she sees the player doing well for the group, he/she can promote the player. There are two ways to see how well a player is doing. One by the amount of gold the player has gotten (each player's main town gets a moderate gold increase after researching "tax").

10)When buying larger amounts of extra land, or a lot of small pieces at a time, tribes known as "barbarians" that are just computers, but still can pose a threat to the town. They can be peaceful and willing to trade, or hostile wanting the blood of their enemies. Usually in small groups, but get larger in deeper areas such as unclaimed Gaul.

11)A player can get points for his town by playing a skirmish, which would not count in the group but would get the player points for his city. If a group has gotten into war with another group, the player can participate in it by making a smaller village to help grow their army, or simply to deploy some from their main town. While in war, a player will get 10x as many points as in a skirmish. If founding a town and/or destroying a barbarian village, then the player will get 5x as many points.

12)After a war is finished and a player has made a town for it, then the town will go under a computer mayor, and (with settings can do nothing) will continue to grow the town like as if it was his main town. The money gotten from tax will have 40% of it given to the founding player, 50% to the group's coffers, and 10% as an upkeep. The founding player can always assign the village to make one product in general, but the player will have to send some other resources to make up for the absence of their way to make it. Such as after a war, a player can assign the village to make wood products, because he realized there was much more forestry in the area but less of anything else.

13)A player can gain land by 2 ways. 1 is to buy it (from a player or a comp), and 2 is to conquer it. If it is unclaimed, the only way is to buy it (I don't want any of those rush for land things). If a player needs to sell some land for the group, then an offer will be made from the head city of that faction (Example: Athens) for times if there is no buyer available. If a player sells the area to the city, it will become unclaimed, available to anyone from buying. A player can buy land in another player/group, such as from Rome to Persia, but the player('s group) must Adjacent to that player/group, and when a player buys it, it will be slightly more expensive than an area near the player's original faction.

That's pretty much everything. If you have any ideas on this, you can tell me and I will see how it'll work. If I decide to add your idea to it, I'll also add your name next to it.

Edited April 26, 2008 by Alexthegod5

[Apomonomenos]

Bumpy

[Silver]

This sounds a little complicated to be implemented.

I read through it and like most of the ideas, I just think they would be pretty hard to make and would cause some people to lose interest.

I dislike the Home City and Exp. leveling idea, I never have liked it because it gives advantages to people who play more games more often.

[MrEmjeR]

you have to remember that this is a RTS game and not a RPG with levels

and this game is based on the idea of the most rpg's like AoE, AoK, AoM, command and conquers etc...

and now a big part of the programming of the basic gameplay is gone, and if u want to change it u have to change almost the whole basic game, also for the multiplayer part. u have to make an other gameplay and i don't think that people like it if the myltiplayer is so much else as the single player. maybe it's an idea for the second release part...

[Apomonomenos]

OK, how about this?

The player doesn't get xp, but can play as his main town to make more soldiers in case of an attack, and a player attacking has to make sure his army can destroy without being destroyed, no shipments about it. But there could be reserves.

Remember, this was an idea about GROUP efforts, not free-for-all. New players can be settled safely in islands (Greece has ALOT of islands) or other places, and there will be a n number of days before becoming a target.

And when a new account is made, then he/she will be settled in an NPC group (EX Sparta, Athens, ETC.) to make sure it won't be a wipe everytime a new account is made.

And remember, this is just an Idea that can be added to.

[Justinian]

You mean like sorta a Multiplayer Conquer the World?

Bags not near any of the Devs!

[Apomonomenos]

Well, yea i guess conquer the world.

But remember to conquer the world you need a lot of supporters, and if a group doesn't like it they can split off, plus there will be NPCs that will control territories.

Also, there could be realms, if one realm is being too pushy, then go to the other one.

[Silver]

So it's like a Team/Clan game where there are borders and you try to conquer? This sounds more like an idea for a board game like Risk rather then an online game type. What if you are the leader or someone in the center of the 'clan'? Then all you can do is support with troops and that would be a little too easy.

[Apomonomenos]

Yes, but Risk is a singleplayer AND limits on what territories you get, and i HATE limits

The leader also does have to manage his or her capitol & every other city he or she controls, like any other player.

I'm thinking of Moral, more moral increases Unit training speed & attack power & speed, and farmers produce more.

[Justinian]

You mean Morale?

[Apomonomenos]

Yea, thanks.

[Silver]

So you want to give an advantage to stronger players? Or lucky players who have a huge 'clan' (When I say clan it's a reference to the alliance and conquered people.)?

Edited June 27, 2008 by Silver

[Apomonomenos]

Let me repeat myself.

But remember to conquer the world you need a lot of supporters, and if a group doesn't like it they can split off, plus there will be NPCs that will control territories (and possibly fight back, according to one's faction).

Also, there could be realms, if one realm is being too pushy, then go to the other one.

And, no, I don't want to give advantages to players who have been playing for a while.

And who said to players?

The leader also does have to manage his or her capitol & every other city he or she controls, like any other player.

In fact, the leader has to do MORE work, he has to run not only a town but a whole COUNTRY. You need ecenomic help, military help, morale help, etc. It ain't easy for the leader of a big country.

Not to mention, every "Empire" has collapsed. Alexander the Great's Empire, the Roman Empire, the British East India Company, the Tzar, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, so the pressures on. >

Edited June 27, 2008 by Alexthegod5

[Silver]

Let me repeat myself.

And, no, I don't want to give advantages to players who have been playing for a while.

And who said to players?

As soon as you mentioned morale, you are giving an advantage to someone, to say everyone can get and have morale would make it just another upgrade. Usually the morale is always low on the losing side, and high on the winning, that means there will be less chance at coming from behind and less chances in general if you lost the last skirmish or battle.

In fact, the leader has to do MORE work, he has to run not only a town but a whole COUNTRY. You need ecenomic help, military help, morale help, etc. It ain't easy for the leader of a big country.

Not to mention, every "Empire" has collapsed. Alexander the Great's Empire, the Roman Empire, the British East India Company, the Tzar, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, so the pressures on. >

No one has the time to do all that, and then it takes away a lot of fun especially if one 'country' has more members then another. It means the leader can just infuse his member with a ton of support and win the game for him.

You're relying heavily on the fact that people will divide up huge countries for almost no reason, that almost never happens, the only time an empire 'collapses' online, is due to inactivity, even then, most empires will just re-create and conquer the original leader.

[Apomonomenos]

Just think of Morale as a resource that gives bonus to other resources.

Plus, what i meant was someone who can run that. That's why I said "help" at the end of each topic, because the President chooses who's gonna run what, so you have to do that AND maintain a BIG city and also make plans of it.

Plus, I've seen people who would commit suicide it their game (EX: BF1942, WoW, Puzzle Pirates <the list goes on D: >) shut down, so I'm sure that there will be players who stay up all night and play just to run their clan.

[Kimball]

The problem I see with the whole 'conqueror the world' thing is that we'd end up with a massive dominating alliance of elite players that conqueror everybody and don't allow newcomers to succeed.

Instead, let's cater to clans. Through negotiations with our matchmaking host, whoever that may be, we'd develop a clan registration window. Leaders would be able to register clans (a minimum of 3 other members registered to the matchmaking service), define username prefix/suffixes to specify clan membership (or maybe even a little icon that appears next to a member's name), and a clan page could be generated where members could choose to enlist.

[Apomonomenos]

The problem I see with the whole 'conqueror the world' thing is that we'd end up with a massive dominating alliance of elite players that conqueror everybody and don't allow newcomers to succeed.

Instead, let's cater to clans. Through negotiations with our matchmaking host, whoever that may be, we'd develop a clan registration window. Leaders would be able to register clans (a minimum of 3 other members registered to the matchmaking service), define username prefix/suffixes to specify clan membership (or maybe even a little icon that appears next to a member's name), and a clan page could be generated where members could choose to enlist.

OK then, how about a clan can only hold a certain amount of territory. I also said that if a player gets too much land, other factions (that are NPCs) will declare war until they are small enough. Just think of the NPCs as GMs (If anyone ever played wow )

[Justinian]

Alternatively, you could have one Server for Clans, and one for newbies/lonesome folks.

[Silver]

If this were to be implemented in any game, you would need a few things -

First off as Scipii said, you would need a dedicated multi player server for this clan/country idea.

Secondly, you would need a secondary map, so new players who join, join on the outside, and the center would be full of the oldest and original players.

Third, if conquered you should have the option of relocating to the 'rim', or outer edges of the map.

Fourth, a newly created account/player would have immunity from higher level players/bigger countries for a certain number of days.

Fifth, it should take time for any resources/workers/armies to be sent (depending on distance on the big map) from a leader or anyone to another village, allowing the weaker player to strike before he can be overwhelmed with support.

Sixth, members should be able to fight each other inside the country.

Seventh, a player can have more then one city/village by conquering them and the player then chooses to relocate to the 'rim'.

Maybe then you could achieve some degree of equal opportunity, but even then you might need to clean and restart the server every year or so to prevent one or two clans just dominating everything.

Edited June 29, 2008 by Silver

[Justinian]

There should be a really good incentive for older players to target older players. And ignore the newbies (and me!).

[Silver]

There should be a really good incentive for older players to target older players. And ignore the newbies (and me!).

Morale, older players have to travel farther to attack the opponent, troop morale is lower, weaker units (because of low morale).

It makes sense, what kind of soldier wants to travel thousands of miles to a foreign place to conquer a tiny 'empire' or 'country'.

A text game (don't laugh I was really bored and tired, it was easy to do, only had to log on once every few days for 15 minutes.) I used to play had this system, if you had fewer points/kills/conquers, and some huge player tried to attack you, his morale would go so low, the troop investment and resource investment would be huge. That leaves him open to attack from other strong players.

[Justinian]

No I mean, an incentive so that the real masters don't even WANT to go there, a reason why attacking your souped up neighbour is good.

[Apomonomenos]

If this were to be implemented in any game, you would need a few things -

First off as Scipii said, you would need a dedicated multi player server for this clan/country idea.

Secondly, you would need a secondary map, so new players who join, join on the outside, and the center would be full of the oldest and original players.

Third, if conquered you should have the option of relocating to the 'rim', or outer edges of the map.

Fourth, a newly created account/player would have immunity from higher level players/bigger countries for a certain number of days.

Fifth, it should take time for any resources/workers/armies to be sent (depending on distance on the big map) from a leader or anyone to another village, allowing the weaker player to strike before he can be overwhelmed with support.

Sixth, members should be able to fight each other inside the country.

Seventh, a player can have more then one city/village by conquering them and the player then chooses to relocate to the 'rim'.

Maybe then you could achieve some degree of equal opportunity, but even then you might need to clean and restart the server every year or so to prevent one or two clans just dominating everything.

Remember, this is an idea that can be built on.

1. Remember, in [almost] every MMO RTS/RPG game, there are players who would do anything just to run their thing in game. But while the player is out for one reason or another, the player can chose to temporarily let someone else run it or have the computer to an auto run, it just builds more defenses (or if someone's in a war they would make a balance of resources, defence and offence).
   
2. The map will be able to "grow", so a player/clan will own a certain ammount of land, but a dwindling ammount of percent of the land if they just stand still. The rate of the "growing" is determined on the ratio of how much land is being consumed to how many players, or in other words the avg. rate in which a player takes land at what speed. 7000miles/km at one week will mean 1000miles/km a day.
   
3. You cannot conquer the world.
   
4. Not a certain ammount of days, but a certain ammount of Power per square mile/km to the ammount of land the player has.
   
5. Yes.
   
6. If they can get around the begining.
   
7. A player can get towns by conquering OR founding, and if you mean by relocating to the rim as moving to run another town, then yes.
   
8. Maybe not, because then players will have no reason to build up clans. However, you can do this indirectly, by having "NPC" nations (like NPC Greece) declair war on the clan and the NPC would win, so the player/clan doesn't feel ripped off.
   

[MythicRuler]

All I know is that because AoEIII had homecities and experience levels I stopped playing it. Microsoft did not bring back the classic aoe feel that everyone liked.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Funny thing is, everyone kept screaming for formations and units on walls, but Ensemble ignores everyone and instead opts for Home Cities. While the Home Cities were a good feature, that they ignored their fanbase altogether on the formations and wall garrisoning issue was kind of dumb for a developer to do. Especially since in some of their screenshots they show units on walls! IMHO, it's not that they didn't follow the AOE formula close enough, it's that they held onto it too rigidly!

BTW, here's a blast from the past for ya!

I remember when I first heard about Age of Empires in PC Gamer Magazine way back in 1996. I could not WAIT for it to come out. The graphics (for the time) were amazing and I was mesmerized by the screenshots. This was way back in the AOL 2.5 days when the internet was still a toddler, so to speak and gaming magazines were the only good sources for information on upcoming games. I remember when we upgraded from a Pentium 120 to an AMD K6-2 400MHz processor. I thought I was bad ace. The same when we upgraded from a 36.6 modem to 56k. lmao. People were ENVIOUS!