Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[zaamoot]

Alright, I had an idea while playing with my friends, but I am not sure if it is possible. I will try to describe it as clear as possible.

When I play with my 5 other friends, we choose a map and select a position, but sometimes there is a discussion about who gets which place.
We would like randomize the places within a team, but this is not possible, because of the option to get a place with the enemy (It is only possible if one of the two teams select the places).

Alright I guess this is technical impossible without help from the mapmakers. Positions need to be available, so you can choose a side and the Remake will place you on a position within the side.
It is a lot of work for a small feature (if it is too much I can help by looking up the most common positions in all maps)

Hope it is clear enough .

[Ben]

I recommended this to Lewin and Krom some time ago, and it has since already been implemented in the beta release

[zaamoot]

I recommended this to Lewin and Krom some time ago, and it has since already been implemented in the beta release

My fault I see, I didn't understand the feature good enough

[sado1]

Yeah, would be a waste of time to change every single map to have predefined teams with all the possible configurations. It's way better to just let all the teams choose the positions, and then randomize them between team members, if the randomize option is set.

[Rhaenon]

Just a quick idea that might have been posted in the past, but this topic is getting rather long and I have read like the first 60 pages of it, but I wouldn't really know what's in them anymore (this sentence is rather long too):

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to be able to build the Storehouse without connecting it to a road? There is a problem with that though... You would need to get resources (at least building resources) to that storehouse without a road...

Anyways I'm just curious about your opinions about this,

Rhaenon.

[Ben]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to be able to build the Storehouse without connecting it to a road? There is a problem with that though... You would need to get resources (at least building resources) to that storehouse without a road...

Again, this has already been suggested, and Krom sounded like he liked the idea, but technicalities need to be worked out. Once reason why this may not be implemented is because storehouses are actually kinda useless. Try playing with blocking everything in your storehouse except gold chests and food, and you'll see how much better you play.

I understand why you don't like looking though this topic. It's impossible to read everything here now. This topic was supposed to be updated, but recently has been ignored/needs be be moderated.

[krisdw]

Just another quick suggestion. Don't know if brought up before.

Is it possible to add victory conditions to the game? Right now I guess you only get the Victory! message after every enemy's military and crucial buildings are destroyed. So when I win a 4v4, and our enemies all resign, you have to kinda manually say "Quit game" and then it feels like you didn't really win so is it possible to give the winning players a Victory button as soon as all the enemies have left the game? It's just a very minor thing and not really important, but would be nice anyways

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to be able to build the Storehouse without connecting it to a road? There is a problem with that though... You would need to get resources (at least building resources) to that storehouse without a road...

Again, this has already been suggested, and Krom sounded like he liked the idea, but technicalities need to be worked out. Once reason why this may not be implemented is because storehouses are actually kinda useless. Try playing with blocking everything in your storehouse except gold chests and food, and you'll see how much better you play.

I understand why you don't like looking though this topic. It's impossible to read everything here now. This topic was supposed to be updated, but recently has been ignored/needs be be moderated.

Maybe a nice idea would be something like a "starter kit" of a base. Like, you build a storehouse but with it comes 20 wood, 15 stone, and 10 gold or something. Just enough to get you started on making a new camp with a school, woodcutter and quarry etc, far off in the distance. Of course you would need to detract all those resources from the ones you have in your main storehouse. But in single player I always wanted to kinda like set up a second base on the far opposite side of the map, just for fun and for the luxury of having 2 bases it sounds like a nice idea, but I don't know if it can be done, and I don't know if it is high priority enough to put time into it. After all it's not going to be used much in multiplayer and the multiplayer development is still the most important of all

[Ben]

Unless the game gets huge new changes (like mega huge, bigger than FoW even), this won't ever be used in competitive online play, but it would be nice for sandbox scenarios and such I suppose.

It's not a question of whether it can be done, but whether it is worth doing.

[The Dark Lord]

I was just editing and playing TNL 1, and I noticed the AI players are called 'player 1' and 'player 2' in the statistics (screenshot below). That makes sense, but it would be great if I could give them names, to make the statistics fit the storyline.


Oh and one more thing: what about only showing the statistics after the game was won (only for single player of course)? Because if you just leave, you can see exactly how much army the opponent has left... which is extremely valuable information.

[Ben]

^Very good ideas. Especially the AI player names.

[pawel95]

Yes good idea. I also hate it when you just give the big battle of Mission X a next try and you can see, that player brown hasnt that many army left, so you can just rush them first( Tactic advantages).

[Islar]

hi

I just played a map and in the beginning many houses were uninhabited. After a few minutes i get messages. What i now very good in the new update. But when you get many messages you will get a extremly hard sound. That scareds my off a little. . So what i would like when you get a lot of messages that you will get one sound.

[Lewin]

Setting AI names sounds ok, I've added it to the script proposals list.

Good point about using the army graphs to gain an advantage, we'll fix that so graphs are only shown if you quit the mission after victory (so only when "VICTORY!" is shown at the top of the stats). Do you think graphs should also be shown if you lost the mission? On one hand you can't change what you did, but it could give you a tactical advantage when you restart the mission or load one of your saves (knowing how many troops the enemy had)

@Islar: I added that to our proposals list, we'll consider it.

[The Dark Lord]

I'm not sure. People could abuse it by destroying their buildings themselves. However, at the moment people could also just use the cheat to win the mission and look at the statistics anyway.

[Ben]

I'm not sure. People could abuse it by destroying their buildings themselves. However, at the moment people could also just use the cheat to win the mission and look at the statistics anyway.

Good point about cheaters. After some consideration, I think that this is not a unnecessary feature. If someone wants to spoil the mission for themselves, they can do it through other means (like you just said).

Being able to see that stats after losing is important. For example, say someone is having a hard time winning a mission, and they want to see how they are doing with each attempt. After they lose, they may want to see stats to see their "progress" with different attempts and strategies. I don't know about you, but I'm not waiting for the AI to destroy all my buildings before I restart the mission.

Therefore, because of these points I just mentioned, I think that stats should be shown whenever a mission is canceled/finished.