Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[sado1]

Why not quit and rehost from a save instead?

Its is second option ?

I don't think we really need 2 options for this.

[Lewin]

I don't think we really need 2 options for this.

For what? Please be more specific or quote the conversation you are referring to.

[pawel95]

Ok Lewin, you are right that Wilderness 8P (8P) looks stupid

About Remake 2012 and Sado: They have discussed that we don´t need a pause,because we can rehost/load a saved game. however this isn´t doable with 8 players i think. one player won´t read the message in game for example and won´t join
So this pause thingi isn´t bad, but if the Remake team implement this feature, it would be nice with something líke a "voting" so when 4/8 players accept the pause at this moment,the pause will activated or sth. (like "kick plaers" in some egoshooters)

Back to the nice statistic screens. We had this little discussion in this forum,i think, but Lewin/Krom do you wanna add this extra field under "armies" that you will see,which number of armytypes someone has made? So with little pictures of milita and co. Because its actally nice,but when you see player X has made 150 soldiers,you don´t know if he made only 150 milita or 100 bowmen and 50 knights (without looking the replay)

[Lewin]

I think pause is a useful feature, I often use it when playing strategy games with my friends if we want to go eat or something and come back to it later. Rehosting takes too much time. I think "vote pausing" is overkill, I think just allowing the host to pause is enough. If someone needs to go they can ask the host to pause the game for them. That's how it works in most strategy games that I've played. I also don't think we need vote kicking, we can just let the host kick like it is now.

The army graphs will become huge and complicated if we show individual units. Too much detail and complexity is not a good thing. I don't think it matters that much if the player who made militia has a slightly higher graph.

[Thomas]

@Jeronimo: Could you make a sketch of that and a way of seeing overall productions? )

Gladly... I made this today, to show you what I think is best for Economics section.
You have listed all game resources at left column (I think 28 wares, same as marketplace), and in right column the names of players, so you tick 1 type or resource and then you compare its production among the players at the same time.
In case that player didn't produce that selected resource, his line won't be seen or will be 0, horizontal line at bottom of table.

That sounds ok, basically your idea is to swap the "Players" and "Resources" selector so there is only ever 1 resource type on the graph at once. Mostly I guess it's more interesting to see "who made the most wood" rather than "how many wood did I make compared to how many stones I made". Can anybody think of a use for the way the graph is now? (1 resource per line, only 1 player shown at once) Is there any reason we shouldn't change it to be like Jeronimo suggested?

I think Jeronimo is right. The way it is now isn't very interesting. Indeed it would be more useful when "Players" and "Resources" would be swapped.

[Kruciprdel]

I think pause is a useful feature, I often use it when playing strategy games with my friends if we want to go eat or something and come back to it later. Rehosting takes too much time. I think "vote pausing" is overkill, I think just allowing the host to pause is enough. If someone needs to go they can ask the host to pause the game for them. That's how it works in most strategy games that I've played. I also don't think we need vote kicking, we can just let the host kick like it is now.

The army graphs will become huge and complicated if we show individual units. Too much detail and complexity is not a good thing. I don't think it matters that much if the player who made militia has a slightly higher graph.

I think it will be a problem in no-name games. Host says break for lunch and leave without the consent of others. If the players are "friends" will have no difficulty agreeing "confirmation pause"

host suggests -> other active players confirm

----------------------------------
new idea:
I think it might be useful to have possibility to create a new save during looking at a replay, because sometimes there isnt suited save.
then I'll be able to build my (or foreign) village otherwise from any moment. (or new fight)
It could expand KaM fun. What do you think?

[ChrisEggII]

I have a little idea, "active pause" in multiplayer

Pause for multiplayer is already planned. The host may always pause, and clients may pause if the host selected "Clients may pause" in the lobby settings. (the "clients may pause" thing isn't that important and might not be implemented)

I see only one little problem: This will be able to be new way to troll other players.

[pawel95]

I have a little idea, "active pause" in multiplayer

Pause for multiplayer is already planned. The host may always pause, and clients may pause if the host selected "Clients may pause" in the lobby settings. (the "clients may pause" thing isn't that important and might not be implemented)

I see only one little problem: This will be able to be new way to troll other players.

Well thats the thing, why i have said the there should be a voting, when 5 of 7 players accept the pause,it shouldnt be a trolling thingi.


@Lewin: no i dont wanna add sth more to the military graph, only adding maybe somewhere little button,that shows a empty screen,only with these pictures of armytypes,and the number of it from selected player

I mean sth like this style but for KaM,if you dont know what i still mean,i can post a photoshopped picture maybe sometimes:

[`Maurice]

I don't know if this has been discussed yet but as far as i know it hasn't.

In the armour workshop you can make wooden shields and leather armour.
A wooden shield costs 1 plank and a leather armour 1 piece of leather.

I don't have a problem with the building itself, but sometimes i decide i don't want to make any wooden shields, but the building will still recieve planks.
Just close change the distribution of wares so it wont get any planks you say?
Well, that might be an option but what if i have 4 armour workshops and i only want 1 of them to make wooden shields.
This results in 3 workshops getting planks which will not be used, and could've been used for building or at the weaponmaker.

My suggestion is that you can block planks from being delivered to a specific workshop, but still be able to send them to another one.
I know this is not a "major" issue, and i don't even know if more people would want this to change. I don't even know if it would be hard to implement, but i guess bringing it up for discussion won't cause any harm.

Tldr: implement a feature where you can block planks from being delivered to 1 armour workshop, but are able to receive them in your other armour workshops.

So, what do you guys think?

[Nissarin]

This might be useful but it's too much micro in my opinion, I usually set it to 1 - there is no need to use higher value, since there is plenty of time to restock and "losing" 1 plank per building is not a big deal.

[Romek]

I just read some post about increase rest time for buldings making iron stuff to make iron production slower. In my opinion its not good idea beacause in most of maps we have 3 iron mines so maximum what we can get from this 3 mines is 2 x armor smithy and 2 x weapon smithy. Iron productions is not so fast as some players thinks.
In most of games you will have only one big iron army ----> after PT. Decent iron production starts in 30 - 40 min(if you go for rush then its 25-30min). Good leather production needs time so we cant make it so fast like iron. So what we have in 60 PT is :

IRON ------->One big iron army after PT and then slow production in late game,
LEATHER ------------>at least 20 soldiers after PT and then huge spam in whole game.

After PT leather production is much more faster and not limited compared to iron.

[Jeronimo]

Romek, your game theory is correct, however...

IRON ------->One big iron army after PT and then slow production in late game,
LEATHER ------------>at least 20 soldiers after PT and then huge spam in whole game.
After PT leather production is much more faster and not limited compared to iron.

There is no late game. All replays show it due the high impact of iron spam in early rush.

Little slower iron production makes iron to be produced along leather... but what would you focus first?
Fast iron chain or fast leather chain? IMO it will depend on the map... by now all choose fast iron chain.

Iron units will still cause impact, but won't be game decisive factor as mass swordmen have shown.
Iron production will last longer in match since mountain will be depleted slower (IMO a nice consequence).

In my opinion, foreseeing what could happen, lancers will be trained again... consider you will spam knights, so I go for [lances + xbows] instead of [pikemen + xbows].

I'm not seeing the [only iron + militia] obsolete at all... but if you try it again, you might have at 60 PT less swordmen for sure, so game isn't broken. Nowadays you train 30 swords + militia, and you blast anyone (even more if your ally did same tactic).

-------------------------------------
This solution brings less complications than adding new unit, new structure, etc.

I'd rather test some games with increased time debuff, rather than keep talking and talking about theory and predictions.
Is it possible to have a testing *.exe soon, or this might be tested in next patch (along with all new features)?

[Da Revolution]

I'm against making the iron chain slower, this won't solve a thing. This change would cause less xbows and swordfighters, less swordfighters might be nice sometimes, but less xbows can have really "nice" side effects. Why do you think people make 40 xbows? Its not really because they are overpowered in my opinion, but you just need a lot to outshoot shielded units. Yes axefighters are a big threat for them. This change would only cause a shift in the dominant strategies, people will say for example lets skip iron, mass archers will outshoot everything (60-80 archers is possible). What will you do when this happens? Make the leather production chain longer as well? This will be an endless problem as well.

As I said yesterday Jeronimo "I really advise you joining a game". Replays do show you stuff thats true, you'll see dominant strategies, but most good balanced replays aren't uploaded. Demanding a change isn't really justified by just watching and using theories. Experiencing it says a lot as well. For example if you watch soccer, you'll see everything from a whole other perspective than the players do. You don't know what they think.

[Jeronimo]

I'm against making the iron chain slower, this won't solve a thing. This change would cause less xbows and swordfighters, less swordfighters might be nice sometimes, but less xbows can have really "nice" side effects. Why do you think people make 40 xbows? Its not really because they are overpowered in my opinion, but you just need a lot to outshoot shielded units. Yes axefighters are a big threat for them. This change would only cause a shift in the dominant strategies, people will say for example lets skip iron, mass archers will outshoot everything (60-80 archers is possible). What will you do when this happens? Make the leather production chain longer as well? This will be an endless problem as well.

How many less iron units you think this will cause? (in a duration of 25 minutes).
Is not like "if we change this it will remain forever", that's the reason why I'm suggesting to have a testing version of this to play a few games and see the real impact, with no more drama or catastrophic predictions.

Skipping Iron is what Dicsoupcan has been doing lately, and he expressed well his conclusions.
In this moment, that's impossible for 1v1. I look for the balance where that option is acceptable, not yet dominant.

PD: I know you have recently talked with Romek about this in TS, so this answer is for him too.
---------------------------------------

And since you insist... I will play 1 game with TS people in some day soon.
But noone will like my secret strategy.

[Da Revolution]

Jeronimo we're really close to the balance at the moment. It has some flaws, making the iron chain slower will need complete new balance testings again. Iron rushers often have 35 minutes for their iron army. I'm quite sure it will make quite a difference.

Using Dicsoupcan as an example here isn't the best I think. Yes leather only won't work 1v1, so what? My tactic doesn't work 1v1 either. Not everything can work 1v1, thats just the reality. You know that dicso did say he would like a new unit as well.

I wrote the post before talking to romek. Anyway would be nice seeing you in game again sometime.