Poll

What do we want to play?

Sandbox
9 (19.6%)
Alien Invasion
9 (19.6%)
Solar Evacuation
5 (10.9%)
...Anything!
3 (6.5%)
Team Faction Control
14 (30.4%)
1-Player per Faction
6 (13%)
...Something Else?
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 24

Author Topic: Multiplayer Planning Poll  (Read 2799 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sublight (OP)

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Captain
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 592
  • Thanked: 17 times
Multiplayer Planning Poll
« on: February 15, 2014, 11:13:49 AM »
Recap
A few weeks ago alex_brunius announced plans to SM a multiplayer multi-faction role-playing mystery game when 6.4 comes out. This generated a lot of interest, even more discussion, and the suggestion that maybe someone should run a second game. The big questions are Who and What.

Who
Panopticon, sublight, sematary, and Ektoras have all expressed some interest in being SM for a new game.

What
Take a look at the top voting options.

Sandbox - A classic open-ended Aurora game featuring multiple player faction. Probably in a small universe.

Alien Invasion - An asymmetrical scenario setup that gives one or more players the responsibility of defending the Solar system from alien invaders controlled either by the SM or an opposing group of players.

Solar Evacuation. - Maybe the sun is cooling by X degrees each year. Maybe the sun is preparing to go super nova. Or maybe you share a homeworld with twitchy NPR supper power(s) and need to leave before nuclear winter. Either way, the objective is to get as much of your population off planet as fast as possible.

...Anything! - A buffer option to separate the game type poll from the control type poll. Feel free to vote here if you don't care too much about either the game type or control method.

Team Faction Control - Chief scientist. Military Admiral. Civilian Governor General. Possibly further subdivision or a Chief Historian. Each faction would get it's own private subforum (or be based out of a different web forum), and each player would have a distinct responsibility of control. In theory this fits more people into a game, reduces player workload, and generates additional diplomacy/communication.

1-Player per Faction - Congratulations. You are expected to do everything. Set industry, set research, design ships, write standard operating procedures, and dispatch task groups on missions. Depending on interest this option might only be possible with multiple SMs running multiple games.

...Something Else? - I'm assuming anyone selecting this will be posting their idea, and volunteering if necessary to be the SM for said idea.

When
After 6.4 comes out, and after alex_brunius gets the RP heavy community game going. We'll be starting one game at a time to make sure we don't fragment the player base into little shards to small to run anything. If you have time you are welcome to sign up for multiple games.

Where
Home base will be on this forum. The SM might pass around the save by email or dropbox, or might keep everything to him/her self and pass out information on a need-to-know basis.

Why
Because multiplayer is fun. And the AI/diplomacy system as of 6.3 was a little sad. Rumor has it this might be improving in 6.4.  ;D

How?
One person volunteers to be System Master. That person then sets up and runs the clock in a multi-faction game, only instead of controlling all sides personally they have each factions follow the orders and directives of other people, the players. In some games each faction is given a password lock and the players upload orders directly. In others they issue general guidance. Since Alex's game appears to be leaning toward general guidance game #2 will probably lean toward direct player control.

I found this LetsPlay/Tutorial hybrid on google. It isn't as good as TheDeadlyShoe's Basic Walkthrough, but it might answer some questions on multi-faction setup.
 

Offline Cripes Amighty

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2014, 12:28:02 PM »
I'd prefer team faction control in a sandbox setting as my votes show.

Team faction control reduces the amount of work required and the sandbox setting allows for more variability. I just think it would be the most fun.
 

Offline Panopticon

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 883
  • Thanked: 37 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2014, 01:12:26 PM »
I'm for that as well, also I'll throw my hat in the ring to be the SM, I need something to do that isn't play World of Warcraft when things are slow here at the store(All the time)
 

Offline Raaaak

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • R
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 4 times
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2014, 09:58:28 AM »
Team factions and alien invasion.

I'd like to participate, but I don't know if I will have the time needed to run an entire faction consistently for a long game.

I also find that most of my games either end due to extremly slow progress once the NPRs start fighting, or boredom and lack of direction if I deactivate enough features to avoid that.  An invasion scenario, or something similar, could fix that and give us a clear ending point to the game.

Though with multiplayer in a small universe that might not be needed.  So not a strong preference on that point.
 

Offline Panopticon

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 883
  • Thanked: 37 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #4 on: February 16, 2014, 01:27:03 PM »
If I was to run a game I was contemplating turning off NPRs altogether, save for spoilers, though I am on the fence about that especially with the new changes, perhaps only one or two and reduce the generation chance.
 

Offline Alfapiomega

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 232
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • My Youtube channel
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #5 on: February 18, 2014, 09:07:38 AM »
I still kind of support one player per nation but I will yield to whatever the majority wants. I would ask though to be able to create teams and not be assigned to someone :)
"Everything is possible until you make a choice. "
 

Offline sublight (OP)

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Captain
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 592
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #6 on: February 18, 2014, 08:52:47 PM »
It looks like game #2 is going to be Team Faction control of some sort. If there are 2-4 factions controlled by teams of 3-9 then the game will need 6 players minimum, with room for 36 max. If the ideal sweat spot is 12 players, then it is plausible a third game with one-player per nation could safely be split off if either no one drops out or more people show up. Maybe, but again let's plan one game at a time.

Who: Panopticon, probably.

What: Team Faction for sure. So far the setup preferences looks divided enough to come down to SM choice.

How
Suggested positions for team of 3
• Suggested positions for team of 9

Fleet Admiral of the Military
• Rear Admiral, Advance Fleet
• Rear Admiral, Home Guard
• Rear Admiral, Frontier Services

Chief Scientist
• Profesor of Theoretical Studies
• Director of Applied Development
• Shipmaster Engineer

Citizen Sector General
• Homeworld Governor
• Commodore of Merchant Marine
• Ambassador of Foreign Relations



Are there any other thoughts on what the minimum or maximum allowed team sizes should be? I'm already guessing 3 minimum,  9 maximum.

Should there be specific player slots outlined ahead of time, or should teams divide duties however they see fit?

Does Panopticon have any further questions to ask perspective players?

Do the potential players have any questions for the proposed SM?
 

Offline Cripes Amighty

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • C
  • Posts: 141
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2014, 10:38:16 PM »
I agree with a minimum around 3. I also think that maybe each team should be allowed to separate their roles as they see fit, although I think sublight's division is a really nice outline (and probably something each team will revert to anyway). I do think, however, that each team should setup a relatively clear chain of command for the SM to refer to in case of someone disappearing. At least establishing a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person so that the game doesn't suffer slowdowns due to lack of orders etc.

For team setup, should we pick teams as alfapiomega suggested or should we randomly assign them? I have no real preference either way, although I think we should try to create a clear list of who is participating.

After that I think we could decide empire setup and other specifics, unless that comes down to the SM.
 

Offline Panopticon

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 883
  • Thanked: 37 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2014, 11:55:21 PM »
One thing I just want to make sure happens is we get standing orders so I have some idea of how your empire will react to various events and so that I can run the empire in the case of people not putting their orders in. Making sure that stuff is done on time will go a long way towards keeping the game moving.
 

Offline Alfapiomega

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 232
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • My Youtube channel
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2014, 07:41:03 AM »
Sublight, can I create team two? I am already onboard definitely... I also have a few friends who I think would join in with me. As we know each other personally I can vouch for them not dropping of if they join :)
"Everything is possible until you make a choice. "
 

Offline Alfapiomega

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 232
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • My Youtube channel
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2014, 02:16:10 AM »
Did I by accident kill the thread?
"Everything is possible until you make a choice. "
 

Offline sublight (OP)

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Captain
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 592
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2014, 05:53:19 AM »
I can't decide if that is a general organizational decision I have a vote on, or of that is a game specific decision that is all Panopticon.

If I get a vote? Then: Yes*

*The following conditions may apply. If your team is significantly larger than the average team size y'all may be asked to donate players. Likewise, if your group is significantly smaller than the average team size y'all may be asked to accept additional team players. Additional terms and or conditions may be imposed by the game SM.
 

Offline Ektoras

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • E
  • Posts: 169
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2014, 06:18:22 AM »
So we wait for 6.4 version to start?
 

Offline Panopticon

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • P
  • Posts: 883
  • Thanked: 37 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2014, 01:20:59 PM »
That seems to be the case, no point in doing full on sign ups until it actually releases. Once it does I'll create a thread in my fiction subforum with the basic rules we hashed out here, and whatever tweaks I think might be fun. Unless someone else really gets a hankering to run the game, in which case I guess we can vote on it.
 

Offline sublight (OP)

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Captain
  • *
  • s
  • Posts: 592
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: Multiplayer Planning Poll
« Reply #14 on: February 25, 2014, 06:54:48 AM »
Waiting for 6.4 was the original plan. However, every new diplomacy feature request/promise suggests 6.4 won't be released any time soon.

I don't think 6.3 is stable enough for multiplayer, so if we got impatient and started now we would probably use 6.21.

In my opinion, the 6 biggest multiplayer-related improvements I think we would loose by starting now are:
  • Ship/commander kill histories.
  • Correct alien class names
  • Shock Damage
  • Fighter Bonus bug fix
  • Interception movement
  • NPR update package