Home » MODDING HQ 1.13 » v1.13 Multiplayer Development & Bug Reports » Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal
| Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #242936]
|
Sun, 31 January 2010 13:42 
|
|
 Incoming |
|
Messages:3
Registered:February 2009 |
|
|
Imagine playing Jagged Alliance 2 Multiplayer against your friend.
As if you were playing the original, the twist is:
Against _each other_ taking over sectors, towns, mines, getting gold from the mines you have. Him getting gold from the couple of mines he has. Ja2 Multiplayer - All out war
If you have played Jagged Alliance Deadly Games, you know some about what I'm aiming towards. If you don't you can just use your imagination of what playing Ja2 against a friend and what kind of game that would be. Some inspiration can also be taken from both Jagged Alliance 1 and 2.
There is no queen, but you are each high up commanders that both want control over a country very similar to Arulco. Hiring mercenaries. We can use the original map, re-model the sectors just a bit and balance it some (so that the number of mines are reachable just as easy, and at an even number). At first getting higher up equipment is not possible, so that it is very balanced in how much firepower each commander
[Updated on: Mon, 01 February 2010 20:21] by Moderator Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #242957]
|
Sun, 31 January 2010 22:15 
|
|
|
|
I think that custom bases and the option to buy militia like buying guns from bobby rays would be cool.
It would be like one player defends and the next infiltrates (with or without militia)
Also, if the big maps project gets finished......Two bases on one map, complete with booby traps, mines, and defending miltia. This would mean that selection of mercenaries would be essential to survival rather than just whomever has the biggest gun wins.
Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #243003]
|
Mon, 01 February 2010 16:47
|
|
| the scorpion |
 |
Messages:1834
Registered:September 2004
Location: CH |
|
|
@Incoming
Right now i don't really see how this is supposed to work. I'm poorly informed about DG, but wasn't DG mission-based sort of?
Ja2 however is very sandboxy, and therefore, tons of stuff would be different for each client so tons of stuff would either have to be synced through a central server or unsynced so each client can still play independantly of what the other client does. In a different thread where someone else shared your dream of MP-campaigns, i made the example of time-compression. Imagine how i spend half an hour searching through crates on a map or maybe half an hour micromanaging my squad. This is a lot of real-life time where almost no game time elapses. What if you, in your campaign, would want to fast forward in the 60 minutes mode? So i guess synchronizing the strategic screen in terms of time can't really be done without making the game unbearable. Now unsynching it on the other hand wuld mean that one player could have been in the game for already 3 weeks gametime, captured some mines and used the income to hire top mercenaries, while the other player migth have elapsed only 3 days of gametime (because he was micromanaging and fighting and looting crates all the time)
Furthermore, if we require both clients to be connected whilst this happens, and if we consider how long in ream life time a ja2 campaign migth take, then it becomes apparent that you would have to be able to spend a lot of time parallely online playing that ja2 MP campaign. So i see many logics issues for which i hope the devs can come up with good solutions at some point. Maybe the level of snychronity would have to be minimized.
Say only one, shared savegame on a server somewhere that saves both players advancements and synchronity if mercs of both clients are in the same tactical map at the same time... Now time, as discussed above, could be very tricky to model in meaningful ways :-/
For the time being i suggest you create scenarios. for example you and your friend play each a ja2 campaign and then communicate each other what you do. Once you meet in a sector, you launch an MP game, hire the mercs and buy the equipment you have in your SP game and slug it out in MP. Back in SP you dismiss the mercs killed in MP and retreat from the sector if you lost in MP or whatever.
sure that works better in a Cooperative sense than in a DM sense, but not impossible and not much extra effort, as opposed to coordinating with another player to simulatnously play ja2 for hours and days.
So what would be needed are solutions to the logics problems. And then solving the code problems that follow from that. Probably a long way, but then who am i to judge that? some years ago i woulnd't have thought ja2 MP could be a reality at all.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant Major
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #243016]
|
Mon, 01 February 2010 20:26
|
|
| redgun |
 |
Messages:190
Registered:March 2007
Location: Austria |
|
|
The main problem with JA2 is its AI. Even if the AI performance is increased 200%, the AI will still be no tactical challenge for an experienced player. Especially militia seems to be extremely stupid, so I don't see why you would want to include them?
IMHO, the main change (and chance) in JA2MP is PvP gameplay. PvP can give you fights and duells that are interesting, creative and exciting. Playing vs AI can't give you that at all.
And, tbh, I really don't see the point of adding things like booby traps mines and other such micro-management things into MP game play. I just don't see how fighting your way through a sector to be blown to pieces by some stupid trap could be fun. This is multiplayer: While you might enjoy watching the other player's merc's dieing in some very stupid way, for them it will just be frustrating. If people get frustrated the will stop playing....
Report message to a moderator
|
Staff Sergeant
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #243022]
|
Mon, 01 February 2010 21:14
|
|
| the scorpion |
|
Messages:1834
Registered:September 2004
Location: CH |
|
|
redgun...tactical challenge for an experienced player...
If people get frustrated the will stop playing....
This is difficult to pull off. On the one hand, our squads shouldn't be wasted by an invisible MG42-gunner in the first few turns of the game, on the other hand, the ai's shouldn't be just sitting ducks or kettle going to the slaughterhouse. To make the challenge/ frustration ratio correct for all possible scenarios is impossible, even if you make an AI that cheats, scales, exploits.
and it's not just about the AI. The entire complex of balancing, map design and AI interdepends. You turn one screw at one end and the overall outcome may be very unexpected. At least that's the feeling i have from past 1.13 AI changes. In some sense, the made them smarter, in another context, they became dumber.
Report message to a moderator
|
Sergeant Major
|
|
|
|
| Re: Ja2-MP What we want to do - The Goal[message #243040]
|
Tue, 02 February 2010 15:50
|
|
| Incoming |
|
Messages:3
Registered:February 2009 |
|
|
The AI of JA2 Unfinished Business is pretty good, I remembered they were at a good level even after playing through JA2.
The AI are not as big of a question as you make them now, both players are limited to a number of mercenaries. The level of fighting they can do is not endless.
MG42, I was thinking making the weapons level pretty low and balanced.
"some years ago i woulnd't have thought ja2 MP could be a reality at all".
This thing is way easier then that speedbump, and there is a lot more fun to be had with it.
Report message to a moderator
|
Civilian
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 18 05:15:58 GMT+3 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01220 seconds
|
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
