Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Suggestion for multiplayer campaigns, especially head to had

RedPhoenix596RedPhoenix596 Posts: 26Registered Users
Would it be possible to have the feature from Warhammer, that the other player can choose to play the battle, even if the player whos turn it is has chosen autoresolve? Now this is a bit of an issue in multiplayer games since the other player cannot see how the battle is before the first one chooses.

Would be really great if this feature from Warhammer could find its way to thrones.

Comments

  • The_baronThe_baron Posts: 347Registered Users
    Hey Phoenix :)

    Seems like they changed the MPC to what I told you should be :smiley:
    In head to head you shouldn't get unlimited armies as you are playing only 1 faction - the option should be available only when the other player decided to go into battle and therefore allow the other player to participate in the experience.

    However while this should be the default I do think an option to change it for players which want to host games were both players want unlimited armies to control other.
  • RedPhoenix596RedPhoenix596 Posts: 26Registered Users
    In a competitive head to head game, it is a problem since autoresolve in many cases gives a lot better battle results than fighting it against a competent commander.

    I thought the default battle resolution setting should have defined this already, but even if you pick play battle as default, it doesnt allow for the other player an option to select it.

    I'd understand your point for default battleresolution autoresolve, the baron :)
  • The_baronThe_baron Posts: 347Registered Users
    Think about it this way - you are playing one faction and only one - you create your armies and command them, this is the main level of competitiveness you have versus the other player anything you get beyond that is a bonus. In no other competitive strategy game you get to control AI like in TW MPC.

    The reason CA added that option is that Battles can, and often do, take large portions of time which in multiplayer is less of a luxury but they still are a large part of the game. So there is a fair trade off in place to deal with it- the player who 'asks for extra time for his turn' in return gives his enemy the option to command an army that his enemy never fielded.


    The basic default options they added in the MPC host menu were broken ... only auto or only battles. Default settings should be what you experience - just what I said you control only 1 faction and your ability to take command is only given when the enemy is demanded for 'extra' by taking the battle **BUT** I believe they should allow for players like you to add option to chose at the lobby host to define that both players can decided whether to take battle or not.

    P.s. as I said to you I had plenty of experiences which 'hijacking' control led to frustrations - that is probably why they changed it in ToB. Try to think you about it this way : you play the campaign and go to pick a fight which manually you know for certain you would win and you chose to fight it - then your opponent 'hijacks' control and picks auto-resolve which kills your army ... wouldn't you be **** ? same feeling goes for people who picked the auto-resolve and the other player 'hijacks' control and forces them to fight.

    I didn't tell you but my first head to head was with a good friend of mine and I used to do it ... we stopped playing for a long time after wards cause he was mad about it and it took me time but I understand him now. My control was and should have been restraint to the level of control of my empire during his turn.
  • RamsesXXVIIIRamsesXXVIII Junior Member Posts: 28Registered Users
    Right now it doesn’t make any sense. There are four scenarios:

    If the default battle resolution is auto resolve;

    Player 1 attacks an AI force.

    1)Chooses auto resolve - player two sees the battle but can’t change the outcome (since default is auto resolve, whenever the players disagree the default is used).

    2) Chooses play battle - player 2 sees the battle but can decide against player 1’s decision.

    If the default is play battle:
    Player 1 attacks an AI force.

    3) Chooses auto resolve, player two DOESN’T see the battle at all and the battle is auto resolved (Player 2 should be able to 1) see the battle and 2) decide against player 1’s wishes, since they both agreed the default is play battle).

    4) Chooses play battle, player 2 sees the battle but can’t change the outcome (as it should be).

    Scenario 2 and 4 are fine, but 1 and 3 are wrong. 1 is mainly just a nuisance (why give player two a pop-up if he can’t change the outcome), but 3 is completely horrible (If player 2 wants to play the battle and the default is play battle the battle should be fought).
  • RedPhoenix596RedPhoenix596 Posts: 26Registered Users
    Yes exactly, atleast one of the options ingame should default it to playing a battle, so it would be up to the players wether they want one player to be able to for autoresolve or not.
Sign In or Register to comment.