You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Medieval 2 Multiplayer Discussion and Hotseat Forum
Moderated by SwampRat

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.38 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Medieval 2 Multiplayer Discussion and Hotseat Forum » Potential interforum hotseat
Bottom
Topic Subject:Potential interforum hotseat
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
SwampRat
M2TW Ladder Leader
posted 07 March 2013 16:05 EDT (US)         
There has been a suggestion that a joint hotseat could be run with the chaps from total war.org

Rather than try and do anything crazy like organise it, I thought I'd throw a list of questions and suggestions out and see what thoughts you have and whether you're interested.


Teams/players



The options I can think of are:
- Lots of factions in a free for all
- Lots of factions in teams them Vs us
- Lots of factions in free for all, but us as one religion them as another (semi-teams)
- Two or four factions, each played by a team (swap game hotseat?)
- Something else


I'd say that the first three options all risk having too many players to run smoothly for a full game - although with admin mode that's not a huge problem as people can be skipped, replaced, kicked etc.

Having a free-for-all would be less fun, in my view, than some sort of competitive game, but having two formal teams would hamper diplomacy and lessen intrigue. There'd be more flexibility with a religious approach since you could go against those in your own religion.

I think a swap game would be best though, a simple game with only a couple of teams but a full level of discussion and cooperation within each site - plus it could zip along nice and quickly.
Small games with two players lack something - you know who the main opponent is. But can two distinct swap game teams operate nicely off each site?


Rules



There's quite an impressive set up on the org with hotseats, a nice guide (including discussion of the autoresolve system) and a 'standard' set of rules.

I think they're excellent rules - if you're a paranoid numpty with no sense of fun. No offence anyone from the org after all we want to play a game with you not make you cry.

To be fair, some are quite clever but others just seem to suck the fun / skill out things.

The guide and rules are shown in full glory here:
http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?138876-The-comprehensive-guide-to-hotseat-play

Main points I have issues with are:
- No destruction of buildings
- No opening gates with spies
- No calling or joining jihads and crusades


Interestingly I didn't see a matching of 'no building destruction' with 'no extermination' as I'd find that the two go fairly hand in hand with area denial.

The argument against them is, I think, mainly that you create central deadzones of no-mans land. It could be that I haven't seen the worst of it, but in HotseatA we did have a couple of areas that really suffered with destruction - but it wasn't hugely widespread and served a tactical purpose. The Balkans got spanked with the back and forth war, I raided Egypt (yay Sicily) with the intention of hurting the Turks rather than expecting to hold it. I think it's part of the game.
The players should be well aware that if they destroy buildings they're hurting their future potential.

The spies issue is in their rules because it's easy (but hard to detect) cheating by reloading etc to get spies inside gates and it's quite hard to defend robustly against spies. They also reduce the need for siege weapons. More than that, I think it also makes it a lot harder on the defender than the standard autoresolved siege battle. Those are reasonably fair points, but is it reasonable to have to pull spies out of a settlement before attacking? This isn't a crazily bad rule (unlike the other two) but it does seem a bit of a limitation.

No crusades? Pah.

The most interesting rule is one barring a defeated army from moving - to even the situation up. An fair idea but hard to keep track of perhaps.

There are also the usual questions like 'which mod?'

[This message has been edited by SwampRat (edited 05-01-2013 @ 02:42 PM).]

AuthorReplies:
Myth_ORG
Legionary
posted 30 April 2013 13:51 EDT (US)     26 / 38       
What? I always thought that with all the free stacks they get and the great generals they have, and the overall large amount of MP available in SS, they could point one finger and say "this faction gon' die", and that's pretty much it. Mass trebs, absurd HAs, decent enough infantry and so on - that's more than what anyone can muster.

I think they get around 10, probably 13 stacks. How can you contest that without time to eat AI lands (unless you're on the other side of the map). I think the Mongols can come knocking on Eastern Europe's door within 10 turns. Even with RR off, how many stacks can one realistically raise until then?

Also, the other factions will go just as bankrupt as the Mongols if they try to match them. I seriously don't see anyone 1v1-ing the Golden Horde.

The only possible issue would be if they don't have gold for forts in a lead battles game. That would suck a lot (happened to me when i was the K-Shah vs Monkey who was the Mongols but in Early where they can Horde)
Nightbringer_ORG
Legionary
posted 30 April 2013 19:12 EDT (US)     27 / 38       
I vote for late era simply due to unit diversity, and less need for grabbing rebel settlements at the start. I feel it just gets the real game going quicker on late era. I am ok with early though.
Awesome Eagle
Spear of Mars
(id: awesomated88)
posted 30 April 2013 19:25 EDT (US)     28 / 38       
I would enjoy maybe playing the hoseat but it unlikely. Does anyone know if the Steam Version of M2TW can be modded for SS, and if hotseats are available through it. I am trying anything in order to be able to play M2TW right and maybe have a Hotseat or 2.. My current version of Kindgoms is screwed and will not install, even after a full reinstall of M2TW- Frustrating! So i might have to go the way of Steam...

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it- George Santayana
History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are- David C. McCullough
Wars not make one great- Yoda
EnemyofJupitor
HG Alumnus Superbus
posted 01 May 2013 02:36 EDT (US)     29 / 38       
Huh, strange. What error comes up? Also it is possible to install on steam- I'll walk you through it if we can't get the original working.

I vote... Late. Lack of rebels mean we can start plotting from the beginning about all the lovely back stabs and expansion plans and stuff. Sorry

And I shall go Softly into the Night Taking my Dreams As will You
Awesome Eagle
Spear of Mars
(id: awesomated88)
posted 01 May 2013 06:58 EDT (US)     30 / 38       
That would be great EOJ. Hopefully i will be able to purchase it on Saturday or so.
Hopefully this means i can come back to the realm of Hotseats.

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it- George Santayana
History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are- David C. McCullough
Wars not make one great- Yoda
LooseCannon1
Legionary
posted 01 May 2013 07:22 EDT (US)     31 / 38       
@Awesome eagle Here is a link for making Steam work with SS. It's for 6.3 but I think 6.4 works the same way.http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?377824-Stainless-Steel-6-3-Released&p=7808159&viewfull=1#post7808159] This should lead to post #245 of the 6.3 release thread if I did it right. Still not used to how this forum software works but at least it doesn't crash everyday like vBulletin does at twcenter.

@Myth Re:Golden horde it's all about the money. With The GH not a Horde faction in late era you're broke by turn 8. You're losing 20,000 a turn to start, 40,000 after the 5th turn scripted units arrive. No money, no troops to recruit and every unit you lose then brings you closer to elimination. In M/P a broke faction is a soon to be dead faction. That Horde ability is what kept Phonics alive in WOTK2. I was broke just like you esp. after I got backstabbed by Zim.

[This message has been edited by SwampRat (edited 05-01-2013 @ 01:50 PM).]

Myth_ORG
Legionary
posted 01 May 2013 13:31 EDT (US)     32 / 38       
I vote Late era. BTW, there shouldn't be any backstabs as this is an ORG vs TWH team game.

LC: yes, not having the option to fort block gets one killed. If it was forced AR though maybe things would be different.

Oh, before we start picking factions, one last thing:

Crusades and Jihads: yay or nay?

I vote nay for reasons stated above but if all 3 TWH players want them, then I'd be happy to use them as well.

[This message has been edited by Myth_ORG (edited 05-01-2013 @ 01:34 PM).]

SwampRat
M2TW Ladder Leader
posted 01 May 2013 14:42 EDT (US)     33 / 38       
Loosecannon, I corrected the link, hope that's ok. In general you can just type links and they'll automatically convert I think. Your tags [url=blah][/url] would have worked if you'd put any text between them, like this

Back on topic, given the fixed teams thing as well it's probably best to not have players joining crusades/jihads - no real chance of avoiding them via diplomacy etc. If it's a three player thing then I'll be happy to sit back and watch EoJ, Kilij and AE do their thing.

We haven't done team games before here, how close is collaboration between team members meant to be? I would assume there's meant to be some separation between the factions (compared to potentially having a team of three people jointly playing three factions, which gets a bit like a swap game) but I couldn't think of anything that wouldn't be allowed - so that leads me to think 'as close as you like'

Going back to the crusades/jihads thing, would it be stupid to have each team having one member of each religion and then just ban calling a crusade/jihad? It sounds stupid now I've written it.
LooseCannon1
Legionary
posted 02 May 2013 06:50 EDT (US)     34 / 38       
Nooooo!!!! You Rickrolled me! Fixing the message was fine. I worry more about sending someone to the page instead of the actual post I intended to send him to. I hate reading through 20 posts trying to figure out what the sender wanted me to read.

Different teams co-operate differently. (Huh?) Two examples-invicta and me in Age of Creed 2 where we were like 2 cats playing with 10 wounded mice. We messaged(ingame and thru PMs) continually while the other 5 teams never worked together. And then there's Wrath of the Khan 2 where Myth set up a private group on the forum and we discussed plans in public. We didn't know a few of our members would betray us. So basically, it's however you wish to collaborate with your teammates. No restrictions.
Awesome Eagle
Spear of Mars
(id: awesomated88)
posted 02 May 2013 07:05 EDT (US)     35 / 38       
If it's a three player thing then I'll be happy to sit back and watch EoJ, Kilij and AE do their thing.
Nah mate, i am good. You can play, my M2TW skills are not up to par to be a starter here due to a lapse in playing the game because of Kindgoms! I will however(if i can get it to work) be a TWH team sub if needed...

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it- George Santayana
History is a guide to navigation in perilous times. History is who we are and why we are the way we are- David C. McCullough
Wars not make one great- Yoda
EnemyofJupitor
HG Alumnus Superbus
posted 02 May 2013 08:01 EDT (US)     36 / 38       
It's good to have a sub on hand.

We like back stabbing over here, this is where the discussion of teams come from it's basically the whole reason why we play!

And I shall go Softly into the Night Taking my Dreams As will You
Myth_ORG
Legionary
posted 16 May 2013 04:02 EDT (US)     37 / 38       
I was away on business trips recently. By the way, it seems that Mithridate, one of our own, will like to join as well. He's back around the 20th, so this can be a 4v4.

I suggest you all install Stainless Steel 6.4 now and get used to it. Faction choice and crusades/jihads need to be taken care of now so we can start.
Myth_ORG
Legionary
posted 03 July 2013 02:18 EDT (US)     38 / 38       
Hey guys, any news on this?
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames