Team change during game
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
Team change during game
I checked the FPI and the first 10 pages of the ideas(well flicked over) and didnt see this so i thought i'd give it a shot, please lock if it already has been suggested.
IDEA: To be able to change your team alignment during game. i.e. if you wish the game to last longer, you could change your team alignment so that you can attack your ex-allied factions.
E.g. Loyalists (me) + drakes on team 1 vs. team 2 and team 3. Team 2 and 3 have pretty much been defeated. The option would alloy me to leave Team 1 and attack the Drakes. Basically leaving the team and forming an individual team of myself.
This may be completely impractical, but i thought i might bring it up just because it struck me whilst playing previous games, that my ally tends to steal my keep whilst im out, and i have about a 3 turn treck to reach his base. Had i been able to attack him, i could have saved the time and got some EXP in the process
Thanks for reading
IDEA: To be able to change your team alignment during game. i.e. if you wish the game to last longer, you could change your team alignment so that you can attack your ex-allied factions.
E.g. Loyalists (me) + drakes on team 1 vs. team 2 and team 3. Team 2 and 3 have pretty much been defeated. The option would alloy me to leave Team 1 and attack the Drakes. Basically leaving the team and forming an individual team of myself.
This may be completely impractical, but i thought i might bring it up just because it struck me whilst playing previous games, that my ally tends to steal my keep whilst im out, and i have about a 3 turn treck to reach his base. Had i been able to attack him, i could have saved the time and got some EXP in the process
Thanks for reading
-
- Posts: 250
- Joined: November 19th, 2007, 7:46 pm
- Location: One among the Fence
The glaring problem with this is that games could devolve into a tag-team-fest. Say you have Red and Blue. Player 1 and 2 on Red, Player 3 and 4 on Blue. Player 3 joins Red, and all three sides pummel it into submission. Then what? They all maneuver until one thinks they're in position to take out the other two. And then they switch. And fight until it's 2 players left. Followed by a duel to the death.
So I suppose maybe it wouldn't be too bad, the only part I don't like is the initial tag-team.
So I suppose maybe it wouldn't be too bad, the only part I don't like is the initial tag-team.
Glory in Blood...Needs Programming Help!
If you have time, check out my ongoing serial story...
The Hidden: Secrets of the Future's Past
If you have time, check out my ongoing serial story...
The Hidden: Secrets of the Future's Past
Well there's always the age of empires approach. Even if you have change your diplomacy so that another team is you ally, that doesnt mean they have changed so that you're theirs. In multiplayer it would be different, because players could agree to change.
If thats a real problem, just eliminate the tag team altogether. If you change team, then you have no team, and its a stand alone map.
If thats a real problem, just eliminate the tag team altogether. If you change team, then you have no team, and its a stand alone map.
already implemented in one of appleide's maps from an earlier 1.3 version, I think...
ahh, here it is: http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... highlight=
ahh, here it is: http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... highlight=
Just play a FFA and agree not to attack the person you're "allied" with.... why do you need a formal alliance?
For I am Turin Turambar - Master of Doom, by doom mastered. On permanent Wesbreak. Will not respond to private messages. Sorry!
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
And I hate stupid people.
The World of Orbivm
- Darker_Dreams
- Posts: 608
- Joined: February 1st, 2008, 5:26 pm
- Aethaeryn
- Translator
- Posts: 1554
- Joined: September 15th, 2007, 10:21 pm
- Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA
I prefer non-formal alliances in FFAs. More likely to have a backstabber, or pile up on the few shared fronts to cause tensions. And no shared victory!
Aethaeryn (User Page)
Wiki Moderator (wiki)
Latin Translator [wiki=Latin Translation](wiki)[/wiki]
Maintainer of Thunderstone Era (wiki) and Aethaeryn's Maps [wiki=Aethaeryn's Maps](wiki)[/wiki]
Wiki Moderator (wiki)
Latin Translator [wiki=Latin Translation](wiki)[/wiki]
Maintainer of Thunderstone Era (wiki) and Aethaeryn's Maps [wiki=Aethaeryn's Maps](wiki)[/wiki]
- krotop
- 2009 Map Contest Winner
- Posts: 433
- Joined: June 8th, 2006, 3:05 pm
- Location: Bordeaux, France
and ZoC, and teamchat.Darker_Dreams wrote:shared view?turin wrote:Just play a FFA and agree not to attack the person you're "allied" with.... why do you need a formal alliance?
Don't trust me, I'm just average player.
***
Game feedback for the Nightmares of Meloen
Art feedback by mystic x the unknown
***
Game feedback for the Nightmares of Meloen
Art feedback by mystic x the unknown
The possible diplomacy engine I've thought about would probably work like this: you can make offers to other players during your turn. They can accept, decline or stall during their turn. So diplomacy wouldn't be instantaneous; if you'd want to ally with one of your enemies, you'd have to send him a request for alliance, and then when his turn arrives he could accept or decline it. Also, taking in a new member into an existing team of more than one side would require everyone in that team to accept the new member, and expelling a member would likewise require everyone but the expelled to agree. You could attach at least one condition to a proposal, for example you could ask for an alliance and if the enemy accepts, they'd also get one of your units. Or you could offer a unit of yours to an ally on the condition that he pays you x gold for it.
Of course you also couldn't make conflicting proposals, like asking for an alliance with several enemy teams at the same time.
It might be good if the proposals were public (visible to everyone, not just the parties involved), so the other players see if someone is for instance just spamming everyone they can with similar proposals. Maybe you could make a proposal secret by paying a bit for it.
Of course you also couldn't make conflicting proposals, like asking for an alliance with several enemy teams at the same time.
It might be good if the proposals were public (visible to everyone, not just the parties involved), so the other players see if someone is for instance just spamming everyone they can with similar proposals. Maybe you could make a proposal secret by paying a bit for it.
A question about that one, to offer an unit... it should haven't moved/attacked? because imagine this case.zookeeper wrote:... Or you could offer a unit of yours to an ally on the condition that he pays you x gold for it...
Opponent has dark adept, you have a melee unit.
Melee unit doesn't managed to kill the DA, you offer your unit to your "friend" after the attack is done, so he has a second chance to off the dark adept before you lost the unit to its damage.
"Mysteries are revealed in the light of reason."