Joining games post-launch

Cheesecan · Post by **Cheesecan** » 16 Mar 2005, 20:28

Don't know if maybe this has already been suggested but..
I just thought of a nice feature(those of you who have played GC2 have seen its sweetness), how about allowing players to join a Spring game after is has already started? ie someone drops in 5 minutes into the game and is assigned a fixed spot on the map to start playing from just like everyone else.

With the size of the maps, I don't think it would be a problem and the host could specify options(time interval, say first 20 minutes then locked), prohibiting players who've lost from joining again) and even disable it completely. As many players as supported by the map would be able to hop in post-launch.

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 16 Mar 2005, 21:06

Cheesecan wrote:... how about allowing players to join a Spring game after is has already started? ie someone drops in 5 minutes into the game ...

I don't really suport that idea...

When a player was arriving even only 5 min late, it would get smashed. Optionally, the other players would restrain out of pitty. Either way, not good.

But you made me think...
How about a player joining an on-going game but only joining into cooperative mode with another player?

That way, a player that arrives late to a game can still play, sharing control of one army, and mostly when it's needed.
After all, at the begining there is not that much need for two players on one side.

Also, consider a 2x2 game. When one of the players looses, the game is almost over, right? And the other gets to get bored waiting...

This way, the player that would loose could still join it's team mate and bring a new balance to the game while keeping the looser entertained playing.

I don't supose that is too hard to code and it could bring new shine into clan battles.

AF · Post by AF » 16 Mar 2005, 21:15

Actually I pm'ed Jouninkomiko and SJ about this and SJ said that joining games post start wouldnt be possible because of the way the network protocol works

Cheesecan · Post by **Cheesecan** » 16 Mar 2005, 21:20

I've played games where i've been AFK the first 5 minutes, and then come back and still won the game. Differences in skill and also luck will have more impact on it I believe, either way it is up to the one joining. Especially with the Spring maps being larger than TAs, a player dropping in won't be at as large a risk of getting crushed directly by others.

Cooperative mode is also a nice idea, although pretty different, you'd of course want the first player to accept that the new-comer take control of his army as well. You could also make it like in AOE2 where two players can select the same color already in the gameroom to cooperate from the get-go too.

I think both of these ideas are sound, and since you would have the option of disabling them(or having them disabled for default) I don't see why they shouldn't be considered to be implemented.

Michilus_nimbus · Post by **Michilus_nimbus** » 16 Mar 2005, 21:40

With the terrain deformation, wouldn't the joining player have to download the whole map again?

AF · Post by AF » 16 Mar 2005, 22:06

and all the changed features

As I said before, I would ahve started a thread like this btu I PM'ed Jouninkomiko about it and I was told to ask SJ who said it wouldnt work because of the network protocol, so if you want this be prepared for a long wait sicne the protocol would have to be reworked for it meaning major engine changes

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 16 Mar 2005, 22:57

Alantai Firestar wrote:... SJ said that joining games post start wouldnt be possible because of the way the network protocol works

Well, at least players that are already playing the game could continue in the coop mode. That is, in a 2x2 fight, a player loosing would have the possibility to join it's team mate.

And, i think PMing the admins is not a very good conduct. I can imagine everyone bugging the admins with loads of PMs...

Humm, now that i think of it, maybe that's why you eventually ended up as a Rabid Poster!?

Cheesecan wrote:I've played games where i've been AFK the first 5 minutes, and then ...

Anything can happen in TA but it's not a very good way to go...

Cheesecan wrote:... you'd of course want the first player to accept that the new-comer take control of his army as well ...

Ofcourse.

AF · Post by AF » 16 Mar 2005, 23:12

I did nto get ym title that way, I wasnt particularly happy wiht it and I dotn usually pm the admins unless I ahvea question I know only they can answer or I want to start a thread which might be just a waste if it's technically impossible due to engine implementation so I ask one of them ebfore continuing but that rarely happens though I hope you're not insinuating that me and the admins have some sort of special preferential treatment relation going on, after all I do seem to be sensing a lot of subtle hostility towards me from you not to mention the odd time where its as plain as day

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 16 Mar 2005, 23:35

Well, Im PM'ing an admin... heheehehe. And he dosn't think its bad conduct. Of course the rabid posting is realy due to his, well, rabid posting. Hes on 204 and im only on 142! And im the nearest person buy almost 20! Hes insane! but i like him for it, and it gives me a target to aim for...

aGorm

AF · Post by AF » 16 Mar 2005, 23:38

aaaww somebody likes me, and here was me thinking you'd all voted to sell me for peanuts on ebay.

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 17 Mar 2005, 00:31

Alantai Firestar wrote:... I dotn usually pm the admins unless ...

That's good. I have no idea how you behave with the PMs and considering the amount of posts you post in the forums, if your behavior was similar that would have to be at least anoying.

Alantai Firestar wrote:... I hope you're not insinuating that me and the admins have some sort of special preferential treatment relation going on ...

Now that's a silly thought.
I was thinking exactly the otherwise. I was under the impression that the admins feel anoyed by you.
That's why i sometimes insisted on you (and sometimes aGorm) to write more carefully and post less times per day.

Alantai Firestar wrote:... I do seem to be sensing a lot of subtle hostility towards me from you ...

That's another silly thought. You are wrong.
I can't remember you ever beeing harsh to other users and that is to me one of the worst things to do on these forums.
I mean you no harm and always strived to advice you in non-aggressive ways.

My personality is dominated by a search for peace and order. I often find myself trying to help/modify others into what i think can be a better person.
This is probably an example of my personality's behavior...

Alantai Firestar wrote:... not to mention the odd time where its as plain as day

I have no idea what you are saying...

aGorm · Post by **aGorm** » 17 Mar 2005, 00:38

Well, i hope my posts are clear enough, im not typin in such a rush anymore... Less to say at teh moment aswell, so rabid posting is over for now on my part... (prob y Alantai holds such a huge lead...)

Its a shame this could not be done without a major rewirte of the network... It would be very usefull.

aGorm

PauloMorfeo · Post by **PauloMorfeo** » 17 Mar 2005, 00:55

aGorm wrote:... im not typin in such a rush anymore...

I had noticed.

aGorm wrote::EDIT: Edited because i cant even spell "speel" corectly...

If i remember correctly, you said you where dislexic!? Dislexic people tend to see the letters wave and dance and makes it very dificult to properly order them.
I highly regard your care into the writing. I was even going to post in that thread in consideration to your care but i eventually forgot.
This helps alot to read >140 posts.

AF · Post by AF » 17 Mar 2005, 01:04

Aha so thats where it is! PauloMorfeo, I hate people trying to manipulate or influence me like that and though I may not let on about it in most cases I have become sensitive to it in such a way that I dont even have to be conciously aware of it, I just get a feeling something is wrong which is what happened to you, which leads to the general opinion that you dont like me very much. However I see now that you're only trying to help in your own way. So I'm sorry if I offended you.

And aGorm I'm not a rabid poster, I'm a speed poster with a lot to say

As for the Admins annoyed by me? I feel they're amused rather than annoyed, after all I rarely PM unless I'm compelled to

Doomweaver · Post by **Doomweaver** » 17 Mar 2005, 11:35

I think you should be able to join a game that has already started.
Basically, if you join a game that has already started, you become an observer to a random team and can chat with your team mates, and also see with their fog of war (whatever, you know what I mean!) During observation, you choose a starting point. Once each team has a random oberserver each observer simultaneously joins the game.
Thats fair, and its also really social, because you can chat to an idle team mate a bit while you wait.
Also, latecomers should get starting resource bonus.

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 17 Mar 2005, 14:47

SJ has made it clear that the way spring is coded, this is extremely infeasible. There is destructable terrain, not to mention a constantly changing simulation, which would require (i'd imagine) a massive amount of data transferred which would lag the game until the person was done logging in. not worth it

Cheesecan · Post by **Cheesecan** » 17 Mar 2005, 17:59

Okay I understand if it's an impractical idea, was just brainstorming a bit -
how about the cooperative style seen in games like Age of Empires 2?
Two players sharing the same color, being able to control the same team simultaneously etc. Or would it also require you going out of your way to put it in?

jouninkomiko · Post by **jouninkomiko** » 17 Mar 2005, 18:29

That's the way it works now actually. Many people can be on a team (one color) who share units and resources. Multiple teams can join an ally team, which share los. And ally teams can ally with other ally teams whenever.

Cheesecan · Post by **Cheesecan** » 17 Mar 2005, 22:05

Sweet, looks like Spring will be *the* RTS.

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 20 Mar 2005, 07:17

This whole discussion has given me a flash of geineus! Why cant you have a game where the entire point is to control the galactic gates on three or four 'plantets' (maps that is) So you can have people gate into games that are in progress. Expamle, player One has a freind, and player Two and Three (who are in a allience) have retreated to another planet and dug in. Player One grabs the gate from player Three (who had left behind a gaurdian battiry and a few mines) After digging them out, player One sends in a task force of a few advance constructors, basic constructors and his comander. Once they step through the gate, a pop up would ask "Can Player Four (who, if you remember is Player Ones friend) join the game under your comand) then player One could say yes, and he'd come in with another comander for his ally. Of cours they have a rather large planet filled with hostiles to confront them. Of cours why just have four players and three planets. How about Elven planets and 10 players, and throw in astiroids and moons and space fleets in with massicve amounts of players logged into the same game fighting long drawn out campains of aggresion and defece. People would log off, but their base would be comanded by the AI till another player could log on and take control of their base or start a new one. hmmm TA: the MMORPG.... or maby the MMORTS

Spring RTS Engine

Joining games post-launch

Joining games post-launch