No announcement yet.

Multiplayer Wishlist

This is a sticky topic.
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    The Gaalsien deserve to have the Assault Cruiser/Turrets/Turret Controller/Radar Scramblers etc


    • #47
      I have two things that I would like to add to the multiplayer part of this game:

      1: Ways to see whom is queuing for what kind of game in multiplayer, so it would be at least a little easier to get a game. Also maybe one could just set preferences for the matchmaker - What to go for first and then it expands out from that after a set amount of time. For example:

      - Set primary region to search in OR a preferred highest ping range. Then the matchmaker automatically expands out from that. The player will se a message that it has expanded the criteria as in ranked matchmaking, thus the player will also know that most likely the get a bit less connection quality but still a greater chance to just play.

      - The player can set preferred team size etc like 2v2 or 3v3 but after games are not found the matchmaker will start looking in the other setups as well.

      All in all lets say the player can place 3 picks of priority within the options available - thus guiding the matchmaker to what the player seems most important. Priority 1 goes over priority 2 etc. Example : Prio 1 for Closest region OR prio 1 for 3v3.

      2: I wish the game could be a bit more back and forth. As things are now, and I guess this is due to the "2 games in a lunch break" goal, games often are won and lost within 1 or two early encounters. I know this would upset balance but I also do think, not that much - What if a system similar of "refund on death" was implemented. Lets say player A meet up with Player B in a skimmer vs skimmer fight in the center of the map. A looses the engagement (due to what ever reason) now B has a huge advantage in the field. Combat is fast and furious but the re-build of your forces are not. So if instead when all those units where lost,they did refund some of the resources spent on them, the player who lost the initial engagement will have a chance to counter what just happened in a good way.
      How? Well tech goes forward and having those units lost in the engagement, against skimmers, will now let the loosing player pour those resources into what ever is the best direct counter to the skimmers incoming to harass the salvagers.

      Of course having some units refund more or less than others and maybe not refunding RUs as much would be tweaks needed, but in a mode like Artifact Retrieval i do think this would work. Playing the objective would still maintain the speed of the match.

      I do not want to make skill of smart builds etc matter less but I do wish that there was a opportunity to have more of the nice tactical fights during each game. It would keep the tension up as well as focus on what the game does really good - the combat.

      I hope I made some sense here.


      • #48
        In all honesty, I haven’t played that much artifact retrieval. But I think the idea of bringing in central themes of the single player is a fantastic way to improve multiplayer. With that in mind, I would like to see a dynamic weather system implemented. Sandstorms and dust devils would have almost identical gameplay as in the singleplayer. Sandstorms would disrupt visibility to a small or large degree depending on the size of the storm (I think the singleplayer one was level 5). And this can also be integrated with artifact retrieval in that you could secure an artifact that reduces or ignores the impact a sand storm has on your sensors. In addition, during a sandstorm, all strikecraft would be grounded. Dust devils would cause damage to light vehicles, but also could play havoc with movement of units. Coalition units might be forced to take a sizable speed penalty for being in close proximity and Gaalsien hovercrafts could be completely thrown off course. To be implemented properly, depending on the type and size of the phenomena, The game would have to notify all players of the phenomena’s predicted location 3-10 minutes in advance so that players could plan their tactics accordingly.

        It would be fantastic to see these in MP.
        ​ Click image for larger version

Name:	2016-01-24_00001.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	37.6 KB
ID:	2298 Click image for larger version

Name:	2016-01-24_00004.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	66.6 KB
ID:	2302
        Last edited by Civilprotection; 24-01-2016, 11:27 AM.


        • #49
          Dynamic weather for the win!
          It would indeed be nice that weather and visibility conditions would dynamically impact mobility, and sensor and weapon range.

          Other suggestions:

          1.) Exclusive units/skins for ranked battles
          The game is already set up for possible DLC bonuse, but it would be nice to have rank incentives, like access to exclusive units or rather unit skins that do not affect gameplay
          What I mean by that is making the Gaalsien Flagship available as a replacement for the regular Gaalsien carrier, retaining the regular carrier's stats, by attaining a certain rank.
          Similarly the Ifriit Nabaal in place of the Kapisi for the Coalition.

          2.) Subsystem targeting against carriers.
          One of the unique features of HW: C and HW2, targetable subsystems on Super Capital/Mothership class ships, is sadly not carried over to DoK.
          Targetable subsystems would add depth to Mothership/Carrier play with the powerlevel related abilities and artifact powerups.
          It would add depth the counter-carrier play if certain systems on the carrier could be knocked out instead of simply having to kill it.
          Either permamently (having to repair the subsytem) or for a certain duration.
          1.) Disable the Sensor's Array with EMP strike (knocking out Sensor Manager for the enemy player).
          2.) Destroying (cruise) missle battery .
          3.) Detracking with mines (could extent to cruisers) immobilizing the carrier.
          Perhaps not interesting by suggested anyway:
          4.) Disabling producting facility.
          5.) Disabling aircraft launch ability.
          6.) Disabling resource drop off point.
          3.) Changing capture mechanic.
          I don't know how others feel about this, but capturing vehicles feels less special than in HW1 and HW2, and has less of a skill based risk/reward dynamic then the previous titles had.
          I'll leave it to others to judge this, but perhaps this could be improved upon.

          For example, having to EMP targets intended for capture first, before driving up near them, then capturing the targets similarly to the repairing mechanic (AoE range/effect, but priority targets have to be manually set), while several EMP disabled vehicles can be captured at once.
          The capture procedure could simulate having infantry taking over the crew of the disabled vehicle (timer), similar to the Marine Frigate mechanic from HW2..
          Perhaps one Base Runner can capter 5 LAVs at once, 3 medium class vehicles (AAV/Railgun) or a single Cruiser class vehicle.
          Larger vehicles take longer to capture,

          This would make the capture risk/reward mechanic more (micro) skill dependable, and force opponents to be wary of clustering vehicles tightly together.
          Last edited by TWV; 24-01-2016, 01:25 PM.


          • #50
            Top Priorities (essential fixes that need addressing ASAP)

            Need to see how many people are searching.
            Region filtering needs to be eliminated or better handled
            Rebindable Keys
            Skirmish AI

            Medium Priorities (quality of life issues)

            "Waiting for Player" is obtrusive and annoying. Really breaks the action. A small message or symbol on the bottom left by the chat box or top left by the connection symbol is more than enough.
            Right click invite on global chat is nice (from the game chat)
            Right click facing order. Much better than "V".

            Thanks! These are many of the communities biggest issues. The top priorities are priorities. If they aren't fixed it will really damage the MP community to a great RTS that BBI has worked so hard on.


            • #51
              I'd love to see more maps, obviously.

              Otherwise, at least for the Coalition(obviously), I would love to see skins that would show off the individual aesthetics of the other Kiiths that make up the Coalition with custom models(though the nature of the Sakala-class carriers as the only Command Carrier type for the entire Coalition should keep Carriers models unchanged except for color patterns.
              An interesting idea would be to include minor tweaks to some of these custom models units. Like a Kiith Nabaal armored assault units that use explosive ordnances instead of the sobani autocannons. Achieving the same role with a slower firing weapon, but one dealing slightly more damages or with a slight area of effects. Thus giving the unit personalized combat visuals fitting with Nabaal love of explosive ordnance but not changing gameplay enough that "Kiith Nabaal" plays radically differently from the original Coalition Expedition.

              In a multiplayer sense, this would be an even greater way to further the ability for players to choose and customizes the visuals of their forces, not only just in color patterns or units models but also weapons effects visuals.

              In a single player sense could be a nice way to represent the sort of units pressed to fight in the desperation of the fights on the northern walls as Northern Kiiths are forced to throw everything they had to stop the Gaalsien tides. Or, again in a multiplayer sense, use the fact such skins would exists as an excuse to create skirmish/multiplayer maps set along ruined sections of the northern military defensive lines.

              Such maps inspired by the Gaalsien onslaught on the walls could even center around new multiplayer modes centering on a sort of "King of the Hill" game mode where a team need to capture an victory critical position and then repair existing defensive assets like heavy turrets to try and defend the position against their enemies until a timer runs out. Or until they are ousted, in which case it is enemy which must defend the objective until a renewed timer runs out whilst trying to repair what is left of defensive assets to defend themselves. This would be a great multiplayer mode to include in addition to a DLC involving a campaign set along the northern Coalition defensive lines in the Coalition/Gaalsien greater conflict I feel.
              (a possible game mechanic of such a mode is that "destroyed" heavy turrets become merely "deactivated" and must be fully repaired to full health again before they can be reactivated. The victory timer could even be tied to the state a similar structure which varies by map such as a Command Center on one map or a massively powerful damaged siege gun on another, their destruction/deactivation reseting the victory timer until repaired again).


              • #52
                +1 for giving resources to team mates and the abiliity to concede


                • #53
                  My multiplayer/skirmish wishlist:

                  1.Resource injection & bounty setting
                  2.Infinite resource setting
                  3.Rush timers setting (to prevent early rush)
                  4.More maps (Optional - include Kharak deadly weather like the sandstorm reduce speed and vision, high heat prevent the carrier to put more power on subsystem, tornadoes throw light units and disable air units etc)
                  5.King of The Hill gameplay
                  6.Improved AI
                  7.Replay and observer system
                  Last edited by DX_Kidjal; 25-01-2016, 10:09 PM.


                  • #54
                    Hello, an original Prospector here. This is what I would love to be added to the game

                    1. More factions. I would like to see the Khaaneph be implemented. I also would like to see the Siidim get a new tech tree after being cut off from the Coalition's tech base. Make one of them be based around walkers.

                    2. New units for each faction, specifically new combat strikecraft.

                    3. Bring the science runners into skirmish, I want to be able to capture enemy units.

                    4. New abilities for Gaalsien Baserunner. Its heal ability doesn't have a lot of use considering the Gaalsien's self-repair racial quirk.

                    5. The ability to increase or decrease map resources as an option prior to a match. I would like to be able to put more resources into the map then what is currently standard.

                    6. An ability to go to default faction colors when choosing a paint job.

                    7. Larger unit caps as an option.

                    8. I want my resourcers to actually dock with my carrier like they did in older games instead of the current automatic implementation.

                    9. New maps that incorporate the lakes and polar regions on Kharak.

                    10. Multiplayer incorporation of the campaign unique superweapon and Gaalsien campaign unique unit

                    The next two requests are for Homeworld Remastered.

                    11. Expansion packs for Homeworld Remastered that add new campaigns for fleshing out the armies (For skirmish use) of the non-playable campaign factions. IE the Turanic Raiders, Kadeshi, Bentusi and Progenitors. I see these expansion packs as great practice for you guys to explore game mechanics for later use in any possible Homeworld 3. Don't be afraid to use Kickstarter.

                    12. Expedition type guide for Homeworld Remastered that salvages the pack in materials from the original releases.
                    Last edited by Kyle756; 26-01-2016, 02:18 AM.


                    • #55
                      My wishlist: a map based on Lençóis Maranhenses National Park. Gaalsien can cross the ocean puddles but most/all of the coalition units can't. With appropriate ocean spray from the gaalsien ships when they're over water of course.
                      Click image for larger version

Name:	1082125499.jpeg
Views:	8
Size:	140.5 KB
ID:	2617

                      Also, what about in MP lobby, a checkbox to show/hide full games? That'd be a good way for a player to verify if the servers are busy or not.
                      Last edited by Sastrei; 26-01-2016, 12:28 PM.


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by DX_Kidjal View Post
                        My multiplayer/skirmish wishlist:

                        5.King of The Hill gameplay
                        ​Mmm, yes. Would like to throw my hat in the ring for this one as well.


                        • #57
                          -AI fixes
                          -More maps
                          -Resource injection option
                          -More options for victory conditions
                          -Weather effects (sandstorms reduce sensors, tornadoes cause damage, etc)
                          -More factions (that come with a nice SP campaign expansion pls)


                          • #58
                            I don't have much on the ranked matches which seem to be fine as they are.

                            1.) VoIP could be nice.

                            2.) Diversity needs to be greater.

                            The current state might be to keep things simple and easy to work with, but the game becomes boring once you've pretty much figured out what's going to happen after a week. More depth and complexity will challenge the players and give them something to do beyond just "let's RTS for 20min".

                            What might help here is
                            a. more unit types.
                            b. adaptable/modular units
                            b. more possibilities in the research tree
                            c. stages to the matches (beyond just annihilation)

                            3.) Roles​

                            Having the ability to claim a role in the team, which can be defined differently:

                            by position: Attack/Defend/Support (support would help whichever needed)
                            by asset: Air/ Close Assault / Ranged Assault
                            by rank: Team leader/ Section A/ Section B (Ranked matches might weigh in here when defining who the team leader is.)

                            This should help in organizing the teams.

                            4.) Randomly generated maps

                            This is to break up the monotony.


                            • #59
                              A few things:

                              More maps.
                              The temperate polar regions, perhaps? Or maybe the outskirts of a city?

                              More logical research progression that is consistent with the singleplayer research progression.
                              For example, why can't I upgrade strike fighters like I did in the campaign? If I can, how do I unlock the option to? How do I unlock sensor posts for my Coalition baserunners? Are they even available in multiplayer? If so, there's nothing to indicate what to build/research beforehand.

                              Make game mechanics and unit characteristics universal over singleplayer and multiplayer.
                              For example, why does the carrier's heat threshold start at max in multiplayer? In single player it went up along with the power output as you collected artifacts and the story progressed. Also, why do the artifacts you retrieve in the Artifact Retrieval gametype increase your carrier's power level? Doesn't that trivialize the carrier power upgrade that you can research? Why bother even having the upgrade? Why do the baserunners' turrets fire so much faster in multiplayer than they do in singleplayer? Why do shipwrecks take only one charge to destroy in MP whereas in SP they take four?

                              Evaluation/addition of different player-counts and gametypes.
                              Speaking frankly, I think that Artifact Retrieval in its current form is a pretty dull game type. Driving a baserunner back and forth between the same locations over and over again is, for me, boring. Why not make the artifacts randomly spawn, and have them be brought back to the carrier instead of the static circle? Why not make them crash down into the surface in the form of a piece of space junk, damaging all units within a certain radius, and giving players a 15 second heads-up of where they're landing? If that can't be balanced, why not make it so the baserunners scout the map with their sensors and uncover them from under the desert? Why not make it so the artifacts give you unit bonuses like they do in SP? Alternatively, why not make it so artifacts that are solely for unit upgrades spawn randomly in the destructible ship wrecks across the maps (like they do in SP), giving your units bonuses but not counting for artifact points? For new game modes (aside from the obvious additions), I feel there's plenty of opportunity for cool map-specific game types, given the awesome universe that DoK is set in. For example, a map that involved the defense of the Stormbreaker wall would fit in with the lore and could be pretty intense. Or maybe two teams could scramble to the Taiidan derelict (or something similar) and uncover a weapon or a schematic for a unique unit that one team could use against the other; the process of breaking down the wreck would take time and resources, however, and could be interrupted.

                              Weather effects that affect gameplay.
                              I think this was mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but its worth mentioning again.

                              New Units(?)
                              This is definitely not a priority, though.

                              Aside from the multiplayer/skirmishes, I've enjoyed DoK quite a bit. If the BBI AMA was any indication, it seems like you are all extremely passionate about DoK and plan on supporting it for a while. You guys talk a pretty good game; here's hoping you can follow through on it. It would truly be a shame if DoK fell into obscurity in the coming months.
                              Last edited by DSS; 27-01-2016, 01:45 AM.


                              • #60
                                Base Runners could use some reworking in general,

                                Base Runners shouldn't be selected with F2