Anyone tried MTW multiplayer?

GoldenEagle · 02-24-2003, 03:46 PM

Well, as some of you know, I finally broke down and bought MTW. And while I am a newbie at the game, I figure I will get good soon. I was wondering has anyone tried MTW multiplayer?

If not I think we might can get an FOFC group togehter. Should be fun, even though I will get smoked.

Tarkus · 02-24-2003, 03:58 PM

I have, but I really suck at multi so it'd probably be a good match for a newbie. I'd definitely be up for it if others are interested.

Tarkus

Chief Rum · 02-24-2003, 03:59 PM

I have never played multiplayer either and also fear that we would get smoked. But if one of us has some experience with it and kinda help the rest of us, yeah, a group might be fun.

We could do an FOFC Cup or Tournament like they do for hattrick. If we could find some free Web space out there, we could also upload our battle replay files. Now, that would be fun.

Chief Rum

Coffee Warlord · 02-24-2003, 04:10 PM

Oooh, I'd be up for that. Since I run my own server with no bandwidth restrictions, I'll even pony up the server space.

Anrhydeddu · 02-24-2003, 04:12 PM

Remember that MTW MP is all custom battles. There is no campaign-based MP.

Tarkus · 02-24-2003, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Remember that MTW MP is all custom battles. There is no campaign-based MP.

Campaign-based MP for this game would make it the greatest game of this decade.

Tarkus

Chief Rum · 02-24-2003, 04:25 PM

Yeah, I know this is just battles. As Tarkus said, a campaign tournament would be incredible.

Yeah, A, I was thinking that if we do it, we could set rules for how to come up with a proper battle map or how to determine the compositions of our forces. Once the playing field was settled enough to make tactics of primary importance, then we would play the individual battles, just like individual games in a sports tournament. The lsoer is eliminated, and the winner moves on.

Better yet, we can even start us all off with relatively large armies, but force us to make a comparable army from the end of one battle to the beginning of the next, so that we are essentially maintaining the same force throughout.

We could even have captured solders in a battle serve as ransom bait like in the game. If we capture a certain number of soldiers, let's say, we get a certain number of additional florins with which to buy new units.

Of course, once again, realize that I propose all this without knowing one whit about the multiplayer game. If someone really knows a little bit about this stuff, we would then know what is and isn't doable in this.

I hope you would participate, Anrhydeddu. I think it would be a lot of fun, even if I get my ass kicked right away. I would love to just download the battles and watch them unfold.

Chief Rum

Coffee Warlord · 02-24-2003, 04:33 PM

The only forseeable problem (if battles work well), the defender has such a HUGE tactical advantage, we'll have to do 'home and homes' for every battle.

For determining winner...

Wins
Losses
# of opposing forces killed/captured, (when attacker)
# of opposing forced killed/captured, (when defender)

So if you split the two battles, if you kill more guys during your turn as the attacker than your opponent (when he is attacker), you win.

Tarkus · 02-24-2003, 04:34 PM

Chief, you could do that but it would take a fairly significant effort for it to be accomplished. Plus, the selection of your army is to a certain degree dependant on the battle field, whether conditions etc. so I'm not sure restricting your army to the same makeup at the end of the previous battle would make sense, unless you are going to use the same battlefield each time. The whole process would take some thought, but maybe we could make it double elimination so I at least get to play twice.

Tarkus

Anrhydeddu · 02-24-2003, 04:34 PM

Chief: I seriously doubt that, knowing that I'm probably the worse at fighting battles.

Tarkus · 02-24-2003, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Coffee Warlord
The only forseeable problem (if battles work well), the defender has such a HUGE tactical advantage, we'll have to do 'home and homes' for every battle.

For determining winner...

Wins
Losses
# of opposing forces killed/captured, (when attacker)
# of opposing forced killed/captured, (when defender)

So if you split the two battles, if you kill more guys during your turn as the attacker than your opponent (when he is attacker), you win.

I like to idea of home and home, but you could also give the attacker more guys.

Tarkus

GoldenEagle · 02-24-2003, 06:58 PM

Is there of a release for multiplayer campaign in the future? I would gladly pay $20 for it. I know we couldnt all play in one night, but we could all meet at say, 8-10 PM and play some years.
Could you imagine the discussions that would transpire from that?

As far as multiplayer battles go, I think everyone is trying to downplay themsevles and tricking us into thinking your no good. I see right through it.

Tarkus · 02-24-2003, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by GoldenEagle
As far as multiplayer battles go, I think everyone is trying to downplay themsevles and tricking us into thinking your no good. I see right through it.

If indeed that were truly the case.

Tarkus

02-24-2003, 03:59 PM	#3
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	I have never played multiplayer either and also fear that we would get smoked. But if one of us has some experience with it and kinda help the rest of us, yeah, a group might be fun. We could do an FOFC Cup or Tournament like they do for hattrick. If we could find some free Web space out there, we could also upload our battle replay files. Now, that would be fun. Chief Rum __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

02-24-2003, 04:25 PM	#7
Chief Rum Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Where Hip Hop lives	Yeah, I know this is just battles. As Tarkus said, a campaign tournament would be incredible. Yeah, A, I was thinking that if we do it, we could set rules for how to come up with a proper battle map or how to determine the compositions of our forces. Once the playing field was settled enough to make tactics of primary importance, then we would play the individual battles, just like individual games in a sports tournament. The lsoer is eliminated, and the winner moves on. Better yet, we can even start us all off with relatively large armies, but force us to make a comparable army from the end of one battle to the beginning of the next, so that we are essentially maintaining the same force throughout. We could even have captured solders in a battle serve as ransom bait like in the game. If we capture a certain number of soldiers, let's say, we get a certain number of additional florins with which to buy new units. Of course, once again, realize that I propose all this without knowing one whit about the multiplayer game. If someone really knows a little bit about this stuff, we would then know what is and isn't doable in this. I hope you would participate, Anrhydeddu. I think it would be a lot of fun, even if I get my ass kicked right away. I would love to just download the battles and watch them unfold. Chief Rum __________________ . . I would rather be wrong...Than live in the shadows of your song...My mind is open wide...And now I'm ready to start...You're not sure...You open the door...And step out into the dark...Now I'm ready.

02-24-2003, 04:34 PM	#10
Anrhydeddu Resident Curmudgeon Join Date: Oct 2002	Chief: I seriously doubt that, knowing that I'm probably the worse at fighting battles. Last edited by Anrhydeddu : 02-24-2003 at 04:35 PM.

02-24-2003, 06:58 PM	#12
GoldenEagle Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Little Rock, AR	Is there of a release for multiplayer campaign in the future? I would gladly pay $20 for it. I know we couldnt all play in one night, but we could all meet at say, 8-10 PM and play some years. Could you imagine the discussions that would transpire from that? As far as multiplayer battles go, I think everyone is trying to downplay themsevles and tricking us into thinking your no good. I see right through it. __________________ Xbox 360 Gamer Tag: GoldenEagle014

02-24-2003, 03:58 PM	#2
Tarkus High School Varsity Join Date: Jun 2001	I have, but I really suck at multi so it'd probably be a good match for a newbie. I'd definitely be up for it if others are interested. Tarkus

02-24-2003, 04:10 PM	#4
Coffee Warlord Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Colorado Springs	Oooh, I'd be up for that. Since I run my own server with no bandwidth restrictions, I'll even pony up the server space.

02-24-2003, 04:12 PM	#5
Anrhydeddu Resident Curmudgeon Join Date: Oct 2002	Remember that MTW MP is all custom battles. There is no campaign-based MP.

02-24-2003, 04:33 PM	#8
Coffee Warlord Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Colorado Springs	The only forseeable problem (if battles work well), the defender has such a HUGE tactical advantage, we'll have to do 'home and homes' for every battle. For determining winner... Wins Losses # of opposing forces killed/captured, (when attacker) # of opposing forced killed/captured, (when defender) So if you split the two battles, if you kill more guys during your turn as the attacker than your opponent (when he is attacker), you win.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)