Having a friend as the storyteller (multiplayer)

[rakkaus]

I've got an idea for the somewhat lack of late game in Rimworld.

Let a friend be the storyteller!

That adds the multiplayer factor into Rimworld with one playing the game and the other controlling what events happen (good, neutral and bad). The human storyteller decides everything that AI would, including the raid size, what pawns from the factions are spawned and he also controls this pawns as if they were drafted. Soo it makes a much more organic and challenging experience to the one playing and is very fun for both!

The speed of the game would be controlled by the one playing the colony, but while raids happen it would always be in the normal speed. Pauses would be disabled for the multiplayer experience.

[Gonumen]

I really like that idea, but because events in game don't happen very often
I'd like to suggest even more abilities for that friend like changing the weather (and deciding where will bolts hit etc.) and also spawning animals.

Also how much could he change raids? Only who will attack? or maybe with what weapon,  stats etc. and also decide wheter they are fleeing or fighting to the last drop of Blood. Controlling their actions as if they were his colony would be nice too!

Anyway, great idea and if that is possible to add i'd love to See that as an option not Only for friends but maybe with strangers (someone new every time you load and he wants to join).

Ps sorry for bad language but I'm writing from a mobile and autocorrect is wierd.

[PhoeniX]

Sounds interesting, though it is difficult to balance that kind of asymmetric gameplay. How to make the game as enjoyable for the Storyteller is a delicate matter. nice idea nonetheless

[Kegereneku]

A question I keep want to ask Tynan without taking the time to make a proper discussion thread is what is the "Storyteller goal".

From the way "Cassandra Classic" ring in the ear I would think its goal is to make a struggle that is interesting to live through, however all I'm seeing now is a AI-driven-difficulty. This is not "interesting" per see you are just constantly put against constantly increasing threat that sometime require you to use "game breaking/story breaking" solution to survive (like exploiting the AI stupidity or the game mechanic)

The ALPHA lack of event diversity can't help, but I would like to know what IS in fact the goal of the Storyteller (Especially since there's "good end" tales and "tragic end" tales)

I'm not asking to knowing if the Storyteller want a good or bad end, but if that's even a consideration.

[akiceabear]

This got me thinking - here are my ideas on how multiplayer could work in a way that is fun for all:

• Each player starts in a separate map tile and builds up as standard. The world map is hosted by a server with potentially thousands of bases spread around it. Story: the escape pods of a major space battle that happened in near the planet.
• A mercenary attack on another player can be initiated by paying a flat fee, e.g.:
  
  • 1000 silver for a normal attack
  • 5000 silver for a siege attack...etc
  • Story: Attack via proxy as you don't want to leave your own colony undefended! And offworld mercenaries are in need of local scouting knowledge/guidance, so for a upfront fee you get a cut of the raid.

• The size of the attacking mercenary force is selected by the computer, as in single player, based on a weighted average of the attacker and defender home base wealth (e.g. 0.99*defender+0.01*attacker). That way the attacks are scaled appropriately to a given defending base and not always lopsided, unless the attacker has really pulled ahead of the other person. This way the battle is more about control/tactics, too. Story: mercenaries are not interested in overkill, just enough for the job.
• The mercenaries you hire can raid and run, but you only get a small % of what they steal. Story: you get paid after their commission.
• There is a cool down after initiating an attack before another can be initiated by that attacker - e.g. mercenaries only come into radio contact every x days. Story: mercenaries are hesitant to become too dependent on a single local source of information.
• There is a cool down before a defender can be attacked again (by any other player) - which shortens as colony wealth and time grows - as in single player. Story: mercenaries aren't interested annihilating in all cases, but rather milking colonies slowly and only exterminating when necessary.
• An attack must be within a certain range of your base. Story: radio range, credibility of your local knowledge.
• An attackers' base essentially is held in "statis" during the attack. Story: the mercenaries agree to form a perimeter around your base as you guide their forward units.

This could have a lot of tweaks, of course - the goal of the attack could be killing the leader, capturing the women, stealing a famous sculpture, etc. Goals could be initiated by other players, e.g. those recently ruined by a third party.

The main obstacle would be that single player games are so damn long - which is great for single player, but hardly ideal for multiplayer. The above approach helps overcome that - all bases could be built asynchronously (but verified somehow by the server to prevent cheating), and only when you are ready to shell out silver to buy into a mercenary raid do two players actually interact in real time. Even then the forces are close to evenly matched (at least as much as is the case in the single player game), so it could be as fun for starters as those with long established bases.

Imagine: a world with tens, hundreds or thousands of bases being built asynchronously but interacting for attacks. The above mechanics encourage attacks on larger bases, given larger expected payout of any stolen silver/sculptures/etc. Given your cooldown between initiated attacks, packs of tribes in a region could form alliances to attack a local leaders base back to back (recall that advanced defenders have a shorter cooldown on receiving attacks). Some regions of the world could become intensely competitive. Tech could be developed to increase your range, improve scouting prior to choosing a location, etc. Finally, big developed bases would also have reason to attack smaller ones (even with the puny mercenary forces) - simply to raid for natural resources that they've long exhausted in their own region.

Finally, why don't big bases ever get to simply attack on their own (with overwhelming manpower)? Story: the mercenaries wipe out any base once it achieves a tech level capable of thinning out their own silver/resource raids - namely, long distant transport/logistics for armies.

Lots of rich story potential. Probably never going to happen, but I can dream...

[MrSurvivor]

*guy spawns 100 centipedes on day one*
Ya that's what I'm afraid of...

[Gonumen]

*guy spawns 100 centipedes on day one*
Ya that's what I'm afraid of...

We could report those kind of players and if there were a lot of complainants he would be labled as "unfair" and People could refuse to play with him. However there should be chat between players so player can say that he wants to have some challange.

[Sir Wagglepuss III]

Balancing a player-storyteller would be simple enough, there are already mechanics in place in other games - Arma 3's Zeus for example. Set resource pools, making any kind of abilities either general or applied randomly over an area, etc.

For example, sure you can make a thunderstorm, sure you can choose where the lightning hits, but you can only choose a 10x10 square of tiles as to where the lightning MAY hit.

Resource pool for the storyteller would allow progressively harder events to scale up, as a VERY rough example, the storyteller starts off with 1000 points total, and their total goes up proportionally to the value of the colony. Spend points, they regen slowly over time. So you can dump 4 250 point animals going nuts right off the bat, or wait a few and drop an early 1500 light raid. Those numbers are to be taken with an absolute pinch of salt, but they put forward the concept.

[JimmyAgnt007]

the problem with this idea, i do like it though, is that most of the time the player is just sitting and waiting with nothing to interact with.  unless they are given something to do all the time that requires equal focus and attention as managing the colony does then its going to get real boring real fast.  more so at the start when the colony has a lot to do and the storyteller has nothing to work with.  its doable i suppose but not a lot of fun.

personally i think multiplayer should be two colonies on the same map.  even if they arnt hostile to each other, rushing to recover resource pods and colonists.  hunting animals before the other can claim them.  there is a lot of ground to cover.  lots of things to do. 

[rakkaus]

Please Tynan i want to be a dungeon master in Rimworld soo baaaad! 

I would not get bored as a storyteller, no matter if it's only early game. Setting a one pirate attack and trying to mess as much as possible with the colony is already lots of fun.

The resource pool seems a nice idea to prevent abuses, soo it would be limited by the difficulty level the colonist set. That could work very well if dealing with unknown people. Even tho i think that it's part of the storyteller/dungeon master role to read the progress of the player and set things in order to match that.

Maybe there could be a system to find a storyteller and another to you set a specific friend as one. Then you could rate the storyteller quality and write a little review if you will; soo everybody knows the good and the bad ones.

I can be wrong but the dev/debug system already implemented (were you can force weather changes and set attacks, etc) is already some of the work in order to archive this. All in all i think that's a simple thing.

To have multiple colonies simultaneously and interacting would be very crazy but looks like a much complex one, even tho one do not exclude the possibility of the other.

[tommytom]

As stated, it's really unfair being able to choose everything.

However, there is another option and much less code needed, I think.

A friend's list with their current colony set as "active". You get to "send your troops" to attack his base.

Super cheap:
Just a customized raid event for your friend. Your guys go off-screen and you have no control or a day simply passes. There is no continuity between, it's just you get to attack your friends base with your colonists with their names and gear. If they die or get captured, it's only on your friend's side.

Expensive:
You teleport to your friend's base and have direct control and get to attack or retreat. When you disconnect, your characters retreat without your control or teleport out after a grace period. All things are true to continuity (all loses and damage are real).

A less expensive option would be to just be in "spectator" mode and you have no control over your guys. Much less net code required, but I doubt anyone want's to rely on the AI navigating your friend's killbox.

[JimmyAgnt007]

It would be more fun if you had manual control of the pawns you spawned.  Make one sniper pirate and drop food to him as he goes, just to take pot shots at the early colony for fun.  Then again that could be very annoying.  Also a human story teller can be much more tactical with things that can hurt the player more.  Could be kinda neat but I still think it wouldnt be fun for most unless we can get more things for the story teller to do.

[kingtyris]

I really love LOVE this idea for multiplayer. This DM approach is the best I've heard so far. I also like Wagglepuss' resource pool idea.

[skullywag]

I like the idea of as you play you earn points, events cost points to fire at your "friend". So you both have to play well to earn more points to try to outmatch the other.

[rakkaus]

In my (huge) experience with online gaming, i would say that when the things become player vs player shitty things like cheating and flamming start to happen. One will always try to be better then the other and that can be very harmful to the experience as a whole.

In the case of one being the storyteller and the other the player, is about the story that may develop; not about one being victorious. The power of a Dungeon Master may look unfair, overpowered... But that's exactly the point of the DM. He is the god of the story. If he does a good job or not is subjective.