Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Would multiplayer work?  (Read 3151 times)

Urist McKing

  • Bay Watcher
  • Resident Spacemarine
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2010, 06:49:00 pm »

Maybe it could be like SS13, where each person has 1 dorf and hilarity ensues. It would be especialy Fun when Urist McGreifer decides to pull the magmalever.
Logged
Yes! I would like the court to recognize the record as showing that I FUCKING CALLED IT!

Kearn

  • Bay Watcher
  • insert witty tagline here
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2010, 06:55:31 pm »

that actually might work
Logged
i like goats

nbonaparte

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2010, 08:00:49 pm »

Maybe it could be like SS13, where each person has 1 dorf and hilarity ensues. It would be especialy Fun when Urist McGreifer decides to pull the magmalever.
reminds me of Minecraft.
Logged
A service to the forum: clowns=demons, cotton candy=adamantine, clown car=adamantine tube, circus=hell, circus tent=demonic fortress.

DaJonkel

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #33 on: October 11, 2010, 02:43:07 pm »

Let me start my saying I got no skill in modding and not a lot of information about the abilities of DF modding at its current stage but;

Couldn't we somehow make a multiplayer mode if you'd be able to change what caravans bring while running the game?
As in.. I'm playing a fortress, somehow select items I want to trade, which are then exported in a list through the interwebs to your fortess, making the next caravan (or a forced one) bring the items I exported.

Maybe attacks/sieges could be done the same way, except that would mean they'd be done by AI control and thus are very easy to exploit I suppose.
Logged
- Protector of those who are always used in or are victim of dangerous experiments, random acts of violence, deliberate acts of unnecessary violence, unjust punishment by false blame of error, justed punishment by blame of trivial everyday stuff, oh and mythological species racism in general. (I help them with law stuff and filing basics forms, as claws, tentacles and whatnot can make that difficult... no forms no benefits, travel coverage, ect apparantly in this world *sigh*).

Brian

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #34 on: October 17, 2010, 09:06:35 am »

One of the many problems with this system, of course, is that you'd either need to limit the amount of time a player can spend on his fort (seems ridiculous to me, but it's the only 'fair' way so no one has an advantage in time played) or to accept the fact that players who play longer will be able to do more than players who play for less time. There are also issues with when events occur - what if a player sends out his army but his opponent has already had his turn? And so on. Ultimately, I think it's clear why multiplayer isn't planned for DF ;)

Might I suggest temporal flux? Let's say two people start in the year 2000. One guy, Johnny HasALife, plays a year to 2001 then has to go somewhere. Meanwhile Scruffy McRedBull plays to 2010 and sends an army invasion. Well Johnny comes back and is still in 2001 but doesn't see the attack... until 2010. In 2005 Johnny decides to attack because Scruffy needs to take a shower. The next time Scruffy logs on, a dimensional portal brings Johnny's troops to 2010 where they are annihilated by Scruffy's all adamantine loincloth whip army (the troops he didn't send).  Well they can communicate through a temporal mailbox..

eh screw it. I really think something might work but not sure what.
Logged

Gearheart

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #35 on: October 17, 2010, 09:14:17 am »

I would vote for a SS13 style, where one person is the "manager" (The omniscient will of the dwarves, in the current game) and the other players are dwarfs. Yes, you can follow orders, or you can go take a month long break, explore a cavern and die.

It would be hilarious, both as a game and as a greifing engine.
Logged

bowdown2q

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #36 on: October 17, 2010, 02:04:55 pm »

Wouldn't unstable FPS cause an almost desynchronized gameplay? Unless the cap is the slowest computer it wouldn't work out.
Simple misconception. Do you think everyone playing WoW is doing the calculations for how hard some group is getting hit in Molten Core? Even just the people in the group? Hell no. There is exactly one server that actually judges what happens and then it sends that out to everyone else. For multiplayer games there can be some wiggle room to that (imagine a sniper not being able to line up the crosshairs on someone and hit them because they were always getting visuals that were late and because the bullet didn't go until even later,) but with DF that wouldn't matter very much. You say "pull this lever" and then you've got to wait for a dwarf to decide to go and do it anyway.

With something like DFterm you even have a potential small advantage- if you have access to a fast desktop computer and a slow laptop you can have the desktop run the game while you "play it" through the laptop.

THIS. I'm running this BEAST rig - it's an IBuyPower machine, so it's pretty OP - and I would run a 24/7 dedicated DF server in a heartbeat. The lag-time wouldn't be too bad, just a question of terminal-web-server-web-terminal lag...  I imagine you'd have to crank down the FPS cap on the server though - I cap at 500, and between the lag and that speed, dwarves would starve by fall. 

If anybody's ever played Europa Universalis / Victoria / Hearts of Iron / etc. multiplayer, then you know exactly how this can work - the game runs unpaused at all times - even in menus - and players can pause for X seconds before the other players can veto the pause and unpause the game again. The framerate is, say, 30, so you can't loose track of everything too quick. 

If... if we can make the game not pause in menus, and have Dfterm2 display only to the player requesting it - instead of everybody seeing the same screen, a mem-hack or something shows the map/menus to the players requesting it (so I can look at Z1 and player 2 can see Z3 at the same time, while p3 can be on stocks, and p4 diggin out the magma sea)- then you could have a legit multiplayer fort going!

(edit for clarity:) you run a script in/on Dfterm2, filtering out keystrokes like ">" and "<" and the arrow keys, and translating them into the commands for the viewing engine to change focus.  You'd need the script to alert the other players that somebody's got a cursor down - I can't imagine 2 people trying to dig in different spots at the same time can end well.

....hotDAMN THIS CAN WORK O_O. Somebody figure out how to keep the game from pausing in menus; that's the hard part i think. I don't know much about memory hacking, but if Stonesense can show map that isnt what the DF window is looking at, then it must be possible.   ...infact....if it's possible to hand along commands from that... you could build what is essentially Stonesense without the fancy view, but passing input through Dfterm2 and into an edited DF running on a server...

Guys. We have 1-fort multiplayer within our grasp. I WISH I KNEW HOW TO CODE ><

(editedit:) Isn't there a viewer prog that exists already? I use 2 monitors, and if I could have the second one showing an alternate view of the fort, even just in regular DFouput, that would rock.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2010, 02:11:06 pm by bowdown2q »
Logged

Namfuak

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Would multiplayer work?
« Reply #37 on: October 17, 2010, 07:22:42 pm »

I do kind of like the idea of people being dwarves and having one overlord.  Plus, then they could actually be smart about digging and that sort of thing.  The main problem is that you would eventually start needing huge numbers of people, or only certain dwarves would be controlled by humans.

Actually, it would be kind of cool if the starting seven were player controlled, and the rest were AI.  Then, maybe you could take the thought screen out of the "Overlord's" menus and instead the humans would have to tell the Overlord what was needed.  What's nice is that this could mean that they could agree to get on at certain times, and there aren't so many that it would be impossible to do.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]