How drop-in battles could be improved to add to the realism

[bangell99]

I've only used drop-in battles a few times myself, admittedly. It took too long to find an opponent, and a few of the opponents trolled me somewhat.

Now, we all know that while CA will improve the AI a bit, it can never live up to what everyone truly wants - that's just too hard. So drop-in battles have to be improved. But they could add more than just a better opponent to the game.

1) Have a separate online ranking system for drop-in battlers. Then, correspond the skill/level of the general you're facing in your campaign with the skill/level of the drop-in player. So if you're playing a hardened enemy general, you get an experienced, high-level drop-in opponent. If you're playing some fresh-faced guy with no experience, you similarly get someone new to online play.

2) Encourage more players to play drop-in battles by making them more rewarding. You could use drop-in battles rather than capturing regions on the campaign map to unlock things for online play. Maybe if you play 500 drop-in games or something like that, you could get a free DLC pack. Basically, we need more players doing drop-in battles, so they have to have incentives.

3) Maybe you'd have less people doing this, but you could designate your game as "role-play", and drop-in players can choose to join or not join depending on whether they want to play along. Basically, this would entail both you and your opponent acting as you feel your factions/units would in the particular situation on the battlemap. There might be a short description to enlighten the drop-in player before the battle. So if he's commanding a very small group of ragged Gauls, hounded by a far superior Roman army, he might go for a heroic, suicidal charge and let the men die gloriously.

Your thoughts?

[Rorarii]

If the game is based on characters then maybe drop-in people in your strategic campaign?

R

[Lord Baal]

Meh... I think all this drop battles are a way to do lazily away the AI work for some part... they should simply improve the AI. Now, the campaign map should be playable by many people, not only four, and it should be by LAN too, not only Internet. IF simultaneous troop movements at the end of the turn could get implemented it will means that everyone gets to play in the strategic level at the same time (no waiting for other dudes) and that everyone gets to play battles once everyone click their end turn buttons. Maybe if the faction you are controlling does not have a battle you could be asked to replace the AI in another battle of another player.

[bangell99]

If the game is based on characters then maybe drop-in people in your strategic campaign?

R

Sounds good if you have some dedicated friends, but those drop-in people won't always be around.

Meh... I think all this drop battles are a way to do lazily away the AI work for some part... they should simply improve the AI. Now, the campaign map should be playable by many people, not only four, and it should be by LAN too, not only Internet. IF simultaneous troop movements at the end of the turn could get implemented it will means that everyone gets to play in the strategic level at the same time (no waiting for other dudes) and that everyone gets to play battles once everyone click their end turn buttons. Maybe if the faction you are controlling does not have a battle you could be asked to replace the AI in another battle of another player.

I think drop-in battles aren't quite such a cynical feature as you seem to think. I agree that CA should do their utmost to improve the AI, but drop-in battles could, if improved, be a genuinely exciting feature.

[Aeneas Veneratio]

Since the drop in battles can have a big consequence for someone's campaign, it seems like people mostly use it, when they outnumbering the "AI's" army. The only time I tried it, I found myself with crappy troops and I had like a third of my opponent's army. Such a waste of time!

CA should really do something about that feature to make it enjoyable.

[bangell99]

Since the drop in battles can have a big consequence for someone's campaign, it seems like people mostly use it, when they outnumbering the "AI's" army. The only time I tried it, I found myself with crappy troops and I had like a third of my opponent's army. Such a waste of time!

CA should really do something about that feature to make it enjoyable.

True. Maybe let players view the battle they're about to participate in and let them accept or reject that fight.

[Sharpe]

he only time I tried it, I found myself with crappy troops and I had like a third of my opponent's army. Such a waste of time!

I really enjoyed dropping in and playing when outnumbered. It is awesome fun to make heroic last stands and cause as many casualties as possible.



I always think of this scene and feel like a badass.

[SonOfCrusader76]

Don't make them on by default - that would help. If I wanted to play against someone else, I'd actually play MP.