Please provide a 3+ multiplayer campaign mode

[Scrotumfiddler Phil]

Title says it all.
Just another request-thread.

In before "long turn times".
Please, that's not an issue for adults and it can be handled with mods if that's the case for some.
A lot of people want long, grindy campaigns with good friends.

[Scrotumfiddler Phil]

Originally posted by Bruce Magician:

It's been requested since the dawn of time. They know people want it, but putting it into action would probably require a new engine.

I know, i know.
This is just to nag some more. I also want to know exactly what you are typing out: Would it require a new engine or not.

[Toaster Maximus]

Total War games have not really been multiplayer focused even though that has been a request and they did try to expand it some in shogun 2 it didn't take..

Maybe for the saga spin off its would work smaller and more focused, would be easier to 3+ campaigns

Edit: Also if you want to nag try their social media stuff and their main forms, it may get more of a look and respond, they mainly just have someone look over the steam forms and mod when needed if I recall right.

[Kantermoose]

60 stacks (each 1 stack of each 3 players) those battles would be <10 fps lag fests

New engine would be needed as Bruce stated, game already struggles with 40v40 battles. Not to mention can only field 40 troops max per faction, so if you're going vs 1 AI would be 120v40 (2 stacks per player vs max 2 of AI) troops in current game plus I think you could let AI control 1 army to further bring a 3rd stack each thus making it 120 + 60 AI troops vs 40 AI before reinforcements get blocked. But maybe it would just lock it at 60 vs 60 since the game isnt meant for 3 ppl but you get the idea.

[RadCon One]

Originally posted by Kantermoose:

60 stacks (each 1 stack of each 3 players) those battles would be <10 fps lag fests

New engine would be needed as Bruce stated, game already struggles with 40v40 battles. Not to mention can only field 40 troops max per faction, so if you're going vs 1 AI would be 120v40 (2 stacks per player vs max 2 of AI) troops in current game plus I think you could let AI control 1 army to further bring a 3rd stack each thus making it 120 + 60 AI troops vs 40 AI before reinforcements get blocked. But maybe it would just lock it at 60 vs 60 since the game isnt meant for 3 ppl but you get the idea.

Even if it did go down to 10 fps that really wouldn't be the main issue here. This game by no means requires split second reaction times. It would look bad sure, but it wouldn't effect the battle's outcome.

[Kantermoose]

Originally posted by Bruce Magician:

It's the campaign map that would need a new engine to allow it.

But thats what OP asked for. Custom battles (2v2) are preset with max 40 troops, watered down effects and no Rites, faction effects and other things that get added (items, weapon skills, banners) and whatever else im forgetting that happens in campaign battles.

Throwing 4 armies (esp human controlled) on a map is a tad easier than balancing a campaign map around 3 players attacking pretty terrible AI that has so much cheats already to stay competitive with the player.

And they already tried the more players PvP route via Total War Arena, and was less of a TW game as a result. Game died within a year.

But yeah anything is possible maybe even moddable in TW WH3

[kever]

Originally posted by Kantermoose:

60 stacks (each 1 stack of each 3 players) those battles would be <10 fps lag fests

New engine would be needed as Bruce stated, game already struggles with 40v40 battles. Not to mention can only field 40 troops max per faction, so if you're going vs 1 AI would be 120v40 (2 stacks per player vs max 2 of AI) troops in current game plus I think you could let AI control 1 army to further bring a 3rd stack each thus making it 120 + 60 AI troops vs 40 AI before reinforcements get blocked. But maybe it would just lock it at 60 vs 60 since the game isnt meant for 3 ppl but you get the idea.

Wut. I don't quite get this. Why would you need that? Already you can have multiple factions in the fight, giving away troops to control for others is a thing, 2v2 is a thing outside a campaing etc, works perfectly fine. Adding more factions to be controlle by players doesn't require any larger battles than there is currently.

I suspect the reasons has more to do with desyncs between 4 clients so on the actual campaing map as I don't think their netcode and handling of current state has been spent that much effort on. Also campaing balance would be even more skewed.

It is not something beyond the current engine likely, but they propably consider getting it stable would require too much work hours put in versus the additional sales they'd get for spending that effort, considering for many people the 4 player turn times would be too much.

Simultaneous turns would solve that problem, something common in many TBS, but THAT would require quite a large rework =)


Edit: Also, this has been a lament of me an many a friend of mine, TW campainngs take long and would be nice to be able to play with 3 others instead of starting a new campaing which each one, so in all honesty, personally I'd be willing to pay for this feature in the form a of a small dlc :P

[Fendelphi]

A big issue for such campaigns is the viability of it all.
As you are nearing turn 100, it is not uncommon for a turn to take about 10 minutes(and that is excluding all the combat), just to move all your armies and manage all your settlements. This is not really an issue in solo play. But for coop, waiting for 10 minutes to get your turn is a turn off for some. And if you add more players to that mix so that we have a 3 player campaign, that is potentially 20 minutes before it is your turn again, not counting battles. Seeing how some people flail about 2 minutes load times, I would wager that few would have the patience for this.

Also, in terms of combat, currently you can "gift" units to your coop partner, that is true. But if you have 2 or 3 coop partners, there is barely an army left to control. I mean, sure, it is something rather than nothing, but if your involvment in a 20-30 minute session(before it is your turn again) is wielding 1-2 units in combat, that could get stale really quick.

My point is, they could probably make it. But how many would actually end up using it and for how long? And would that be worth the ressources required to make it happen, compared to spending those ressources elsewhere?

[Elitewrecker PT]

Simultaneous turns is trash.

[Tricks]

I still think that the reason why this won't happen is because of sync issues. Warhammer hasn't been bad for me in coop so far, but I remember in Empire it was non-stop sync issues where we were constantly having to trade save files just to fix the campaign.

Can't help but think that having more games to sync would only make things worse.

[Master Jukes]

Would it really be that hard for CA to implement a 3 or more person campaign when there is already a 2 player one? I am not expert on game design but surely you could implement this by mimicking the inheritance properties from the first and second player, for the second and third. Why not put something out there? There is a solid community of players that would absolutely love this. And anyone complaining about performance or wait time issues most likely doesn't play multiplayer, and won't be effected by a 3+ player campaign extension.

[Elitewrecker PT]

I don't think time is really the issue. As you say, that's up to the players.
It's probably more technical, I think some people already have issues with desyncs.

[Scrotumfiddler Phil]

Originally posted by Game Is Tough:

Would it really be that hard for CA to implement a 3 or more person campaign when there is already a 2 player one? I am not expert on game design but surely you could implement this by mimicking the inheritance properties from the first and second player, for the second and third. Why not put something out there? There is a solid community of players that would absolutely love this. And anyone complaining about performance or wait time issues most likely doesn't play multiplayer, and won't be effected by a 3+ player campaign extension.

Pretty much. It's been evident that people enjoy spending absurd amounts of time on common projects and matches for decades. I mean, Heroes series is evidence, for starters.

[Fendelphi]

Originally posted by Scrotumfiddler Phil:

Originally posted by Game Is Tough:

Would it really be that hard for CA to implement a 3 or more person campaign when there is already a 2 player one? I am not expert on game design but surely you could implement this by mimicking the inheritance properties from the first and second player, for the second and third. Why not put something out there? There is a solid community of players that would absolutely love this. And anyone complaining about performance or wait time issues most likely doesn't play multiplayer, and won't be effected by a 3+ player campaign extension.

Pretty much. It's been evident that people enjoy spending absurd amounts of time on common projects and matches for decades. I mean, Heroes series is evidence, for starters.

In the Heroes series, you usually only wait a few minutes before it is your turn again, as there is far less going on on the overworld map and battles are relatively quick.
Not to mention, the latest generation of gamers have probably not played Heroes of Might and Magic(and if they have, probably only the more clunky 6 and 7) and are more used to fast paced gameplay.

In Total War: Warhammer 2, once you get past the 60 turns mark, each player's turn(without any combat) approaches 10 minutes, simply due to the amount of territory and armies you need to manage. So by the time you are around turn 100, with a total of 3 players, you would have to wait 20 minutes or more to get to your turn. Even with no combat.
Even most players that enjoy coop games(myself included) dont want to wait 20 minutes while doing nothing, especially at the endgame of a long running campaign.

[Nosgoth]

if there is a way to create someone mod for 3+ players co op in campaign it would be amazing

[Elitewrecker PT]

One help would be for players to at least be able to set up building orders while the main player is moving and stuff. It used to be possible.