Online battle with other players In real time !!!

Unknown

I think it would be fun to battle online in real time also you can bet your iso before online battle of how much u willing to spend or lose.. Anyone else have any opinions and ideas of online battling.

Bowgentle

Servers would die within a minute.
They can barely handle the load as it is now.

atomzed

I would not like that.

Each game will probably take 20 mins as each player take turns.

Right now I love the game bec it is fast and simple. I can play a game within 3 mins. I don't want to play a 20 min game.

Unknown

I believe that in the future it will happen. I play game from Android device and there so many other games that have success with playing online. Imagine if u co uld not only bet iso but also bet extra covers that u have no need for. I just think playing the cpu would become redundant. I like a challenge and a challenge would be to play against the best of the best.. Someone who is strategic like myself where it will take thinking to beat them. By selecting my top players against yours. Just a idea...

Unknown

Whoever is losing will likely just start playing really slowly and hope to bore you to death even if there's a turn timer, not to mention if the turn timer is set to anything low that'd make the game not very strategic at all.

Whoever goes first would also have an overwhelming advantage that'd be hard to overcome.

Kelbris

Phantron wrote:

Whoever is losing will likely just start playing really slowly and hope to bore you to death even if there's a turn timer, not to mention if the turn timer is set to anything low that'd make the game not very strategic at all.

Whoever goes first would also have an overwhelming advantage that'd be hard to overcome.

There's plenty of strategy with a short turn timer, if not more than usual. You just need to plan your moves during the opponent's turn and think a few turns ahead.

If you play with a 5 second turn timer long enough, you get used to it. Only way I could get a really high level mount in PQ1. It shouldn't take more then 10 seconds to study the entire board anyway. It's only 64 tiles.

Griffon all day errday

Of course, we need a UI that isn't terrible first. I should be able to know that the AI only needs 1 more purple to fire off recon the INSTANT their turn ends.

Just like in PQ1.

hurcules

I think online fighting games like Street Fighter would be a good approximation of how a real time MPQ Versus would be like. Of course we need a timer for each player (like chess) too.

Cragger

The cost to retreat is so low that most people would quit as soon as they start to lose. This happens in most other RT online PvP games, and it is highly unsatisfying.

Remember that you are likely not playing against another top-tier forumite, but more likely some kid playing around with Iron Man on his Dad's phone.

Unknown

Cragger wrote:

The cost to retreat is so low that most people would quit as soon as they start to lose. This happens in most other RT online PvP games, and it is highly unsatisfying.

Remember that you are likely not playing against another top-tier forumite, but more likely some kid playing around with Iron Man on his Dad's phone.

The way I would make it work is if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet.. I would also do sometype of penalty for retreating. Some ideas would be great I can't think of anything.... But there's always a way to get have success with this it just has to be thought through carefully

atomzed

Dakemin23 wrote:

Cragger wrote:

The cost to retreat is so low that most people would quit as soon as they start to lose. This happens in most other RT online PvP games, and it is highly unsatisfying.

Remember that you are likely not playing against another top-tier forumite, but more likely some kid playing around with Iron Man on his Dad's phone.

The way I would make it work is u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet.. I would also do a sometype of penalty for retreating. Some ideas would be great I can't think of anything.... But there's always a way to get have success with this it just has to be thought through carefully

The 10s timer thingy may be a good way... But it will make the whole game very tense; some may like, others may not.

Putting the timer aside, there's also the issue of connection. Right now, if you lose connection in the game, you just wait until you can connect again. You don't lose any progress.

If you are playing a RT game, there's need to be constant connection. If you lose the connection (subway), do you get DQ immediately? Do you lose all or partial the reward? Does it allow ppl to reconnect within a certain time frame (run out of subway)?

That's a whole slew of technical challenges that needs to be overcome to create this whole new gaming mode. I just don't see D3 having the resources to priorities this now.

If anything, I just want a raid or endless race mode. Say a mode when we fight endless sentinels (which can adapt to different power of the mutants). Depending on your profess, you get certain amount of progression reward. And you get to display it as a trophy of sort.

I think this is more doable within the current game infrastructure.

over_clocked

Dakemin23 wrote:

u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet

Please don't do that if you are not SMSing

GothicKratos

locked wrote:

Dakemin23 wrote:

u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet

Please don't do that if you are not SMSing

You snipped that right out of a bunch of other perfectly typed out words (his punctuation might not be on mark, but there was enough to be satisfactory) - his statement was understandable and not obtrusive. Furthermore, for all you know, he was accessing the forum form his phone - I do that from time to time.

(I was going to downvote and comment, but I cannot downvote. Sorry.)

atomzed

GothicKratos wrote:

locked wrote:

Dakemin23 wrote:

u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet

Please don't do that if you are not SMSing

You snipped that right out of a bunch of other perfectly typed out words (his punctuation might not be on mark, but there was enough to be satisfactory) - his statement was understandable and not obtrusive. Furthermore, for all you know, he was accessing the forum form his phone - I do that from time to time.

I access the forums on my phone 90% of the time... like right now, this was typed on the phone.

IamTheDanger

Betting iso would work, but not covers. That is a major source of income for the game. If you could bet them, then I could match against an alliance mate, bet my extra Hulk black that he really needs and then lose on purpose. Too many ways to abuse a system like that right now. This would be a great addition, but I dont see it happening anytime soon. If they did do something like this, they should keep some way for players to play the Ai if they want.

Unknown

This would be the only thing that brings me back. After playing Hearthstone for the past 2 months, I can't go back to the setup MPQ has.

I highly doubt it would happen though, as they would probably need to create servers all over the world and gate off their playerbase into regions to insure the best experience. That's a ton of money/work for probably very little reward (aside from an awesome gaming experience. )

Unknown

If they did do something like this, they should keep some way for players to play the Ai if they want.

I think both options would be great. Online and ai...I do believe now thinking about it will take time and money but still wish there was that option. Also thanks for letting the the guy know that You can access the forum from your phone. This is not a midterm nor am I writing a term paper so if I choose to abbreviate from my PHONE it should not bother you as long as you can understand what I'm writing.

over_clocked

GothicKratos wrote:

locked wrote:

Dakemin23 wrote:

u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet

Please don't do that if you are not SMSing

You snipped that right out of a bunch of other perfectly typed out words (his punctuation might not be on mark, but there was enough to be satisfactory) - his statement was understandable and not obtrusive. Furthermore, for all you know, he was accessing the forum form his phone - I do that from time to time.

(I was going to downvote and comment, but I cannot downvote. Sorry.)

Your point being? He took the time to type 'through' and not 'thru', and all those other longer, more complex words - why not go all the way then? I wasn't rude or anything by the way, it just seems weird to shorten a 3 letter word on a forum. Phones are a moot point as well, those that spend most of their time there should utilize the features that allow for fast and correct typing. I literally meant SMS and not phone typing because with some mobile plans people try to fit in as many symbols as possible when SMSing. I'm sorry if me perceiving such a manner of typing on a forum as non-logical is offensive to you

GothicKratos

atomzed wrote:

GothicKratos wrote:

locked wrote:

Dakemin23 wrote:

u if u quit u forfeit ur iso or covers u bet

Please don't do that if you are not SMSing

You snipped that right out of a bunch of other perfectly typed out words (his punctuation might not be on mark, but there was enough to be satisfactory) - his statement was understandable and not obtrusive. Furthermore, for all you know, he was accessing the forum form his phone - I do that from time to time.

I access the forums on my phone 90% of the time... like right now, this was typed on the phone.

My point was, he said, 'unless you're SMSing', i.e. phone use. I never claimed that just because you access from a phone your grammar has to be sub-par, but it's perfectly excusable as long as it's understandable, which his was. Your standards are yours. Keep it that way.

locked wrote:

I literally meant SMS and not phone typing because with some mobile plans people try to fit in as many symbols as possible when SMSing. I'm sorry if me perceiving such a manner of typing on a forum as non-logical is offensive to you

I was going more for "I wasn't going to post this and derail the topic, but comment in the downvote instead", but I chose my words poorly, apparently. And it's not offensive, it's just plain rude. You didn't add to the topic at hand at all (which is why I didn't want to post to begin with), you simple posted because you wanted to put that user on the spot for something you find abnormal.

========

JCTthe3rd81 wrote:

Betting iso would work, but not covers. That is a major source of income for the game. If you could bet them, then I could match against an alliance mate, bet my extra Hulk black that he really needs and then lose on purpose. Too many ways to abuse a system like that right now. This would be a great addition, but I dont see it happening anytime soon. If they did do something like this, they should keep some way for players to play the Ai if they want.

This is incredibly accurate. Wholeheartedly agree that they should be separate - I would even go as far as to say that "real PvP" should be a feature and not anything main (akin to the story) because of the mentioned issues.

over_clocked

The thread cannot be derailed because real-time PvP in MPQ can never be implemented and most players know that by now.
And no, if you find such posts understandable, some (I am pretty sure most) people don't since it really detracts from an otherwise maybe decent post. I honestly could not take the said post seriously because it screamed 'I like to shorten words for no reason' to me.

Unknown

locked wrote:

The thread cannot be derailed because real-time PvP in MPQ can never be implemented and most players know that by now.
And no, if you find such posts understandable, some (I am pretty sure most) people don't since it really detracts from an otherwise maybe decent post. I honestly could not take the said post seriously because it screamed 'I like to shorten words for no reason' to me.

Let me start by saying "YOU" responding to Grammer is uncalled for. I'm on my phone using the SwiftKey keyboard so when writing the whole point is to save words I use all the time shorten them so I can text faster. I shouldn't have to respond to someone for writing "U" instead of "YOU" because it's dumb and a waste of my time and yours. This is not a hand writing... Spelling quiz forum. If I or anyone chosen to abbreviate why does that matter. The title was not " U OR YOU.. WHAT DO YOU GUYS Think". Now that's out the way let's stick to the topic which was online gaming. I appreciate the others from the forum commenting on the topic at hand.

Unknown

Implementing this would add very little to the game despite what people think. For one any sense of accomplishment is negated by the fact that the person going first is going to win about 80% of the time between two equally strong players because that's how big the first move advantage is, so if you are actually trying to figure out who is better you'd have to either play an even number of matches with rotating starts until one person wins by two, which could take a stupid amount of time if the two players are equally strong, or you'd have to put some other arbitary tiebreaker that is likely to be unfair and just going to lead to the loser always complaining (for example, amount of damage done). The time of the matches themselves would be open to abuse for anyone who is losing via stalling tactics if you give any reasonable amount of time for strategy, and if you give people only 10 seconds per turn you might as well have AI play for both players. 10 seconds per turn would make it hard for a player to even select the target for Magnetic Field before the timer runs out. It probably doesn't harm the game to have it, but it's not going to be anywhere as useful as people think.