My views on how to balance multiplayer.

[timnitro]

I can already hear it  "Not another how to balance multiplayer thread. Ugh"  

Yes, I apologize for another thread but I would just like to take a minute to express my views on multiplayer and the overall Don't Starve experience. 

 

The general census on the concerns of multiplayer is pertaining the Don't Starve experience. And as a person who thinks that Klei is jeopardizing the whole Don't Starve game, these are my suggestions: 

 

Things they shouldn't add:  

• Any extra game types (PVP Maps, Game types etc.)  - I adding game types and games centered around PVP strays away from the rougelike survival experience of Don't Starve.  

 

• More than 4 players to a map - More than four players means more food. Yes, I fully understand this would be added challenge but seriously? More than 4 players would just be hectic.    

 

• Adding to my last point, I believe there should be no public games. Well more specifically Servers. Servers will lead to many spam posts on the forum and an overall diminish of the community. Instead, Players can play with their friends and if you want more players you can start a lobby and connect with other random players.    

How multiplayer should function: 

• Let the world generation be tweaked- Making a larger map with more resources solves the not enough food problem. 

 

• Make the world harsher. This could be as simple as making weather more frequent, Lengthening the night, making seasons shorter, Adding a damage/health multiplier for hostiles.  

 

• Maps should be filled out individually.- Other Players will not be shown outside of unexplored regions, (evil hehe)   

 

• More Chesters however...- more Chesters = more storage space. It would be a little overpowered to have all players have 9 slots. To balance this out the more players the less slots each Chester can have. players now should only have 4-6 slots. Also different tinted Chesters to distinguish from each other's   

 

• No duplicate characters. - Again, Not overpowering the game is crucial.  

 

• Everyone has to be in a tent to sleep.  

 

• Scale Hound attacks to # of players- 2-3 hounds per player. Also a higher frequency of attacks 

Things I'm Indecisive / Haven't developed completely.   

• Universal Perk/penalty system.- I not sure how this will work but players could randomly be assigned perks at the beginning of the game.It would apply to all characters but not overide their current perks/penalties.   

 

• PVP - I do not like the idea o the traditional PvP mechanic, However Maybe Players could Challenge each other in which both players have to agree to fight with no permadeath penalty. Like the system in Borderlands 2. good for fighting over resources.  

 

• Sanity Penalties for not being around each other.- This sounds kinda weird but players should hang around each other and should get lonely when they are alone, this would complicate world exploration. Maybe make sanity drain faster/more when lonely .     

 

•  Special items/ events for multiplayer  

 

Tell me What you think of my ideas, possible flaws in logic or just plain bad ideas. 

Thanks for taking time to read my post

[imsomony]

It's cool man, we're in the forum for multiplayer, and the devs are still gathering info and feedback!

 

 

• Things they shouldn't add: Any extra game types (PVP Maps, Game types etc.)  - I adding game types and games centered around PVP strays away from the rougelike survival experience of Don't Starve.  

I agree that initially they shouldn't add this, just to be able to get MP up and running. I like the idea of them adding at a later point as an option for people though, so we have the choice of advancing into new territory. I won't cry myself to sleep if they don't, but do think it could be an interesting addition further down the line if/when it's developed.

 

 

• Things they shouldn't add: More than 4 players to a map - More than four players means more food. Yes, I fully understand this would be added challenge but seriously? More than 4 players would just be hectic.    

Agreed. It would be a crazy undertaking to make DS Together into an MMO, and I'm not sure how they would/could do that while still keeping in the original spirit of the game.

 

• Things they shouldn't add: I believe there should be no public games. Well more specifically Servers. Servers will lead to many spam posts on the forum and an overall diminish of the community. Instead, Players can play with their friends and if you want more players you can start a lobby and connect with other random players.  

Might & Magic: Clash of Heroes accomplished both at the same time, so it can be possible. I can play 1-on-1 with a private invite, or a group of 4 (2-on-2) in a combination of public/private (I can invite others, or wait for randoms). I'd prefer Klei go in that same sort of direction with DS Together. I feel like locking people out of the option of public would actually invite more non-relevant posts... we'd be flooded with "hey guys, I'm playing now, anyone wanna join?" over and over instead of insightful discussions about gameplay.

 

 

 

• How multiplayer should function: Let the world generation be tweaked- Making a larger map with more resources solves the not enough food problem. 

Agreed. The original DS and the RoG DLC allowed this, I'm sure they'll continue this in MP.

 

• How multiplayer should function: Make the world harsher. This could be as simple as making weather more frequent, Lengthening the night, making seasons shorter, Adding a damage/health multiplier for hostiles.  

Yep, agreed again. There will have to be a lot of buffs. I have no doubt Klei will do this. There are too many players who have pretty much mastered the vanilla game and RoG, so just copying the same content over wouldn't present a challenge at all.

 

• How multiplayer should function: Maps should be filled out individually.- Other Players will not be shown outside of unexplored regions, (evil hehe)   

Absolutely, 100%, no doubt about it AGREED. I can see my map, what I've uncovered and explored... I can't see what anyone else has uncovered. That wouldn't be fair at all, I'm not them!

 

• How multiplayer should function: More Chesters however...- more Chesters = more storage space. It would be a little overpowered to have all players have 9 slots. To balance this out the more players the less slots each Chester can have. players now should only have 4-6 slots. Also different tinted Chesters to distinguish from each other's   

I'm still not sure how I feel about "more Chesters". I can really waver on either side of the fence, one unique Chester per player or only a single Chester in the world (forcing players to work together and SHARE to survive). I'm not sure I can really take a stance until I see how they first go about implementing multiplayer.

 

• How multiplayer should function: No duplicate characters. - Again, Not overpowering the game is crucial.  

This is another one I'm just not sure about. I think it's because I can't envision just how they would ensure non-overpowering if everyone were the same character.

 

• How multiplayer should function: Everyone has to be in a tent to sleep.  

This could work. What I'm leaning towards more though is that whoever chooses to sleep is basically in a hold-pattern, watching a timer spin until time runs out. it's only a few real-world minutes anyway. If they go with "everyone has to sleep together", then anyone playing Wickerbottom takes away the sleep function for everyone, and that's not fair.

 

• How multiplayer should function: Scale Hound attacks to # of players- 2-3 hounds per player. Also a higher frequency of attacks 

I definitely agree with scaling hound attacks in some way, but haven't come up with anything really-really solid yet. What if they keep the hounds as-is, but have them attack any-or-all players? We hear the hounds coming, but don't know if it's us or our buddy they're attacking... and the packs can be split up amongst us with random math? Like, if you and I were playing and 10 hounds were coming, 3 of them attack you and 7 of them attack me. Or all 10 attack me and none attack you.

 

 

 

• Indecisive/Undeveloped: Universal Perk/penalty system.- I not sure how this will work but players could randomly be assigned perks at the beginning of the game.It would apply to all characters but not overide their current perks/penalties.   

I'm not sure how it would work either... but it's a good idea! Would definitely keep an element of surprise and challenge going with each and every play-through.

 

• Indecisive/Undeveloped: PVP - I do not like the idea o the traditional PvP mechanic, However Maybe Players could Challenge each other in which both players have to agree to fight with no permadeath penalty. Like the system in Borderlands 2. good for fighting over resources.  

I would prefer PvP to be an additional option of gameplay, as in folks could join a server where players are going that route or not.  That way folks who like this could battle it out (this hasn't been fully developed in my mind) and folks who don't like it can choose a traditional co-op experience.

 

I'm not sure exactly how Klei could work PvP into this all while remaining true to their understanding of the DS world and experience... but if they did find a way, it would be really interesting to see! For the record, I wouldn't play it... I just support the option.

 

 

• Indecisive/Undeveloped: Sanity Penalties for not being around each other.- This sounds kinda weird but players should hang around each other and should get lonely when they are alone, this would complicate world exploration. Maybe make sanity drain faster/more when lonely .     

Also indecisive, but your idea totally makes sense!

 

•  Indecisive/Undeveloped: Special items/ events for multiplayer  

It depends on how they create and balance out the rest of the game. Also whether or not special items could be shared amongst players, or if they're unique and remain with whomever gained them.

[Starbladek]

 

• Sanity Penalties for not being around each other.- This sounds kinda weird but players should hang around each other and should get lonely when they are alone, this would complicate world exploration. Maybe make sanity drain faster/more when lonely .

 

I like this. Some people have been saying that there should be a sanity gain from being around others, but this is way better.

 

This would be a really nice incentive to actually work together to accomplish goals, which is what I'm assuming the primary goal of "Don't Starve Together" is.

 

The length of time it takes for the sanity drain to begin should be lengthy, though. Perhaps being away for one or two days would initiate the sanity drain. This would make doing things like going on a two day trek across the world to visit the pig king possible, while discouraging players from building completely separate bases.