Sovereign Items that Carry Over from Game to Game. (Useful in Multiplayer Too)

How cool would that be? Awesomely awesome, that's how cool that would be!!!

From certain points of view, surely. But not from all the points of view.

This gives the player a reason to play multiple games

The player should already have plenty (and more important bunch) of reasons to play multiple games... Fail Game if not. Not that I have reasons against more reasons to.

You might find a Rare Item of Power once every 20 or so games, but to find the right matching Items of Power to make that super weapon or uber spell you might have to play through 500 games or more.

Good, forget about games in uber large sizes that take months to complete. Unless you plan to take it easy and play those 500 games in a few decades.

You could also make these items tradable in Multiplayer games.

Some people would feel the multiplayer component forced upon them to be able to complete a quest in single player. (Sounds a good DRM scheme for some companies out there)

1. These Items, under No Circumstances, should be made available through the use of the games Editors. If people can cheat and add them to their games they will and that defeats the purpose of even having them as they are Obviously Over-Powered Items.

Mods.

But the Super Items or Spells should only be Usable in a Single Player Game as they are extremely un-balancing and game changing.

Right. So I suppose that the AI carries items from game to game too (between other details associated with the idea).

How many people go mental for that and have to "catch em all"?

How many hate it too?

You asked...

Ok, I spaced that out so I could reply in parts. Here goes.

Ok, yes, it being a "Awesomely awesome" idea is just my opinion. It might not even be a very good one, but I thought so

Also true, the player should already have plenty of reason to want to play more, this just enhances that even more, which as you say, isn't a bad thing.

Oh no, I would never forget about Extremely Long Games. Those are my favorite kind to play, so yes the time-frame might be off. As I said the thought needs work and fine tuning, which is where you and everyone else comes in

I don't see how you would feel obligated to play Multiplayer. The items "could" be tradable in Multiplayer, but they don't have to be. I just thought it would add a great reason for Diplomacy to matter during Multiplayer games.

I don't think the AI Sovereigns should carry limited items over as well no, instead add a very insignificant chance that the AI player would acquire one of these items during play, already assembled. Think about it. Once a player finds all 3 items to make their Super Weapon, once they use it, it's gone. I never said the plans/components stay with you after you use them. The actual chance of a player assembling one of these items and getting to use it would be Very Rare indeed. Hence the chance for the AI to use one during a single player game would be extremely small as well. But once in maybe every couple hundred games it might happen. That also won't necessarily mean the player will loose, it just means one of the AI factions would have a advantage once in a blue moon. With people's number one complaints being that end game is just "mop-up" and that AI's are "too easy", one more random (though small) chance that the AI can challenge you is never a bad thing.

P.S. Personally, I Hate Pokemon. That was just the first analogy that came into my head.

I don't see how you would feel obligated to play Multiplayer. The items "could" be tradable in Multiplayer, but they don't have to be. I just thought it would add a great reason for Diplomacy to matter during Multiplayer games.

People "feeling forced" isn't the same as "forced" but it's enough to start being loud about it. Dawn of War 2 cosmetic multiplayer achievements argument come to mind (lucky that those were easily moddable in). *shrug*

I don't think the AI Sovereigns should carry limited items over as well no, instead add a very insignificant chance that the AI player would acquire one of these items during play, already assembled. Think about it. Once a player finds all 3 items to make their Super Weapon, once they use it, it's gone. I never said the plans/components stay with you after you use them. The actual chance of a player assembling one of these items and getting to use it would be Very Rare indeed. Hence the chance for the AI to use one during a single player game would be extremely small as well. But once in maybe every couple hundred games it might happen. That also won't necessarily mean the player will loose, it just means one of the AI factions would have a advantage once in a blue moon. With people's number one complaints being that end game is just "mop-up" and that AI's are "too easy", one more random (though small) chance that the AI can challenge you is never a bad thing.

So I need 500 games to get the uber weapon (that will last just that game) and meanwhile the AI can have a lucky strike and get such weapon in five of those 500 games (being "optimistic" about how unlucky the AI is). Weapon already stablished as being overpowered. And supposing just one enemy faction. If you play against five of them every game, the chance of facing one enemy that gets that weapon...

In any case, people who won't do multiplayer no matter what (in their right to do so, Single Player being the main focus of the game), would be "banned" from such items because the AI doesn't collect the pieces like the player do and cannot trade with them. That would force them to forget about them, use mods, play lots and lots of games just for that (which lowers the fun factor but that would be their own fault).

Not that I'm against (well done) collectables, achievements and the like. Just sharing why I don't see it working (without actually offering solutions... ).

Then by all means, Please, Offer Solutions.

Help me refine it. The details in the end would be all about how to balance the Time-frames. Multiplay aside, it comes down to the rate of Games Played = Collected Items. Games Played = Total Amount of Game both Single and Multi. It won't matter which type of game you play, you'll have the same chance to get a piece or spell component either way. That balances that, unless you bring in trading with other players, but all that would do would be to promote interaction with other players. If you chose never to do it, you'll have the same chance to find fresh pieces either way.

As to how to balance the AI getting these in single player games, that's where you come in or anyone else with a better solution then my suggestion to fix that.

Unfortunately, I don't because (currently) I have none to offer. I expect to meet my deadline tomorrow (so far so good) and then I should have the time for true brainstorming. Right now (in rl) I'm trying not to emulate Michael Douglas in Falling Down... Luckily for my client, I lack access to guns. ¬.¬

Oh, playing multiplayer has the advantage of "number of games played" (same as if you only play single player) plus trade possibilities.

The flip-side to the trading thing for MP games...

Let's look at the example of the Casual Gamer VS the Hardcore Gamer, or if you prefer, the Utterly Screwed Player VS the Been-Winning-The-Whole-Game-From-Turn-Freakin'-One Player.

Let's say Casual Gamer has the second or third piece of a Schematic, (That's what I think they should be called, Spell or Item, it makes decent sense for both, though less for Spells,) that Hardcore Player needs...  Now, Hardcore Player, being who they are, is kicking everyone's butt...  But Casual Gamer, who's about to get steamrolled, suddenly has a bargaining chip, making an alliance or a mutual victory for them and Hardcore Gamer a possibility.  (Though not a certainty.)

Hardcore Gamer, being who they are, is of course going to take the next part of their schematic so they can BBQPWNSAUCE their next single player game and watch they Volcanic Golem of Hellish Destruction wreak havoc on their opponents.  I'm sure they also want the achievement, but personally I'd have a hard time getting excited about those in a game like Elemental.  (That's just my opinion.)

Now, it's not just a collectible thing, it's a valuable resource of sorts, useful -only- to actual players.  If you don't play MP, then it shouldn't matter too much, since you can still always play SP and just try to get them that way.

We've already established that, for this to work, MP and SP games both have to count.  AI's need access to it at this stage, but the AI is crummy right now...  After the brunt of the AI gets implemented, we'll see how much of a game breaker it would potentially be, but even then, getting AIPwned every so often never hurt anyone...  Well, okay, that's actually not entirely true...  But it only ever hurt a very rare few, so the risk is negligible.  =P

The frequency between games in which you find these Schematic Items would need to be decreased a bit methinks, but it seems to me you already know that.

You could also have it so the Schematics themselves are much more easily found and all collectible at any given time, but make the items required for these schematics the truly rare things, and only allow a finite number of those items to be carried.  Somewhere between Three and Five items seems good.  Three seems best in my opinion.  That allows you to increase the frequency between finds enough to make it manageable, as well as not too easy to find.  Have the Schematics themselves work similar to Achievements, so you can keep track of all your formulae, including the one you're working on.

Now one of these super-weapons every 500-ish games seems a little steep...  Problem is, unless there are lots of these super-weapon type items/spells to get, that's actually not too far-fetched, which might be a turn off, but at the same time, most people would probably ignore after their 20th game without getting all the stuff they needed, so hopefully, the loss of that won't impact them too much beyond time wasted and effort spent.  If you could put lots of different super-items/spells in, then you could decrease the frequency between Key-Items found, making it a fairly tradeable resource for MP.  It would rely on luck whether or not you were playing with someone who was looking for one of the specific items you possess, which may not necessarily be a bad thing.  Having a Super-Bargaining-Chip every game is also potentially a game-breaker.

So, so far:

This needs to be a Single Player, Skirimish only feature.  No using these in Campaign Mode or other Scenario's.

MP and SP games must count.

Schematics could be infinitely collectible, while the Key Items for completing the Schematics could be much more finite.

A high number of Schematics is necessary, in order to increase the frequency of finds in general, without directly increasing the frequency of the specific Key Item you might need.  (Notice I didn't say 'Could' this time.  This really would have to be a must.)

Each Schematic, once finished, should come with more than just an achievement or the like.  A (relatively) detailed lore entry regarding the Weapon/Spell/Thing would also be unlocked, adding more reason to finish the schematics, and more flavor than just being able to essentially insta-own your next single player game.  In my mind, this lore entry should come with a cool 3D model of the Item/Weapon/Creature you unlocked.  I especially like the idea of putting together a Diamond Golem or a Glass Dragon, Artificial or Artificially Controlled Creatures in general.  (I.E., you find the Golden Heart Scale, Dragon-Speakers Tongue, and Wand of Fusing to incant the words to bring the all-feared Great Gold Dragon under your command for a game.)

Given the above paragraph, Items and Spells aren't the only limits to this idea.  You could even go so far as to get Schematics for special buildings that proffer special bonuses or allow the creation of a special unit for the duration of a game.

In later versions, if the AI having access to these items ends up being too big a deal, you could easily re-implement it as a quest for only the player, force them to accomplish some super-dangerous task before finishing the game in order to obtain X Key Item.

The Key Items themselves should have a lot of flavor just in their appearance.  Lore entries for all of those would be too much however, especially at three per schematic, and I'd guess you'd need somewhere between 50 or more schematics to make the frequency of finds high enough to help the player to not lose hope in ever finding the ones they need.

You shouldn't have to play more than maybe 2 weeks worth of ANY game-length/size to complete 1-3 schematics.  This will allow players to pace themselves, and give the game 3-6 months worth of replayability just to complete all the schematics.  This is also considering a relatively casual pace, maybe slightly more than what would generally be considered casual gaming.

This time can be shortened drastically via MP games, which is a good thing, bringing the whole thing down to 1-3 months of semi-hardcore playing and some smart trading with other players.

Trading between players doesn't necessarily have to be in-game either, it could potentially be done in the lobby for those who are just looking for the achievements/lore entries.  This is especially good if someone has some time to kill, but not enough to get started playing a game.

I'll pitch in more later once I think of something else to add...

One of the problems I would forsee is being able to keep people from modding them in. Especially with as mod freindly as they are making this game it just seems to me that would be opening Pandora's Box.

Oh, absolutely that'd be a problem...  But, the OP wanted suggestions on how to make this idea good, so I offered the best ideas I could think of.  I honestly don't really see it working given the very mod-community friendly atmosphere Stardock has put around E:WoM.  It is a genuinely cool idea though, and ya never know.  =P

I think this idea sounds really fun.  Especially with the comments RikazeMA added to it in reply #6.  I would really enjoy a feature like this, so long as these rare items were realisticly obtainable.  I would have to categorize myself as a casual gamer as I generally can only dedicate a few hours a week to spending any time on the computer. 

I also don't think the risk of people modding this stuff in would be much of a worry.  The people who want to mod in something that makes them disproportionally powerful could do it whether a feature like this existed or not. 

I still don't know if this might be the first game where I try multiplayer seriously, but the idea seems bad for solo games.

The whole point of something being staggeringly rare is that it will help make a given map truly memorable when you actually find/acquire it. Being able to retain something very special for every single game after I got it would make it seem less impressive with each following game.

The idea is that it would dissolve after the next Single Player game you played, as long as it wasn't the story driven campaign, where it wouldn't be available anyway.  Personally, I'd see it only implemented for Skirmish style maps, I.E., non-scripted scenario's, random map, etc etc.....  Pfft, you all know what I mean, why bother explaining.  =P

Excellent ideas All, especially RikazeMA, I like where you took that with the Multiplayer. Now we just need a little SD Staffer attention...

*starts jumping up and down* Yo!!!!!! Frogboy!!!!!! Boogiiiiiieeeeee!!!!!!! *waves arms* Over Here!!!!!! Looooook!!!!!!

I see your point there, but, you have to remember in proper implementation of this, you won't be getting these "staggeringly rare" items every game. You might find 1 in every 10 or 20 games you play. You may have to hold on to it for quite a while before you find the other parts of your item or spell to make it work. Also in proper implementation it's not an item that will stick out. It would be off to the side in a "Special Bag". Maybe you'd only even see the Bag at the beginning of the game when you're setting it up (unless of course you have a matching set to use). in normal circumstances you won't see the Bag or Items except when starting a game and when the game is over If you happen to have found one that game or gotten one as a quest prize or something. Then you could see a window with the message "Would you like keep this item?" or "Would you like to add this to your Collection?".

I was thinking today of different ways this could work or be implemented. They could work like "Achievements" to be unlocked as well. Maybe after you collect a full set or spell or what have you, it unlocks and you can get it all the time if you chose at the beginning of each game, but, as with carrying the items your-self, you are Limited into how many you can keep with you, plus once in a game even if you "know how" to use or make a Powerful Rare Item/Spell, you may still need to find the component or only have a limited number of components that could also carry over.

If that's the case then the Items/Spells/Schematics would need to be extremely well balanced or maybe even toned down.

Also, since Elemental is extremely Mod friendly, there probably wouldn't be anything stopping someone from Modding in items that do the exact same thing as these only without all the needed work to get and collect them. Then again with that same logic, there's nothing stopping a Modder from making a Mod where they simply start out being All Powerful. Some people like to play that way, while others consider it cheating. In a single player game it all comes down to how You, the Player, want/like to have your fun.

The important part of this Collectible Idea when it comes to Modding would be to make sure Modders Don't have the ability to Mod what is being kept from on your Sovereign from Game to Game. That part would be hard coded as some other small core concepts will be hard coded. As I understand it Stardock is avoiding hard coding as much as possible with Elemental, but, there will be some parts of the code we simply won't have access to, even as Modders.

1 in 10 or 20 games doesn't seem staggeringly rare to me, just rare; but that's a quibble. It isn't the frequency that's a problem for me, it's that I think it better to have the game treat each map as a unique story/instance. Objects that get ported from one saved game to another just sound like a deck/MMO thing to me, not something that would make a single player TBS-RPG fusion more fun.

I have to say I agree with what you say here (except for the deck/MMO thing). That's why when I initially had the idea I knew it would have to be extremely limited, both to keep it "Ultra Rare" and to keep it from being abused. That's why you can only carry 3 schematics at a time. Even then, they need to find three pieces of each Schematic to unlock the actual design of the building/item/spell. Even then once the Schematic is unlocked you will still need Building Materials and/or Spell Components to use it.

As long as the Schematics are Very Rare in their finding, and which in turn makes them even more rare in their use, you would think that would make the Maps where you find or use them Very Unique and Memorable. Right? Also as RikazeMA has shown us in his reply, this would solve part of that problem everyone has with the "End Game Mop Up" and can give weaker players the advantage over the stronger in a limited capacity. The implications to use "Real Diplomacy" in the multiplayer games also introduces a new and fun element.

I originally got the idea from expanding on what Frogboy has said, "You might play 200 games and suddenly get a quest that gives you the plans to build a diamond golem – provided that you find the star diamond located on some distant island (you get the idea).".

If it takes you "200 play throughs" of the game to get this one Very Rare Quest, why not have it maybe take another hundred games or so to find the "Star Diamond" ? Even when playing the map where you get the quest, there's no actual Guarantee that you'll even be able to find the "star diamond" without either getting killed first or just dominating the map anyway.

I can see the whole Idea I propose needs work. None of the Devs have responded to it (which they often do when the idea's actually "good") and based on how it's been reacted too so far and how many design flaws/problems it has I can understand why.

Still, I think it's worth "thinking" about none the less as if it's done right and with proper balance it could have a lot to offer the longevity of the standard game (No Modding Needed if included), not to mention the implications to the Multiplayer game and "Live Diplomacy".

Last thought, if I had a piece of one of these items and I sign a Alliance in a multiplayer game with another player, agreeing to give them the piece I don't need, if they Betray that Alliance they obviously aren't getting that piece. This would give players a thought (in some cases anyway) before betraying a alliance in , lets say, a ranked multiplayer game. Even though if these are unbalancing to use in multiplayer and hence not allowed to be used in multiplayer, they still offer other uses with heavy implications into the multiplayer environment.

Here is a crazy thought.

What if every MP Map had 1 of these RARE items. They comes in 3-5 pieces and are rather hard to assemble by yourself due to be spread Map wide. That allows for the MP Diplomacy angle to be used.Trading pieces for favors, Wives, whatever.

BUT, what if, as a perk for playing  in MP, or at least for trying it out, for those who aren't currently thinking that way, if you can get one, it could be Saved for use on the SP game side against the AI...

Quite a good Perk to help promote the MP game me thinks.

Number 1 is not reasonable or fair to modders who are creating unique games. If I want to put the "One Ring" in my game, I'll put the One Ring in my game.

Number 2 seems to counteract the point of these items being unable to be editted, since if I wanted to cheat in a single player game, it's about as hard as popping open the xml file for my character and giving them a billion strength. I wouldn't waste time with the items.

Not for me. They'd by their nature make the new map somehow connected to the old map and the game currently has no mechanics or storyline to support the idea of a reincarnated/resurrected sovereign who retains possessions from a past life. 'Treasures' from past games would be an immersion-breaker for me, unless perhaps you get a good story idea for the functionality that would work with Brad's novel when it's finished.

Frankly, that sounds like a terrible idea to me. If a game(map) has one piece of some super-artifact, the same game should also have the other pieces(though not easily obtained perhaps). If a part of the game is robbed from me(yes, I did say robbed) because I prefer not to play multiplayer games or collect achievements or whatever, I would be quite incensed.

The whole "collection" frenzy that has afflicted games these days is a very bad thing in my opinion. It detracts from the game itself, if the player is more concerned with finding this collectible, instead of just playing the game for fun. They'd be grinding the same game over and over as fast as they can, to maximize their chances of getting this certain item.

But if the same map has all the pieces, it is not only more pleasurable to the player, but it also adds a sub-story to the game itself. A sovereign has found a part of a mighty artifact, and spies that the Great Jewel Eye is in fact being kept at the City-Fortress of the Urxen. While normally these nations have amicable relations, the sovereign is stricken by a fit of greed, and he wages war to simply get this single piece.

I hope you can see my point. I do not intend to offend anyone(I suppose ;)), but I feel this idea really is quite bad. I can understand why some people might enjoy it, but the bad point of this idea is that it is forced on the players who don't like it as well.

I'm not understanding how it would be forced.  The only people it'd matter to are Video Game Completionists.  MP would give you the ability to trade them, but it wouldn't force MP on anyone either.  You could just continue to play the game SP and still get everything, it'd probably just take some extra time.  And the only thing it would add to MP is the ability to use these Artifacts as bargaining chips, which, from a Diplomacy stand-point, helps even the odds a little for players who are falling behind or are already behind.

And the thing about people just grinding maps as fast as possible is this...  They're already trying to -win-, how does it hurt if they try to do it even faster now that their Sov has picked up this Artifact that they need for the next game?  Plus, people are going to do what they're going to do anyway.  Why should other people just grinding maps for these items/achievements bother you specifically?  People are going to do that regardless of whether or not this idea is implemented, because they want to win a game or any number of games.

Plus, you could put these items at the bottom of dungeons or as rewards for exceptionally difficult quests, making it so the player can't just waltz in, grab what they want, and then decimate their opponent(s).  Furthermore, there are a million-and-one different implementations that we haven't discussed or even thought of yet that could make this Feature a real Star.  In conclusion, I find your entire argument to be nothing more than opinion, and therefore, moot in regards as to whether or not this idea should be implemented or not.

If you don't like the idea, and it makes it into the game, then don't play that part of the game.  It's not like you'd be absolutely, or even remotely, required to partake of the mechanic.

Everything is an opinion, especially here. That's why we are trying to see which opinion makes the most sense and why. Opinions are the basis of enjoyment.

I will clarify on the "forced" part. It means: I don't want to play five billion games to enjoy building the Star Golem. This essentially forces me to play MP games where I must trade parts with others. Because otherwise I would never see that Star Golem. Simple as that.

You're assuming, however, that we'd be using the scaling suggested above, which is obviously far from perfect and would require much testing and fine-tuning.

Second, when I say, 'It's only opinion,' what I mean is, you're offering no logical reason as to why it shouldn't be in the game beyond, "Because I don't like it."  These forums are not mostly opinion either, they're balancing discussions, using math and playing experience, as well as Logic, Rationale, and most importantly, empirical evidence to back them up.

Now, the Math and and the Empirical Evidence are missing, because this is merely an unimplemented idea, but we are approaching its potential implementation with an objective mindset towards the ends of making all the math add up, making it balanced, and making it fun for as many as possible, hopefully a majority.  If it wouldn't be fun for a majority, it wouldn't make it into the game.

Furthermore, I can understand you not liking MP for TBS games.  I don't either.  But Elemental could potentially be the streak-breaker.  Stardock's doing a lot of really cool stuff with E:WoM, and you may end up finding you actually like MP...  Maybe not in Beta 2, but once the game's closer to/is finished.  Tactical Battles will especially help towards alleviating the standard TBS Multiplayer Taboo.  At the very least, if you're into it, and you've got just one other friend who's also into it, Elemental has a veritable oceans worth of Roleplaying potential, with or without this idea.  This would just potentially make it better.

Perhaps I'm too much of a humanist, as I was trying to rationalize my opinion with words, experiences and assumptions instead of hard data. I tried to explain why I felt it was a bad idea, but I obviously failed. Essentially I don't like the idea, because I feel that those who do not trade the parts for the stuff, will never be able to enjoy them. And enjoyment is the main thing the game is about, I think. If getting the parts is so unlikely that you get one part per 20 games, and you need multiple parts to complete them, it leads to the fact that a normal player will never see any of these things, which makes it a rather bad implementation.

Myself, I love playing MP, but I understand that some people do not. And that is the crux of the problem. Features that are readily available only to a certain way of playing are unfair(so to say) toward those that do not adopt this way of playing. You might as well give an item as a reward for winning 5 multiplayer games in a row. I'm sure some would love it, but others would most certainly feel like they're being denied something.

I can agree with that, but, then again the same could be said for Frogboy's "200 Game Star Golem quest". I imagine that will be Moddable too though for those who don't want to play 200 games to see it. It all comes down to balancing the time-frames. The reason for the Multiplayer component of the idea stemmed from an idea to make diplomacy actually matter. Normally diplomacy in games just adds money faster or allows you to trade the AI empires for technology you don't have or gives you a research bonus. AI's more often then not end up breaking treaties and alliances because the player surpasses their "score" in game which throws a switch in the AI behavior that says "kill player with highest score". Diplomacy AI is almost always horribly implemented and it's thought processes never make any sense at all. Small empires that could never pose a threat attack huge empires because of some arbitrary score. In real life that would never happen. The smaller empire would be licking the boots of the bigger one so they don't get steam-rolled.

Multiplayer Diplomacy means even less as a actual player has no qualms what-so-ever about breaking pacts and alliances to take out another competitor on the map as a lot of games don't allow a "allied victory". Like the rest of you, I'm not much of a fan of multiplayer in games like this. Mostly because you end up waiting for other players more then you end up playing or when you find people to play a good game with someone always has to leave and the game never gets finished. At the very least this would add more depth to multiplayer. In normal multiplayer nothing you have or can get in game will last past that game. As such diplomacy won't matter past that game. With all the functionality Elemental's multiplayer will have you'll be able to keep track of people you like playing with. In a way (by making friends) it's a extension of in game Diplomacy. If you make friends with another player by trading things you build a bond that could last through multiple games. Maybe you and your new-found friend play a multiplayer game against two other people you don't know. Because you and your friend/ally know each other through trading schematics you'll be more likely to ally and take the other two out.

Still, I digress. With there already being things in game that will take many many multiple play-throughs to find adding more might not be such a good idea.