Simultaneous turns in multiplayer

Comments: 67

• 16 May, '22
  Matt

  I was going to add this if it wasn't here yet, this is by far my most desired feature with the game. Personally I would prefer asynchronous multiplayer over simultaneous turns, which is probably easier to implement too. Everything else is great!

• 16 May, '22
  Diahborne

  Could you add more details to what this feature is and why the devs should add it please?

• 16 May, '22
  Lars

  I think, simultaneous turn-play is mandatory for online Multiplayer! PLS implement :)

• 16 May, '22
  ako

  this and an option to watch other players battles (for chill games with friends.)
  also because moving while someone is fighting might be unfair.
  let it be al options for the player to tailor the game he likes.

• 16 May, '22
  Martijn Maas

  Simultanious turns would be great.

• 16 May, '22
  butttface

  I was also gonna add something like this. For multiplay it feels slow burn or long when we wait for each others turn so these mode could be added as a mode or option for players or make each turn have less waiting for other player or be able to do things on the map while its not on your turn

• 16 May, '22
  Iván

  I don't like the idea, would be unfair or turn the Game To an RTS when si a table rpg Game, maybe they could make something like timers (outside battles)

• 16 May, '22
  KC

  In tb games like Humankind, it's simu turns, and, fighting a battle does not freeze everyone else's game.

• 16 May, '22
  Red Dragon

  I think SimTurns would be by far the best investment of dev time above all else - even just from a sheer self-interest business perspective: To create a title that has really lasting staying power in the genre and continues to sell well far into the future it NEEDS to support a large and healthy multiplayer scene - and that is just not gonna happen without SimTurns if people will have to suffer such long waiting times. A healthy MP scene also has other benefits beyond driving sales: Properly balancing the game is all about the accumulated mp experience of the committed "superfans" who know the game inside and out and really push the meta to its breaking point (so that devs can make nerfs and buffs accordingly). Community content like new maps and mods also thrive on continued and lively interest in the multiplayer scene.
  
  1v1 fights on small and medium maps are already barely tolerable and 3+ players is borderline unplayable for people who aim to have a life on the side.

• 16 May, '22
  Yme

  It would be good to know what the opportunity cost is for developing simultaneous turns. This feature will only benefit a portion of the playerbase (inpatient multiplayer gamers) and will have zero benefit for single player gameplay. If the choice is two new factions or simultaneous turns, then I would much prefer the former.

• 16 May, '22
  Scream Admin

  @yme my personal opinion as somebody that loves multiplayer, is that some sort of simultaneous turns options should be implemented. Singleplayer is fun, but people leave after they play singleplayer. The replay value is in multiplayer, and is ultimately what will keep a game like this alive.
  
  It's not about patience, or lack thereof. For example there's a four player map called Four Corners. It takes 5+ hours to play, even with quick players. Eventually people are taking 5 minute turns. Waiting 15 (sometimes more) minute before you can do anything, is tough.

• 17 May, '22
  Kvorum

  I expressed my opinion on this matter on the first game day. But once again I repeat, there must be simultaneous moves! The game has great potential, and the competitive component is of great importance in its future destiny. Waiting, hoping :)

• 17 May, '22
  Heroes Fan

  The multiplayer part of the game should definitely be reworked simultaneously because we get bored of waiting for minutes while playing, especially when we are 4 people.

• 17 May, '22
  Deconnetable

  Simultaneous turns is impossible guys, the primary essence and every strategic component of this game is based on a turn by turn structure.

• 17 May, '22
  Sir.Beast/Seto

  maybe more ways to customize matches and a way to save that feature so when you rehost you can reload the settings, as if we had more options we could probs balance ourselfs tho i feel maybe more movement might speed up matches, so maybe a slider that will allow you to add on movement to the weilders to ajust the match time with everyones amount of time they can play, i feel that might be more the way to go as everyone has certin amount of time they can play and can ajust due to what players say how much time they have as most matches don't get contenued they'all rather start a new match, also some more game modes would be nice like king of the hill, making it so it will take you 10 turns ajustable to take mid and win the match, also maybe pass through some maps into the community domain from the custome maps so we know devs had a good lookthrough and fixup before releasing a new map in community, maybe some map competitions every month or few months would be nice for the community

• 17 May, '22
  Game kNight Plays

  ST done right would work
  ST done wrong will be a trainwreck - luckily, this is early access and I think this should be a priority. As @Scream stated, singleplayer only last so long - I've played four corners against 3 AI and even with them not taking too long, I ended up spending 4+ hours in that map before I won.
  
  That said, it will need to be a choice between ST and something to do while waiting your turn as I suggested.
  
  ST, right now, seems like the more popular choice.

• 17 May, '22
  Gabriel Fonseca Amaral

  we need a way to program how many turns will be simonaneous

• 17 May, '22
  Mondeschain

  To everyone that is worried about simultaneous turns being something unachievable, what most people are expecting is just the mechanics that we had in Heroes Of Might And Magic 3 with the "simultaneous turns" mod. It didn't convert the game in any way to an RTS, it was just an implementation to play the turns simultaneously (within the same game round) in case none of the players interacted in any way between them. When two players encountered in the same map portion or interacted with the same object/mobs, the simultaneous turns were automatically disabled for the rest of the game. To be honest it was a great implementation, it kept multiplayer games definetly quicker for the first part of the game session and it didn't change the mechanics or the spirit of the game in any way.

• 17 May, '22
  Spawni

  Yes, that's I wanted to talk Mondeschain, the feature from HOMM, didn't know there was a mod for HOMM3, but the first time I used it was on HOMM5 and it was awesome. As you say the feature was disable once you can interact with others, but there was map design for this feature to not interact with them before the end game.

• 17 May, '22
  Gildagriffon

  I dont understand reason for disabling simultaneous turns afret players interact with each other, lets say say 2 players fight eatch other so what? Turn not going to end untill all players press end turn button anyway..

• 17 May, '22
  Smok

  @Gildagriffon "faster clicking player gets advantage" is the reason some people don't want ST when interacting with other players. If ST designer happens to be that person, then you get breaking ST like in HoMM3. If ST designer is not that person, then you get not breaking ST like in Age of Wonders 3.

• 17 May, '22
  Neodamus

  My friends and I have been talking about this game for a long time, all HOMM / AOW / Civ players. None of us bought SoC on release because it doesn't have simultaneous turns.
  
  With all due respect, I definitely understand the struggles of deving on an indie budget and also know that is an Early Access release, but it's unfathomable to me for a turn-based multiplayer game to not have simultaneous turns as a given in this day and age.
  
  To me, not implementing this standard feature is a clear signal that multiplayer has been an afterthought up to this point. Adding it in now would definitely show that multiplayer is, in fact, an important aspect to the dev team and make the game purchaseable at this stage. I believe the fact that this is the top suggestion out of the gate vindicates this point.

• 17 May, '22
  Andriod

  Together with a friend I played ~30 games of HoMM3 HD with simultaneous turns, some lessons learned:
  
  Prio
  - Its clear you shouldn't need to wait for each other the first rounds, before you even meet.
  - Its clear you shouldn't need to wait for each other if everyone is on the same team
  - I would prioritize allowing the players themselves turn it on and off, as one please, as games may move in aggressive and defensive waves. And as it is hard to make a correct algorithm for it from the get to. This could work like; anyone can turn if off, but all have to agree to turn it on. We have dreadfull memories of having to reload games in HoMM3 after the auto-turn-off-simo-turns kicked inn, as one could not do it mid-game.
  - Turning it off, as the game design is now, have to revert the whole round for all players. Can be be abused? Yes, but thats for social control to deal with in the first iteration of such a feature.
  
  Later
  - Turn timers
  - Tweak it so it cant easily be abused.
  - Give warnings

• 17 May, '22
  Derrick Peterson

  Love this idea, as long as it is an option and not mandatory and the option for alternating turns can still be had.

• 17 May, '22
  Yme

  @Scream so if I understand it right, initially the game is fast for all 4 players because the number of decisions in early game is low. As the game progresses and the choices increase, the duration of each players' turn also increases. Given that once you have visibility of other players' heroes / assets, the ST goes out of the window, the benefit is really just during the early game when turns are fast anyway. There also doesn't seem to be a consensus among those who commented on how ST should look exactly.
  
  As I say, I'm not opposed to it in principle, but there is an opportunity cost to everything - so how much other content are people prepared to forgo to have slightly quicker games in multiplayer?

• 17 May, '22
  CheehC

  DO NOT DO THIS!
  
  The only way you can make it simultaneous is that during the other person's turn you can schedule the purchase of units/town advancements so that it speeds up your turn. Otherwise, if you move wielders at the same time as your opponent it creates completely different gameplay which in my opinion would suck.
  
  1) People would wait for a turn timer to almost finish before completing all movements by their wielder's as to avoid surprises.
  2) If at the start of a turn two opposing wielders were say 5 spaces away from each other but close to a settlement, then it would become a quick race at the start of the turn to click the button to get to the unfortified settlement before the other.
  3) The whole game is based on turn-based strategy. Its played like chess and not supposed to invoke adrenaline. Trying to play this game on fast forward, panic, quick decisions, would make me want to quit so fast. Its a beautiful game, great music and and an ode to HOMM type games.

• 18 May, '22
  Gildagriffon

  If we allow simultaneous turn only for few early game turns we will not change anything Basically, game still will be 12+ hours long, few turns in beginning will not solve problem
  
  But, maybe you guys forgetting that simultaneous turn is only for one turn..you or your human opponents not going to move for next round untill everyone presses "end turn" button.

• 18 May, '22
  Alek

  only now did I find this voting list. Simultaneous turns are the most important thing that the game lacks in its current state.
  The ability to turn it on and off.
  From poverty it can be even like in homm3 where time is set with simultaneous turns and then the game is standard.
  Please introduce this feature as soon as you can

• 18 May, '22
  Papa Pasda'

  Something that must be considered if they do simultaneous turns is this :
  
  https://songsofconquest.featureupvote.com/suggestions/300297/ability-to-queue-up-wielder-movement-across-turns
  
  This would allow your wielders to go straight at their desired location at the beginning of the turn so you flee an enemy wielder by example.
  Please upvote ! ;)

• 18 May, '22
  Game kNight Plays

  Consider voting this up too https://songsofconquest.featureupvote.com/suggestions/300135/add-waiting-for-turn-actions
  My suggestion would not be instead of ST but on top of - if the ST stops when a set time has passed, people will still have something to do while waiting their turn.
  It would also make it possible, when yout ST is over and you wait for the others to finish, to still be able to plan/read/view your wielders and towns.
  
  All in all, making the games faster and more enjoyable.

• 18 May, '22
  TheSpongePower

  By far the most needed thing to add to the game !

• 18 May, '22
  Melonater

  I worry that simultaneous turns could ruin what I enjoy about the game which is that its specifically turn based and not an RTS. I dont have the best reactions so RTS and games that rely on clicking on the map the fastest just make me frustrated. That said some sort of QOL which make turns quicker or something to do while its someone elses turn would be nice as at this point you spend most of your time not playing in 4 player games.

• 18 May, '22
  Mastese

  I don't get why this is being pushed for. Did anyone buy this thinking it was a RTS? Pouring time into development of this is a waste of time and resources better spent elsewhere.

• 18 May, '22
  Eccy

  I am very glad that this feature is included to be in the game in the future as it saves a lot of time be cutting the boring wait.
  
  And I hope that simultanious will be also in SP :)

• 18 May, '22
  Coldsteel

  I don't like this option as it would require a big rework of the game engine. I'd much rather they put their efforts into a good random map generator and beefing up the map editor and documentation. Very few people play this type of 4x game in MP. Most play it SP and that's where the most effort should go.

• 18 May, '22
  Stebs

  I dont even care about simultaneous turns. All I want to do is be able to plan my next move during my friends turns. Everything going black and white without me even being able to look at my own city, troops, or click on objects and objectives to remind myself what they offer feels so limiting and makes my next turn take that much longer. Games could have a nicer flow with this implemented and I wouldn't be browsing the internet during other peoples turns.
  
  Seriously. Do this and im a life long fan. It's a great game and the user generated content will only continue to make it better and better.

• 18 May, '22
  Kvorum

  @Stebs
  I am very glad that you touched on this important topic, I even wanted to create a separate topic on this issue. Completely agree with you! Please give us more freedom while waiting for other players!

• 18 May, '22
  Yme

  @Stebs I like this. Being able to "queue" your actions while waiting for the opponent and then when it's your turn have a pop up to confirm all queued actions (with ability to specify the order in which they should be executed - e.g. recruit creatures, move to pick up resource, etc.) would make all turns quicker, not just in early game.

• 18 May, '22
  NoodleeHUN

  So far i can't understand people who says the game is slow... played 2 large maps 3 and 4 normal AI since i couldn't find hard... the 1st was quite fast, the second one was even faster (67 turns), tho the AI takes hell lot of time... i usually finish my turns in 2-4 min.. even with combat... the fights later on gets even shorter, since the game is quite imbalanced yet... whoever takes 15 min each turn should be thrown out of your MP session and play sims alone IMHO.
  
  Simultaneous turns are totally pointless in a games like this... if everyone cries about it, well yeah, make it, but still, only until 2 parties has seen each other and after that comes the good old waiting game.

• 19 May, '22
  Spq2me

  Everyone who sad no - business opponent

• 19 May, '22
  Maraddor

  Maybe add options to choose between classic and simultaneous rounds? Such an option existed in Age of Wonders Shadow Magic, for example, where you could choose the type of rounds depending on your preference (of course, there was no such option in Hot Seat). Being able to observe the environment, checking research requirements, buildings, our hero and unit status during the opponent's turn in multiplayer (as has already been suggested in this topic) would also be a sure substitute for a simultaneous turn, as it would allow us to plan our moves in advance.

• 19 May, '22
  Glyfos

  I can't really see a reason why some people are like : "DO NOT DO THIS!'!
  Even if it's added to the game, I assume it will always stay as an option.
  
  Simultaneous turns as in heroes 3 or 5, which ends when 2 players meet would always be cool and something that has nothing to be afraid of.
  
  I personnaly would like a fully simultaneous turns, which do never disable itself, in order to play with friends (we can agree on who moves when etc...)
  But this is definitely more tricky and would cause some client/server issues, so I would understand if it's not implemented.
  
  But if it's not costy for the production (if partial simultaneous turns are already added), feel free to implement it as another option, still cool.

• 19 May, '22
  le_lobuz

  I guess it could work by making the underlying code a bit more RTSy (as in multiple weilders can move at the same time, until a given player ends his turn), and then slapping turn-basedness onto it. Then it would come to balancing act - you could either have a moderator that turns off sim turns at a certain point in a game or do it automatically. Or make groups of players who have sim turns. (like allies could have sim turns).
  
  Not a bad idea, but I guess the balancing act is more problematic.

• 19 May, '22
  Wasaby

  I don't understand why people are so reluctant to this feature. It already exist in HoMM 5/7 and age of wonders and it worked very well at the time. For people who disagree, at least give real arguments (only few people have legitimate concerns about this...)

• 19 May, '22
  Capprice

  Too much hype on this imo
  -- As soon as two heroes from enemy teams are in movement range of each other it goes to turn-based mode. It will never go back to simultaneous mode
  
  It took a while for Homm3 to have this feature and the game was fine without it and still it was a better game than Homm5+. Definitely not highest prio.
  If you are just waiting for this feature to BUY the game, you should should leave.
  
  I am in favor of this don't misunderstand. Just I'd rather developers focus on other aspects first

• 19 May, '22
  player

  Started a game with 5 AI, to watch how the AI acted.
  They barely left their base, turns began to crawl, and eventually waiting for turns to end became unbearably slow,

• 19 May, '22
  Red Dragon

  I don't know if this has ever been solved before and there are perhaps good reasons why it can't work but how about this: Keep simturns on all the time (but still everyone is on the same turn ofc) and only "freeze" two wielders when they come into some kind of aggro range (Say a range of 8 squares in every direction. If two hostile's range overlap only those two wielders get "frozen" (everything else is still simturns) and the game randomly chooses who gets to go first (Say the wielders get a red exclamation point and a number over their head). The first player gets to go first an can choose to engage or run away. The beauty of this would be that even if more and more wielders manage to get into aggro range on this same turn to pile into the fight they just get assigned higher and higher "turn" numbers and the fights/escapes get resolved in order. Players not engaged in that fight can meanwhile use their turn with other wielders to fight mobs or whatever.

• 20 May, '22
  Glyfos

  Red Dragon I like the idea and I also got something like this in mind, but I think it would be a hell to code and set up (a to prevent specific conflicting cases)

• 22 May, '22
  Jonathan

  The way I imagine simultanous turns is that each wielder has a "zone of control", if another wielder steps into this zone of control, the game reverts to a normal turn based for the players that are involved. Once the other wielder either has won a battle over the other wielder or stepped out of the zone of control simultanous turns continue again.

• 24 May, '22
  especial1986

  Simultaneous turns would be the way to go, one of the reasons why me and my mates played HoMM with the patch/mod with Simultaneous turns. Make it possible to enable/disable and also customisable to be turned off when wielders get within walking distance of one another or to just let it run.
  
  In sum:
  Allow for sim turns to be enabled or disabled
  If enabled, also allow an option to keep it forever or to be disabled after wielders get close