I still think an accelerated game would be awful and would require way to many modifications to make it balanced. It wouldn't be the same game any more, it would just have similar mechanics and graphics.

roozbeh wrote:So in 5-10 minutes you cant really talk to each other and you have to be more lucky rathar than be a pro .

I actually think a fast mode would be much more challenging, and not because of luck. You could still talk to other players, and even expect a very quick response because everyone is online. However, conversations would need to be extremely quick and efficient. ("Peace?" -- "Sure.") There would probably still be a lessened impact of diplomacy, and a greater impact of war skill, but that just means its a different experience. Not necessarily a worse or better one.

v3xt wrote:It wouldn't be the same game any more, it would just have similar mechanics and graphics.

Thats kinda the idea. Its meant to feel more like a RTS than a turn based strategy game. And this is just a suggestion for a new mode, not a change to the base game. So if you dont like RTS feel, you could keep playing the standard game.

Alright. So I played a game called Neptunes pride 2: triton. Nowhere near as good as subterfuge, although kinda similar. But, there was one game mode that had 64 people playing in one game. I think if you could somehow make a game like that, although maybe not to that scale. If you could get 20 people into one game, there would be so many more opportunities for alliances. I don't expect it to work, but it would be a really cool idea

1. Stats - The more stats the better. But the minimum I'd like to see at the end of the game would be drillers produced, driller kills/steals, driller deaths, specialists produced/stolen, specialists lost, factories made, generators made, factories lost, generators lost. I think this would give a good summary of the type of game everyone played, i.e. diplomatic, offensive, defensive, etc.


2. Balanced specialists - Not all specialists will ever be 100% balanced, and that is fine. It actually is good that they aren't all equally useful. Each specialist also serves a different purpose. However, they need to at least be in the same spectrum of usefulness. Too many games have specialists chosen by a hierarchical preference, basically a list of best to worst, with the context of that specific game barely relevant. Kings and smugglers seem to be insta-picked for example. Most of the themes of the specialists are pretty neat. Most of them can be easily tweaked just a little to be more balanced, but a few of them might need an overhaul or changed completely.

3. Anonymous Game Invitations- When I invite my friends to an anonymous game, they know who I am since they know I created it and I'm the only color in the game. They should hide the colors until at least 4 players (or some number greater than 2) have joined. This should be easy to implement.

layze23 wrote:2. Balanced specialists - Not all specialists will ever be 100% balanced, and that is fine. It actually is good that they aren't all equally useful. Each specialist also serves a different purpose. However, they need to at least be in the same spectrum of usefulness. Too many games have specialists chosen by a hierarchical preference, basically a list of best to worst, with the context of that specific game barely relevant. Kings and smugglers seem to be insta-picked for example. Most of the themes of the specialists are pretty neat. Most of them can be easily tweaked just a little to be more balanced, but a few of them might need an overhaul or changed completely.

The reason that Kings and Smugglers as instapicked: Nobody tries anything else nowadays.
I find that the reason I get smuggler(s) is not because of their speed, but because of what I think is the best specialist in the game: the tycoon. You see, you rarely see anyone with more than 1 tycoon. But 2 tycoons double your production speed. But its getting better, its starting to be promoted more often now.
Another quite OP specialist is the general. Having 3/4 of them, in my opinion, can be equally as devastating as having 3/4 kings. Especially when you have diplomats an/or pirates.