#Consider smaller and bigger lobbies

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

vernal acorn
#

While 8-player lobbies are great, some players might prefer smaller or larger groups.

Personally, I’ve always wanted to try a massive 32-player lobby. It could be structured into subgroups, where each one plays until only 4 players remain. Then, they wait for another subgroup to reach 4 before merging, creating a dynamic, evolving game. Or it could simply work like a normal lobby but we are 32 instead. This might result in 2-hour matches, but it would likely require a significant rework of the game.

The game could also be revamped to make it last less than 2h or it could be a rare special event.

If it’s not too resource-intensive, I suggest running some tests after implementing the features mentioned in the recent blog.

thin vapor
#

Tournaments as a single global match/in one lobby?

Sounds like a bloodbath.

I like it.

vernal acorn
# thin vapor Tournaments as a single global match/in one lobby? Sounds like a bloodbath. I ...

Tournaments were the original idea but 1 big game would probably allow less skill expression than 3 normal games so maybe not

Still I would definitely want to try!

Aaron talked about using portal data to understand what players want and then potentially implement the portal bonus in the original game so they could do something similar but we could choose the size of the lobby instead 😁

brave notch
glacial holly
#

Im saying this, not expecting this structure to attract players en mass. I may be wrong of course 🙂

vernal acorn
# brave notch How much rework would it take to make this happen? I love this idea!

I don't know to be honest, I'm throwing this idea here so that maybe one day it could be utilized especially if AI software engineers become x1000 more efficient than real software engineer in which case there would be no such thing as "too much work"

I suggested to work on it after they implement upcoming features but that would probably be too soon