Power-ups and size of the board up to 9x9, 5 players

[gdgdgdgd]

I really like the op's idea, I think the added total game time for player turns could be more than made up with a simultaneous development phase which someone else posted about too.

So why not go for double the plots and double the players? And keep doubling things as required to maintain the "scale".

Some small compensation for the guys in last place who can no longer let go of all the Mules: add a short queue in the coral and let them get to the "front of the line" whenever they enter right after a higher ranked player.  Add some time to the clock to compensate for new queue time.

Tack on a "break period" to let everyone peak at the competition from time to time...

Oh yeah and add A flame thrower in there somewhere too   who doesn't like A flame thrower?  Think of it like a mobile mule that spouts flames, costing other players hospital bills and to let go of any Mules that go insane from being cooked... you drag it onto someone's plot and they can't move it with a mule in their hands...

I'm starting to think tactical nuclear weapons too, for when you really can't stand the injustice of it all and want to make a statement!   

About that... Well...

I don´t think Planet M.U.L.E. is about war...
But to put flame throwers AGAINST pirates would be cool.
The flame throwers could be put in a plot so if pirates come you can defend yourself.
You could put different upgrades as a protection from plagues, or pirates, or any other thing.
It is a good idea but with some modifications it could be better.

[gdgdgdgd]

Please go to General Discussion and open the one the says Atari Emulator.
Then write about how much you liked it.

[Blitzen]

Fair enough gdgdgdgdgdgdgdgdgdgdgdgd... sorry stutter.

But read my post just before your posts I wasn't at all serious either

Now whats this about Atari? I never played the Atari version, wouldn't bother with it since the differences I have read about them are important improvements imo.

http://www.planetmule.com/forum?topic=1057.0

And how much I liked what exactly???  Maybe I should go read it now...

[Blitzen]

Further to this discussion, I just noticed my suggestion to make development simultaneous has even been considered by the devs already:

http://www.planetmule.com/forum?topic=333.0

I do recognize that seeing what everyone else does is important but I disagree with giving up on the idea altogether though and my earlier idea to add a pause would still only be a "memory game" as you put it.  It wouldn't give enough detail about what each player did without a photographic memory... so how about some replay time right after everyone is done going at the same time?  Lasting the equivalent to one player's development time to review and replay the entire events of the previous development phase?  If you doubled the players this would mean still saving half the time from this process over the original game, and quadruple the time over the original style with 8 players.

You could even let each player set playback speed, review in another window even during auctions, rewind, ff, loop!  Make that down time in auctions useful for something else kinda thing...

I think I'm giving ya'll too many good ideas for free to be not the least bit humble! But I guess its the least anyone can do as a show of gratitude and respect!

[gdgdgdgd]

Here is the link to my Blog where you can find more ideas for Planet M.U.L.E.

http://1playergamer.blogspot.com/

[gdgdgdgd]

maybe instead of only one random generate level, it would be cool to be different types of color, of the soil. Let's say: you select only the color of the soil and if it already has meteorite holes. The rest to be randomly generated?   

[gdgdgdgd]

Go Voting!

[gdgdgdgd]

new vote option

[Mt-Wampus]

Stear clear of this new guy gdgdgdgd . He is a bigtime troublemaker! Most probably know already but for those who dont. Yet another new player ruining things for legit new guys.

[Null]

for players that let go of mules, perhaps double the price of a mule for each player induvidualy as they pull one out.  100/200/400/800  This could get expensive for them.  Its a dirty tactic that should still be allowed, but it should be expensive to do with an equal negative reaction.

Perhaps even lower the timer for every mule pulled out of the stable.

The first player letting go all mules, leaving the next 3 players without, seems kinda harsh and can really screw even the lowest standing players from ever getting the chance to catch up.  Sure, this tactic is to boost prices of ore, and give that player a leg up against all others, but it really shouldnt be at the cost of totaly taking another player out of the game so early in the game.

If you want people to stay 12 rounds, why do we do such things that make them want to leave in the 4th round?


Extra players?  Hmmm I dunno.  That seems a bit much.  It's hard to determine wether or not you can last an hour and change to play one game.  If you're playing with more players, you can expect the game to last much longer, giving a greater chance of loosing players durring and having to play with bots.


Fewer rounds... Yes!  We should be able to play 6-8-12-+ rounds without choosing training.  Though I can see how this might not compare so well with rank standing.  someone winning all of their games in 6 rounds shouldnt compare to someone winning all games in 12+ rounds.

This is where I would suggest having multiple ranking systems, not just 1.

[gdgdgdgd]

i think Mt-Wampus got ignored........ 

[gdgdgdgd]

for players that let go of mules, perhaps double the price of a mule for each player induvidualy as they pull one out.  100/200/400/800  This could get expensive for them.  Its a dirty tactic that should still be allowed, but it should be expensive to do with an equal negative reaction.

Perhaps even lower the timer for every mule pulled out of the stable.

The first player letting go all mules, leaving the next 3 players without, seems kinda harsh and can really screw even the lowest standing players from ever getting the chance to catch up.  Sure, this tactic is to boost prices of ore, and give that player a leg up against all others, but it really shouldnt be at the cost of totaly taking another player out of the game so early in the game.

If you want people to stay 12 rounds, why do we do such things that make them want to leave in the 4th round?


Extra players?  Hmmm I dunno.  That seems a bit much.  It's hard to determine wether or not you can last an hour and change to play one game.  If you're playing with more players, you can expect the game to last much longer, giving a greater chance of loosing players durring and having to play with bots.


Fewer rounds... Yes!  We should be able to play 6-8-12-+ rounds without choosing training.  Though I can see how this might not compare so well with rank standing.  someone winning all of their games in 6 rounds shouldnt compare to someone winning all games in 12+ rounds.

This is where I would suggest having multiple ranking systems, not just 1.

Good Comment!

But fewer rounds... i don't think that would be a good poll option but ill put it even though, cause that would make that most of the people want to play the game shorter and no one or too few people would play the normal one, cause it takes more time than a monopoly game... 

[cerealbusiness]

With a bigger map couldn't we increase the size of the actual game window. Up the resolution and bring it closer to full screen. I hat how in the current beta versions they try to cram so much in but if the game were bigger they'd have plenty of room to present everything.

[gdgdgdgd]

That's what piete said some time ago.
You can enter my blog for more ideas:

1playergamer.blogspot.com

[cerealbusiness]

That's what piete said some time ago.
You can enter my blog for more ideas:

1playergamer.blogspot.com

good to know im not the only one. i checked out the blog but didn't see any different ides.