Having a tense relationship with your friend’s dwarven settlement is something I cannot wait for.
Competition for resources and territory would make a seriously interesting challenge mode on mass multiplayer sense players would constantly get attacked left and right.
What I would like is if Co-Op was a single settlement for each player, have an objective that whoever completes it first, wins the game, this of course would have to be something that took quite a long time to complete, because if you could beat a level in an hour, there would be no point in working on your settlement.
So there could be a large scale objective where “the first player to have 20,000 coins in his bank wins”, or “the first person to tame 40 Yaks wins”, or it could simply be total domination of the other factions. And people would be able to make there own objectives for players to complete.
However I would also like a simply “Play the game with friends!” option for game creation. So that you could build however you wished to in peace.
So basically Civ is what you want (culture, wealth, diplomatic, and domination victories)? I can go with that.
I’d personally prefer it without the objective. Just survival like the single player side of the game, but with friends (/enemies)
When it comes to co-op, and making massive mods for the game, I prefer to want to see endless game play, of players working together. This could be done by what some have suggested.
Things I’d like to see…
Increased monster spawns against one player (at which the other can offer aid)
Increased titan attacks (forcing players to rebuild)
Special events taking place (think blood-moon, Terraria)
Cities branching out in production to support one another.
Over all its hard to make a game endless, even harder when thinking in terms of how to keep the players busy… but I plan to build pretty closely with a friend and don’t want to it to end soon - half the reason I invested into this game. That and how open it will be to mods.
I know what, how about when the game is 3+ players one player also becomes the dungeon master. His goal is to not be discovered but also to destroy the other players. The other players must work together to survive while trying to find out who the dungeon master is.
1 Like
There will be a pvp mode? ( similar to age of empires 2 where you can do teams, 2v2 , 3v3, 2v2v2v2 ecc)
yes, but not in the manner you’re imagining (at least, i dont think thats the current design)… you will basically be tackling a copy of your friends settlement/map…
Player vs. Player City Raids: Select a party of adventurers to storm a copy of another player’s city and bring home their treasures. Leaderboards will rank and track the deadliest fighters and most impenetrable fortresses.
Quite possibly at some point, the only thing we know about multiplayer is what was discussed during the kickstarter -firstly the asynchronous pvp mode where you download a copy of one of your friends setlements and get to work raiding/ destroying it.
Secondly the co-op mode where you play alongside friends and family etc. We don’t know how these things will work and in all honesty we don’t know too much about them.
Aaaaaaand @SteveAdamo has beaten me so I’ll just cut my losses and run 
1 Like
ok, thx. In any case I hope you will make a more classical pvp mode in the future^^
Sounds like an Idea for CHALLENGE MAPS!
Heh, I have an idea about the ‘why not both’ mode in game. It would be excellent in minecraft-like servers.
One word: Diplomacy with some options adjusted by players. Different type of relations which will allow/refuse different situations: Alliance, Peace, Neutral, War.
Let’s see: we have 2 players on the server. They may:
- Play as a one team (both expanding one town or two towns in ‘symbiosis’ doesn’t matter)
- Play as a two factions having only some trade routes between them.
- Raid themselves.
First option is easy - Players sign an alliance with each other and have a typical co-op game, with sharing resources/forces/map… (if they will set that option of course)
Second one - Peace or Neutral. In peace players can’t attack themselves, but they could for example exchange resources. As neutral factions hovewer, players can fight with themselves if they are defending his grounds.
Third one - simple - players have a war and have free PvP, raids, pillages… But to prevent backstabs and other actions: players must be both online and every declaration of war must have some time between it and PvP activation between those players.
I know there is propably another solution, but I wanted to share my point of view. 
The fact the multiplayer is coming is cool (maybe not for a while, but still)
It would be cool to have teams and stuff and be able to guard your stockpiles with walls and patrols against other people.
I’m excited (yeah I realize this is very far off, like maybe even a year or so away)
I think it’ll work like in DayZ.
What about just connecting maps
In you have your own piece of world map do why not just connect it with your friend’s piece while you are playing together. Thus you be can see your friends village being manipulated by him and your village is being manipulated by you
2 Likes
Hey there @_LUNAR, welcome to the Discourse 
!
Please be aware that multiplayer will not be coming until the game leaves Alpha and is feature complete. Feel free to discuss, but be aware!
2 Likes
This means most likely that by the time that multiplayer maps are ended, maps will probably be procedurally generated and chunk-based (Minecraft’s a great example of how this works well) and probably means you won’t be able to connect maps.
why they won`t?
The map is chunk based so you EVENTUALLY can connect it with others
Not really. It’s also based on a random seed. Chances are two worlds will be very different and not able to just “mash” together.