Transport Tycoon Forums

This is a quick poll building on the discussion of a possible Multiplayer forum from Forum Suggestions. Several of the regular muliplayer participants have expressed interest in setting up servers for particular games. Many of them have particular interests, but would like to get a feel as to whether their particular ideas generate enough interest to justify setting up a server. Here's a quick poll for those who play (or are interested in playing) to get an idea what most players want. Please take a minute to review the poll and select the TWO entries that would best indicate your personal preference. Feel free to let me know if anything needs clarifying. Thanks for your input...

i selected time periods, but thats mainly because i want a good playing time, and dont want to have the game end when its getting good.

i definitely think participants is important. that is why we are playing multiplayer after all. and i like to have some people to play against.

thegreatpl wrote:i selected time periods, but thats mainly because i want a good playing time, and dont want to have the game end when its getting good.

i definitely think participants is important. that is why we are playing multiplayer after all. and i like to have some people to play against.

I guess there are two different meanings to "time period". I was thinking more of a particular era, and it sounds like you were thinking of scheduled times for play. It makes sense, I should have made my description more clear and added "Specific scheduled times of play" to the poll. This might make things interesting as it seems there is about a 50/50 split between North American and EU players: we might be munching on a late-evening snack and enjoying a cold adult beverage (Coke or Pepsi for you young'uns) while you "over there" might be finishing up your breakfast bangers (or frikandelle for those in NS land...)

what i meant was, i didnt want to be playing a game when it gets to 2050, or whenever it finishes. so i look at the dates and try to chose a date which will give me a good few hours play time. dates dont really matter me themselves, but i would like to see a game with more historical GRFs., set back in the 1700s and 1800s. of course, what would really be good is if we had further back periods...

anyway, i dont want to be on a server when it auto-resets, or at least, i want to have had a good game. i dont want to begin a game and then half an hour later have it erased as the server resets.

thegreatpl wrote:what i meant was, i didnt want to be playing a game when it gets to 2050, or whenever it finishes. so i look at the dates and try to chose a date which will give me a good few hours play time. dates dont really matter me themselves, but i would like to see a game with more historical GRFs., set back in the 1700s and 1800s. of course, what would really be good is if we had further back periods...

anyway, i dont want to be on a server when it auto-resets, or at least, i want to have had a good game. i dont want to begin a game and then half an hour later have it erased as the server resets.

OK, thanks for clearing that up - it makes sense. As far as the time period, earlier games would be interesting, but in many ways the games is really built around the rail networks. Maybe an 1830-2030 scenario would be playable. I haven't looked at the GVRTS set yet, but I understand it has early steam. Any game before 1850 would be geared around water transport, and coastal cities would by far have the competitive advantage. Are you thinking of a scenario where players begin with sailing ships and gradually transition towards railroads as the technology improves?

I picked Specific Country GRF prototypes and Specific time periods.
I have been having a blast playing with NARS2 and eGRVTS starting as early as 1849 or so (whenever the earliest 4-4-0 American is released.) With the excellent graphics from the US station set, US road set, ISR8, NA city set, etc. I can customize OTTD to look the way I want. Once the NA road vehicle set and NA industry set come out, it's only gonna get better and better.

Unfortunately, I seem to be the only one who uses these GRFs and wants to play multiplayer with them. I have honestly gotten bored playing with the original TTD vehicles and industries- NARS, GRVTS and PBI have me spoiled.

I should try starting another server with just PBI, NARS2, eGRVTS, etc. and no "eye candy". But I really don't like the default stations, so that means ISR8 at least And then there's New Ships, and AV8, and pretty soon there are enough grfs that nobody else has the same combination.

If there was an option to choose all of the above i would have picked that one!

I'm really into making specialized multiplayer maps with new challanges..

I use the Openttdcoop.org GRF pack(7.3 and legacy from 7.2) to have some freedom in grf's
so most of my maps have all of the above..(people who have this pack wont have to set new grf's each time they join another server)

and indeed, a longer time period is essential, as most players want to build big , i find running a map or scenario for 2 or 3 days keeps them comming back for more... since they can continue working on what they left behind the day before...i also set never expiring vehicals so all vehics will be avialable in 2100> so dates dont matter too much..(for me)

Well, the poll results so far are a bit different from what I imagined they would be (you mean not everybody agrees with my personal preferences? ) but based on what I see so far, it appears that people want more challenging games, based on more competitors, more complex economies, and if I interpret the results correctly, perhaps more challenging terrain as well.

KeikyuFan wrote:Well, the poll results so far are a bit different from what I imagined they would be (you mean not everybody agrees with my personal preferences? ) but based on what I see so far, it appears that people want more challenging games, based on more competitors, more complex economies, and if I interpret the results correctly, perhaps more challenging terrain as well.

Given how this poll works I could check anything or nothing. It's not one particular "feature" which makes a game interesting, but it is a fitting combination of many. And then there's the thing that twice the exact same thing is rather boring...

So, when I go about creating a map, I try to arange a setting which emits a certain flair. But then I might not design scenarios for the general public but rather a very limited subset.

You don't have multiplayer goals as an opinion, I want different types of customizable goals in multiplayer! No reason to play if there isn't a winner.

Dear KeikyuFan,
start a Server with these options, then you can try to make a server all inclusive.
But a few options are allready in Trunk or yet in stable.
Perhaps i don't understand the POLL.

Timmaexx wrote:Dear KeikyuFan,
start a Server with these options, then you can try to make a server all inclusive.
But a few options are allready in Trunk or yet in stable.
Perhaps i don't understand the POLL.

Sorry, I thought the reason for the poll was pretty self-evident. Given that there are now lots of new GRFs to expand game possibilities, yet most servers don't use them, I wanted to get an idea what the multiplayers wanted. As much as I like all the newgrfs, I'm sure that for most players, the idea of having to download 20 or 30 GRFs just to play on a particular server would chase them off... However, a game that offered what most people wanted with say no more than 4 to 6 new GRFs would have a better chance of attracting more players. Hopes that makes sense...

KeikyuFan wrote:I'm sure that for most players, the idea of having to download 20 or 30 GRFs just to play on a particular server would chase them off... However, a game that offered what most people wanted with say no more than 4 to 6 new GRFs would have a better chance of attracting more players. Hopes that makes sense...

No offense, but this is knowing very little about the usual players. Mostly, they want to grab ANY grf that they see passing near by. Up to the point where they don't have a clue about what the said grf brings in to the game. It's just...

I WANT IT!

, no matter what.

games with 20 or 30 Grf files i ignore. i just dont want the hassle of going online and downloading them.

i wouldnt mind playing a game in the past. especially a multiplayer game. but there isnt a server that caters for that. i actually would have said 1700 onwards, as there are sets that go for that far back. actually, the earliest date is 1500 (and its a horse drawn train), that i have seen for a new GRF, but until there are more vehicles that come in further back, then its best to stick to more modern times. the real problem is these kinds of periods still had large sea influence, and until someone comes up with a good boat GRF that has sailing ships...

still, a past multiplayer game probably would be good. there isnt that many vehicles that go back in time beyond the 1900's, but some of them would make for an interesting game. plus, the more time you put in would increase the available playing time. and many games run well into the 2100's and beyond. several multiplayer games go on for even longer than that, so i dont see why they wouldnt want to play a game that goes from the past to the future.

Bump.

Definition of a bump:
I've got not a single thing to say, I just want other people to re-activate the conversation for me.
Nice going, KeikyuFan, really nice going ...

why not accept the fact that there are enough people who simply dont care about your poll?

Let me respond to the last two individuals as follows: For starters, I have plenty to say, including some choice words that could be directed at both of you. However, I do realize there is some rampant political correctness going on, and that is forum, like any online forum, has a certain contingency of people with highly-sensitive egos and control-freak tendencies. As far as the poll, it's clear that there are people interested in multi-player games, and at least 50 people have responded to date, showing that indeed some people DO care. I was hoping to get about 80-100 to get a solid sampling, as that number appears to represent about half the number of people that IMHO participate in multiplayer games. I did ONE bump, and the self-appointed forum police come charging out.

As far as I'm concerned, I prepared a well-thought out poll to get more info on a legitimate area of interest, given that I'm contemplating setting up a game server and wouldn't want to waste the effort with a game that nobody would play. Why is this such a freaking problem to a few people in this forum?

KeikyuFan wrote:I did ONE bump, and the self-appointed forum police come charging out.

Interesting definition of "self-appointed". I was under the impression that Belugas was appointed by Owen. i.e. Belugas was not appointed by himself.

DaleStan wrote:

KeikyuFan wrote:I did ONE bump, and the self-appointed forum police come charging out.

Interesting definition of "self-appointed". I was under the impression that Belugas was appointed by Owen. i.e. Belugas was not appointed by himself.

I'm getting the feeling that no matter what I do, it's not going to meet wth someone's approval.

So far, it appears I have committed some pretty major sins around here:

[*] Using HTML code for a lighter text color so it could be readable.
[*] Including a reference of a "naughty word" in a post (not the actual word itself), even though a regular uses the same reference in the same manner in his *.sig post.
[*] An ill attempt at levity, that included no insults, threats, obscenities, private personal info, or anything usually considered bad Netiquette, but referred to some supposedly taboo subject.
[*] A one-time bump to get a few more responses to a poll that obviously had some legitimate interest, as 50+ people had already responded.

I was under the impression that this was a forum for TT players/fans/afficionados to share/contribute/whatever, but I am beginning to see that this is more of a private little club, and somehow I have upset a few sensitive ones.