Real Time PvP vs AI Controlled PvP

That is one way to put it. Also seeing as this game was built on a single player engine, they would have to start from scratch to make a new engine that works on 2 player online play. As it stands this game uses what i can only imagine is a small update service that checks players through a preloaded list and formula to determine who you face in pvp.

1 Like

According to @Bobomb the latter team would win in one long continuous turn :grin:

As I said, if you’re the type of person that really likes live PvP and leaderboards based on this then the time commitment is irrelevant. If I’m super committed to live PvP and battling someone for #1 I don’t care if the match takes a minute or an hour.

I’m sure it would increase the game length by at least double what it is currently, but I don’t think match length is relevant. I’m sure it would discourage some people, but so does any live PvP system.

1 Like

We actually implemented live PvP in Puzzle Quest, Galactrix, & Puzzle Quest 2…

The main design issue (one of turn timing) was an issue in those games too, but we solved it with a short-ish turn-timer (it could be adjusted from 4 sec to 24sec in PQ1 for example). We also stamped out endless looping by putting cooldown timers on individual spells. So the design issues are all addressable, I believe.

The main issue with Gems of War is the server infrastructure. Due to the rather flaky nature of many mobile connections & the need to stop blatant hacking, we’d need to move a lot of the game-state simulation from the clients to the server. That’s quite a hefty task, not just in the amount of server coding required, but in the amount of rewriting of the client-server interaction.

All that being said, we’d LOVE to do it one day - it would certainly provide a challenge - but we won’t be in a place to start this in the next 6 months, I don’t believe.

15 Likes

@Sirrian Let’s say you move forward with actually putting Live PVP into production next year, would Live PVP be the only PVP option in the whole game?

2 Likes

I hope not! That was never my hope. I just think it would be cool if there were both.

3 Likes

@Ashasekayi

7 Likes

I hope it won’t be the only option either since I’ve never liked live PVP. I enjoy the game mechanics as-is.

2 Likes

Thanks. :smile_cat: That’s good to know.

2 Likes

Yep - what @dhjl said. The current asynchronous PvP is fun, we won’t ever remove that.
It would be nice to have an option for live PvP though… because no matter how much time we spend writing an AI, it would never be as devious as you guys!

6 Likes

Thanks for the fast response!

I’m glad to hear that everyone gets to be happy with various play options as the game grows.

2 Likes

You can tell just from where the spinners show up in-game right now that once a match starts, the game plays entirely locally until one side wins. If you’re on mobile, you can start a match, then enter Airplane Mode (or a parking garage) and play uninterrupted until the victory screen.

This would all have to change in live PvP.

1 Like

if you want to make real time PVP, you need

a lot of players

This is why we have nerfs and buffs right here in this line it confirms it.

Let’s be honest about this. A player vs a computer controlled AI is not PVP. It is PVC. I’m tired of misrepresentations by game devs. Player versus player is not the same as player versus computer.

Oh come on stop necroing random threads impostor, we know you aren’t the real Van … oh you are not him … soooo, you’re serious?

1 Like

Lol… I had the same thought

It can be done.

Of course it can be done. However, it would be like playing a completely different game; and it would be a pretty hefty undertaking to move their game state server-side. Latency would become a much larger factor than it is today, where a slow connection results in pre- or post-battle spinners (and the odd timeout). As well, the reward structure would need to be carefully considered so that the mode is both optional as well as worthwhile – a balance that the devs have had trouble attaining with their existing game modes.

I see this as a future direction the game could definitely take, but the payoff relative to the heavy investments required to implement is unclear. (Many players here have expressed no desire in such a mode, but this might be a case of, “Build it and they will come.”)

4 Likes

What of it wasn’t a standard, but an optional way of playing. The actual challenge is when you put your deck against a real, critical thinking and strategic person. You would see that your deck might not work as well as you are use to making it work.

Takes too much from the servers I think.

The devs official stance is they would have to create a new game to implement such a change. (I’m paraphrasing of course.)