Another offer of Multiplayer game

[Gibridus]

Surely there were different ideas for multiplayer, but I also wanted to write about it
I propose to implement multiplayer as follows:
- the game is played only on 9 cells, everyone has the same card;
- players can see each other's cities only with a separate screen load from the opponent’s city, i.e. players play in some of their spaces (or think of something differently, the main thing is to eliminate the load on the PC);
- there must be a choice of game time, for example, three hours, five hours and so on;
- in accordance with the time, there must be a choice of victory conditions in the game, for example, a gain in the number of inhabitants, a gain in the number of open cells, a gain in the amount of money, etc;
- there must be an endless game without victory;
- there should be a function to save and transfer the multiplayer file;
- only those mods that launch the game should work automatically, with the exception of the mod for 25 cells and endless money, for example.
At the expense of the first two points, you can make the addition that the player will only display the adjacent cell of a neighboring player. To reduce the load on the PC to make the number of players no more than three people.
If you have ideas for supplementing what is described, then write
The game is cool, beautiful, but it will not hurt some competition!
Thanks for reading

 

[Cityplanner 53]

While I'm not sure multiplayer would be a good idea, personally I'd prefer to have multiple players working together to make a city, although to an extent, one at a time through the work shop we can already do that.

 

[Fox_NS_CAN]

I am very much against multiplayer for CS. I don't think multi-player would be very practical for most people anyway, and therefore would be a huge waste of time to implement.

Not exactly a drop in, drop out type of game. Playing with complete strangers is unlikely to work well. Do you start over every time someone leaves? Or do people just pop in and out leaving little messes everywhere? Can a griefer doze your stuff? If not, then I guess you can't doze the mess they make? Could box you in. Feels like you'd have to limit it to people you know.

CS is not a fast paced or short game. It would be a huge investment of free time to play. Are you realistically going to be able to get everyone together at the same time to play for hours on end?

If everyone has to be present, it could put your city on hold a lot. If everyone doesn't have to be there, you'd have to deal with syncing issues if you play separately. And if you're playing separately, there's little point in multiplayer.

My last city started as a Mass Transit scenario. I finished it (9 tiles full) last Spring. Started my current city in May. Six tiles mostly done. Maybe I'm slow, but that just doesn't seem like something that would work as multiplayer.

I think in some people's imagination it would be great. In reality, I think it would not work well, and be useless for the vast majority of players.

 

[Cityplanner 53]

I agree that drop in/out competitive multiplayer would not work but I do think that perhaps it could be interesting to have a mode, say, where 4 players who are friends (does steam work like that) work together on a city, with the services split between them, so closer to the way a city actually works, with different departments working together. I know it's not the most popular concept, and if they did do it, would likely be more for the hypothetical cities 2 than as DLC, but I think it could be a novel way to open up a different approach to playing the game.

 

[Reid777]

As already mentioned, it would be a waste of development time for a feature which would be used by very few players.
This type of game doesn't work well as multiplayer.

 

[Legpain]

I totally agree and really want something like this implemented into Cities Skylines. Ideally I would like it to be like Civ 5/6 or Hearts of Iron where there is win conditions or the game ends after a certain amount of time and the player with the most profitability of money wins.

I think this would work really well and I would have a lot of fun playing it. Players would pick a map and then players would be randomly assigned an area. Some players might get loads of oil and therefore base their entire economy around oil and industry. Others might get little to no natural resources and decide to have their focus on tourism and good jobs (well educated citizens).

Something like this would unlikely happen but I would think that it'd work very, very well.