Multiplayer (Co-op/Competitive)

Comments: 58

• 06 Aug
  Gin Fuyou

  I have doubts of how it can work without some serious changes in the game, but in theory cooperative multiplayer seems quite appealing, I'll vote it up just for sake of it.

• 20 Aug
  Mouneedsacookie

  When I showed the demo to my spouse, they got really excited and the first thing they asked is "Does it allow multiplayer? Can we play it together?" So I'm definitely hopeful for the possibility of a co-op mode!

• 15 Sep
  Gin Fuyou

  Coop mechanic idea - technology trading:
  Assuming with game development factions accumulate a number of unique technologies and buildings I propose that in coop you could trade some of them, making them available for partners faction. For example you would print faction tech books and exchange them with another player. Second player consumes books in some research building, gradually unlocking foreign techs.
  I think this idea is crude and it bases on a few assumptions regarding technology diversity of factions - but I think given some condition it could be produced to something interesting.

• 15 Sep
  Piper

  I like this idea, but don't see why the game would need to split the game objects between players. If it's coop, why not just let all players build and manage everything everywhere?

• 16 Sep
  Drewsy

  I am adamant about this idea. I think a great way to add it would be like the multiplayer in My Colony. A trade building that is relatively late game and different empires you can join to chat with as you play, for advice or help with resources would be an amazing addition.

• 16 Sep
  SnuwWulfie

  it's all fun and games until beavers divert the river into flooding another or diverting it to the other side of the map.
  
  it seems like a lot of fun though, putting in RTS-like combat units would also open up the game to warfare possibilities. All the interactions between dams, water, and players are already interesting enough. Combine that with warfare and you can easily end up in a situation with no winner at the end of it all

• 16 Sep
  Ronni Nielsen

  we need this so badly so many good city builder games but no co-op/multiplayer it made the games die to fast since you can't have fun with your friends

• 17 Sep
  Khaim

  Downvoting isn't supported by this site, but I'd like to so do with a comment.
  
  Yes, multiplayer would be cool. This game does not need it. Making this game support multiplayer is a massive task; however much work you imagine it would take, multiply that by 10 and you're probably still underestimating. All for a feature that the game doesn't need, and which - let's be honest - most players will completely ignore. I mean, would you rather have multiplayer support, or a whole expansion worth of content? That's about how much it would cost.
  
  If you can wave a magic wand and have the game allow multiplayer, then sure! But otherwise I think there are a million other things which are more efficient in terms of developer time.

• 17 Sep
  Chakratos

  Coop would be really great especially on larger maps where you have 3-5 districts to manage / build up.
  My wife is also asking me when we finally can play this together ^^

• 17 Sep
  pmduda Admin

  "Please add accounts, and eventually, have multiplayer games with friends." (suggested by Anonymous on 2021-09-16), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 17 Sep
  Zetawilk

  Each player could control different districts. Each player gets to place down their first district center, then maybe the host could allot further district centers after that, choosing how many each player can place down. I definitely hope for co-op.

• 17 Sep
  pmduda Admin

  "Multiplayer!" (suggested by Tom on 2021-09-17), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 18 Sep
  Felipe

  I love playing this kind of games with my wife, it youd be an excelent feature to add, for instance, each of the players controlling their districs and being able to share resources between them. A dashboard showing what was shared would also be great.

• 18 Sep
  zacherl

  I'd love multiplayer even if it was only coop, that is, two friends playing together and having control over the same population (so for the simple mode not even gameplay changes are necessary). A good example is factorio - multiplayer is exactly the same as singleplayer, just one person more controlling it.

• 18 Sep
  Orvalax

  There are mods to Rimworld that allow for multiplayer coop. The game seems rather similar to Timerborn where you manage a city. Each player interacts with the world as if they are the only person on the game. Meaning, each player can fully interact with any and all objects at any time, even pause or unpause the game at any time. I think checking out how that game functions with that mod would give a good understanding of what some people in here are talking about.

• 19 Sep
  Topeveryday

  I agree with Piper, it should not be restricted or at least have the ability to full manage together in multiplayer, don't pull crapshoot of the idea, cuz its not really seen in a lot of colony sims other than mods (rimworld comes to mind) and this would make it stand out in the long run.

• 20 Sep
  Dennis Schiavoni Merged

  The game is awesome, relaxing and functional.
  After all the fixes, I'll add a new coop mode, which from 2 to 8 players will build their city and fight against though drought and enemy hordes larger in a land large 1000 blocks (like minecraft but in a beaver-y way)

• 20 Sep
  Yonish Admin

  "For the future updates" (suggested by Dennis Schiavoni on 2021-09-20), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 22 Sep
  Felix Robitaille

  My partner immediately asked if there was multiplayer, I think it would be great even just as a casual mode

• 23 Sep
  Yellowtail

  Co-op would definitely be fun and would make larger map sizes more interactive than just late game massive engineering projects. The way districts are already set up it seems someone may have already been thinking of this possibility in the future

• 23 Sep
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "Multiplayer" (suggested by Ronan Grainawi on 2021-09-22), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 24 Sep
  Facts Merged

  Thats all you need for this game to be perfect

• 24 Sep
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "Multiplayer and More types of Beavers" (suggested by Facts on 2021-09-24), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 25 Sep
  Spvers

  I see Timberborn multiplayer a bit like Warcraft 3 or something along those lines. Where you develop your base and increase the population, before you can develop weapons or train beavers to chew down your opponent's base. With increased harvesting, this can become a fast and fun multiplayer gamemode, with 2-8 or 12 players, depending on map size i can see myself playing it alot.

• 25 Sep
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  No, Warcraft 3 gameplay is completely unrealistic, that both are strategy where you can construct building and collect timber doesn't mean they can work same way. ^_^'

• 26 Sep
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "Add a multi player mode for timberborn" (suggested by Burgzilla on 2021-09-25), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 27 Sep
  Zeirlynn

  I had assumed the districts were step one toward multi-player. Start a game (LAN would work just fine for us), i get a district with blue flags/trim on buildings, husband gets a district with red flags/trim. We build new districts as needed with our blue/red markers, then connect our districts to share resources.

• 28 Sep
  Thomas

  As for the multiplayer mode, my suggestion is to make a series of content supplements first, for example, to add an expedition team, which can find various resources outside the map, such as steel and wood, jewelry, weapons and other resources that are not available and scarce on the map, but also precious scientific blueprints. You can also try to add Ai beaver villages with fixed population and fixed facilities on the map. Players can trade with them, develop diplomatic relations, assimilate them or carry out military conquest. At the same time, Ai beaver villages can also come to carry out trade, development, diplomacy and military conquest. Then the army and urban defense systems will be designed and developed. You can either wait for PVE to mature and then open PVP, or you can open PVP first and then slowly improve. Hope developers to come on!!

• 28 Sep
  Sean E Rapin

  @Khaim I think by virtue of the fact that this is like the third highest upvoted idea, it clearly does hold a lot of value for the people playing it. Ultimately the devs will decide what things they want to build and add to the game and I am sure they all have their own laundry list of things they want in it as well. Not saying you are wrong it is definitely hugely difficult but just because you do not want it does not mean all the other people who paid for it do not want it.

• 29 Sep
  phylonyus

  Parkitect and OpenRCT2 just let all players control all things, like how someone described Rimworld multiplayer above. This was a great way to get new people playing also, because I could do some of the "boilerplate" building and let them focus on whatever.
  
  Folks can have a gentlemans agreement to only touch whichever district if they want.

• 01 Oct
  VanLeni Merged

  it would be nice to have kinda multiplayer modus in which u can trade with ur friends for example.

• 01 Oct
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "MUltiplayer" (suggested by VanLeni on 2021-10-01), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 01 Oct
  Juniormad

  i would really like to see this as me and my 2 buddies are currently playing this game like there is no tomorrow.

• 03 Oct
  fransenstein

  this game in co op would be cool.
  2 or more modes would be nice.
  2 player as team with one tribe.
  or 2 and more player with several tribes across a big maps.
  with trading and sharing.
  
  then you could add new buildings like Wonder of the world to boost all tribes for thees it all must work together.

• 04 Oct
  Carl McKenzie

  I could see this working really well, but dealing with inactive players in long-running games will be tricky. For a start you would probably have to require every player to be online in order to play.
  
  You would need to pause districts belonging to inactive players so they don't log in to find their population decimated by drought, but still allow the river to interact with structures belonging to inactive players & allow active players to activate flood gates which belong to inactive players.
  
  Perhaps multiplayer could be DLC, with all early access Timberborn purchasers getting free access to the multiplayer beta? That way there are no expectations of a finished product & those willing to brave beta products can enjoy multiplayer as it evolves.
  
  Edit: I should have read all the comments first. Everyone sharing a single faction would be a more logical place to start than trying to assign players exclusive access to their own districts.

• 04 Oct
  ab

  An option would be similar to how sim city created multiplayer where you could have people owning section/s of the map and that would define the district bounds. so a 256x256 map would be 16 districts (4x4). might be an option when setting up the map and would force water/resource transport/management from neighboring districts. might have districts that have an iron mine? but no water.

• 05 Oct
  Jason

  Co-op could be really fun from a "trading hut" to diverting water to each other, to possible even having the option to ex-pat your extra beavers to the other player.

• 06 Oct
  Wiktor Merged

  You could add a multiplayer mode so 2 players could work on the same map and play together with their friends.This could work if the map would be saved in the cloud or sth so both can play at the same time and could share each other ideas what to build on the map.

• 06 Oct
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "Adding multiplayer Mode" (suggested by Wiktor on 2021-10-06), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 08 Oct
  Duhwolf Gaming

  Co-op would actually work well with this game. Take a look at the entire supreme commander series. especially the third installment (Forged Alliance) where they made units and resources sharable. Of course maps would have to be built for resource balance and number of players (district locations) but that's the easy part. four to six player would be ideal. If this game goes co-op it will blow up. Already have several interests in game purchases if it does. Pffftt, if it goes coop I'll buy 10 copies right out of the gate.

• 11 Oct
  Zeirlynn

  An idea for managing absent players would be to require both (or all) players to select the play/speed controls in order for the game to move forward. When a game is loaded, it is already paused. Allow any player to work on their districts freely, but require all players to select '>' to move forward. A list, like we have with the population well-being, could show which players have selected pause, play, or speed options. If any player selects pause, it pauses for everyone. If any player selects 1x speed, it's 1x speed for everyone. In order to go forward or speed up, every player has to select the same options.

• 12 Oct
  sovwombat

  It's not like we're in the middle of a pandemic and travel restrictions and wanted games to play with friends and loved ones we couldn't be near or anything.

• 13 Oct
  JohnyDL

  I could see this kind of co-op being really cool if each player had control over a different faction... only iron beavers can build iron beaver buildings... but all beavers can use all buildings so to get the best possible beaver city requires keeping all factions alive to be able to get all their unique perks. Especially true as more factions are developed.

• 14 Oct
  Lax

  It would be aweasome to manage the same map whith friend, maybe you can take the control of one district each and give the hand to your friend when you are done, like that no need to risk a simultaneous buliding on the same place.
  
  That make years I search for a city builder in coop to play with my girlfriend.

• 15 Oct
  bedegeln

  Although adding a single player campaign mode first I think would be the reasonable decision to make, a multiplayer mode would be a dream come true for me!

• 17 Oct
  zak Merged

  i think that it would be cool to play multiplayer where each player owns a different district.

• 18 Oct
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "multiplayer" (suggested by zak on 2021-10-17), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 20 Oct
  R. Fischer

  Versus - where you mainly build next to your friends, would be nice. Add some negotiation possibilities and little sabotage possibilites(very expensive). So you can get a little advantage or more land. But mainly build friendly next to the other players without having to go for the end. So endless pvp, if all want to do. That´s what we are doing in anno all the time. Never killed us. But made some fun with sabotage or claimed an island from another player.
  
  Other mode would be coop - building all at 1 city, like in prison architect.

• 23 Oct
  LoliKami

  Yes, it will definitely be more fun when streaming!

• 24 Oct
  Denis

  (copying my thoughts from the Steam discussion)
  Since we already have a district system and at least two different factions (the differences are very well designed, by the way), the implementation can be mostly straightforward design-wise - the players start with two different districts, possibly with different factions, and can both cooperate and compete as they please.
  Vertical architecture and water mechanics will provide interesting options for cooperation, as you can build large "terraforming" projects together. Again, the differences between two factions make it more worthwhile to actually cooperate instead of just doing things yourself.
  As for competition, the interesting example for this particular game is to flood each other's districts.
  Of course, special maps that are conducive to multiplayer will be needed.

• 27 Oct
  Kage Merged

  Our beavers had to come from somewhere, and who's to say that they aren't competing against each other? Maybe other species have also evolved, but are less industrious and more opportunistic. Say after a certain number of cycles, or after reaching a certain happiness level, word of your settlement spreads, resulting in enemies trying to take hold of your work, or competing directly for resources (an ai faction pops up on the border and starts building). This could result in new jobs, buildings, and resources as your beavers may have to prepare for war. (Not pvp, just an expansion on pve)
  
  There could also be room for trade and diplomacy, gaining access to resources not on the map (and new buildings to go with it). Maybe a high ranking beaver official moves in, and you have to appease them as well.
  
  These could really flesh out mid to late play once water is solved long term.

• 29 Oct
  SirMichael Admin

  "Rivals/Competing Factions/enemies" (suggested by Kage on 2021-10-27), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 29 Oct
  Fox

  Me and some coworkers at Apex Hosting (unofficially, not speaking for the company here) have "jokingly" said we would like it if we could add Timberborn to our supported games. I'm 99% sure that if Timberborn became multiplayer capable there'd be a good handful of employees pushing for it to be added out the gate.
  
  Perhaps servers could have each player have a section of map just like in the regular game, but they're smaller size and fit together like tiles. You'd be able to see and trade with your neighbors but not build on their land.
  
  I love to imagine a river that's on the border between two players, who would have to cooperatively build their halves of the dam.
  
  Sharing the entire map freely sounds like a disaster waiting to happen to me personally. Would probably be more difficult to implement as well, if I had to guess.

• 06 Nov
  SubLemo

  This should be singleplayer only. Look at prison architect. It has coop, which is pretty bad (imo). Because in essence, its a SP game.

• 11 Nov
  Sapioit

  I think there are two different types of coop which both should be added:
  
  1. Full control coop. All players can control everything, and the game ends when there are no beavers which can spawn anymore (including the cloning vats).
  
  2. Different districts coop. Each player controls a single district, and all players can control what is not part of any district (so people could build stairs outside the district limits, for example), but each player has a different identifying color for their buildings and beavers, and the building queue also has that, with people unable to build or place a blueprint where there is already a blueprint or building placed, even if said thing is outside all districts.

• 22 Nov
  nicholas siegel Merged

  I think there should be multyplayer because I really want too play with my freinds and family in the same game.

• 22 Nov
  Gin Fuyou Admin

  "multyplayer" (suggested by nicholas siegel on 2021-11-22), including upvotes (1) and comments (0), was merged into this suggestion.

• 24 Nov
  GHOST

  Build together, if possible. More fun than just trading :) Maybe make it so with co-op, that you have to have more resources for the buildings, so it's not too easy to build something.