Would it be possible from a gameplay standpoint (programming aside) for a 2v2 or larger MP session?

[rooibos]

Obviously I know nothing of the coding involved, so let's just ignore that.

Do you think CM would be playable with multiple opponents/allies (given of course that coding for such a thing were possible)

From a gameplay standpoint, do you think it would be feasible? Practical? Would it just turn into a chaotic mess?

 

I think it would be a ton of fun if it were possible. I've been thinking a lot about how this would work. One could delegate control of platoons/companies/etc to each player however they wise.  However, would they share "absolute" spotting (as in both players can see each other's units and what they see) or would they only see what their units could see? I think that would be more fun and also adds the possibility of mistaken identity and friendly fire (except if there is a C2 link) then you'd benefit from that.  Perhaps along with the red/green unit colour icon, there could also be a grey for something that hasn't been spotted yet. Hear some movement in the woods? Haven't confirmed it friendly or hostile, so it becomes a grey icon. See some vehicles moving far off in the distance but can't PID them? Grey icon. Having to put the responsibility of co-ordinating fires in someone else's hands would be a blast.  No! I said shoot the big blue building on the RIGHT of the church!  Tell Tankbuster_55 to hold his fire! 

 

It'd certainly make games A LOT longer. PBEM with 4-6 players would be a hassle and HTH would take forever. 

But sometimes I'm in a battle and I think...man it'd be nice if I could just pass off protection of my right flank to someone else right now.

[sburke]

You can already do that - check out all the Kohlenlau CMPzC threads - there is one in every WW 2 CMx2 forum.  What you can't do is avoid the fact that every player who shares a side can see everything that side can see.

Whether BF considers trying to create a true multiplayer option depends on how much actual demand for it there is, or that they perceive there is.  From what one can tell off the forum there is a limited amount of people who are willing to commit the time and effort for it, though it does seem like a blast.

 

[Luka]

Good idea and would definitely be fun and interesting wargaming. However it wouldn't be an easy thing to implement and given that the BF team is quite small and has A LOT of work to do I'd much rather they focus on other more important things. I have a hunch there's not many if any that would want them to focus on making this happen rather than working on patches and modules.

[Los]

This is a holy grail for a bunch of us. However as stated above, right now you can do 2 v 2 or larger PBEM games, through we-go and files transfers. It does take a while after all one turn has to be passed to say four players and they all have to do their part before executing the turn. You could set the options for only seeing what the unit sees and then rely on the honor of your teammates. If you have ever played say Scourge of war: Gettysburg, they pretty much have the holy grail of multiplayer combat where you can have a large number of players each command sub units (Brigades, divisions etc) and even go the extra step of limiting what each player can see from only the saddle and limit communications to courier. Its pretty awesome and gives a great simulation of commanding battles in that period. Even better the games occur in real time (meaning one second is one second...not to be confused with RTS) so you are no held up in large games by some dud that wants to micromanage every soldier. Its  a pretty awesome experience especially when the multiplayer battles are part of a larger multiplayer campaign.

The guys in those CMPzC threads have done a great job of maximizing the CM experience with the tools they have on hand.

Los