Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Hey, this is going to be a really simple question without much of an explanation. Is Illwinter going to create games that are single-player-only in the future? I hate single-player-only games, but I love co-op games, and of course I love multiplayer games. Who shares my views? And who can answer my question (if not Johan or Kristoff themselves)?

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

You should try Portal or Half-Life 2. Then tell me if you don't like SP games.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Hey, Max Payne series? GalCiv II? Silent Hill series? ;) Some games are just a private artistic experiences, like a movie you must see and meditate about by yourself imho :)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Can we please stay on topic? First of all, Illwinter is not going to create a game like Silent Hill or a game like Portal or Half-Life 2 or Max Payne. Maybe GalCiv II, but if you're trying to convince me that single-player games are more fun than multiplayer or co-op, you're wasting your time. Multiplayer and co-op are more fun than single player in my opinion and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

Lets stay on topic:

#1. Does anyone share my views that Illwinter should create multiplayer or co-op games or do you think single player is just as good?

#2. Can anyone answer my question: Is Illwinter thinking about singleplayer games or not?

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Some genres work better in SP. In other genres, MP can work, but creating good SP is much easier.

I suggest that we list all exceptional SP-only games on this thread, while we wait for Johan or Kristoffer to come in and answer Argitoth's question. ;)

Cave Story (freeware playformer with plot)
Master of Magic (MP only via 3rd-party patch)
Monkey Island games (2d adventure)
LOOM (2d adventure, with music)
Okay, all 2d adventure games
Portal
Shift 1-3 (flash games available on e.g. Kongregate)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Nobody knows and nobody decides but Illwinter. And why should they answer to a post as opinionated as the OP?

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I thought the new Illwinter secret project was actually going to be some kind of SP FP-view RPG in the Dom world.

@Endo:

Thief I & II
Deus Ex (never tried 2)
Moo I & II
Fallout I and II, because my HW is too crap for 3.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Morrowind,
Fahrenheit,
Hitman series.

Maybe it's just me but I would appreciate more another MP-heavy game. While I really like playing SP, it would be nice to have many of the old faces of Dom3 brought to another newer shinier game :)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Would you rather a game be designed around a singleplayer concept or a multiplayer / co-op concept?

Before you answer that question, think about this for a moment: Try to come up with a game in your head that you think would be the most awesome game ever made with every feature you would want (try to be realistic in your thinking, something that could actually be created if you owned a game company and you made all decisions). Heck, come up with two or three awesome games. Did these awesome games in your head have co-op or multiplyer or were they only singleplayer?

Now it's your turn. Tell me. Singleplayer or multiplayer?

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

The most perfect game I could imagine would have several different multiplayer and co-op modes as well as several awesome single-player campaigns, because it would have everything. Such perfection is, if not straight-out impossible, at least infeasible.
Since game designs don't automatically result into finished games, I wouldn't wish to burden a promising game project with the difficulty of implementing so many different modes of play.

Dominions games 1-3 are the only video game I've played in MP more than once or twice, but there are several games I've finished in SP more than once. I won't finish those SP games more than a few times, or perhaps only once, so they don't last nearly as long as a good MP game. However, there are more good SP games than MP games I'd like to play, because I'm not going to sink too much time into any single game, and that rules out all MMORPGs and many FPS games and many other MP games.



Planescape: Torment (it might also have co-op MP)
Descent: FreeSpace (I bought a JoyStick to play this :D I should finish it and try 2)
Roguelikes, such as ADOM, Dungeon Crawl, DoomRL
Doom 1
Dwarf Fortress

Here's also few I haven't played, but I've heard things:
System Shock 1/2
The Witcher

Also, X-Com. That's somewhat of a poor example, because CO-OP X-COM would be ingrammaractically AWESOME! Even something simple such as X-Com mod for Left4Dead would probably be very, very undescribable.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

When in doubt, I´d rather have a SP based game than a multiplayer one. That way you dont need to rely on a connection, or finding people to play. You turn it on whenever you want, stop whenever you want, and resume it whenever you want. Of course, multiplayer is a nice adittion but I´d rather have a solid SP game first.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Well, I did say you should be thinking in realistic, doable terms. For example, I dislike Left 4 Dead. I've had this idea for my perfec game before I even heard of Left 4 Dead; that is, an open-ended co-op survival horror game based on a zombie infestation. Throw in a little bit of Battlefield 2 elements plus some STALKER elements, plus lots of simple game mechanics that when combined creates a sandbox-type feel and it's my perfect co-op game.

Left 4 Dead is a step in the right direction, but it lacks dynamics. My perfect game would give you the ability to assess a situation to create a plan of attack. Sometimes you won't have that ability. You may find yourself in situation that you will die, period... UNLESS you use the sandbox mechanics and somehow quickly come up with a way to survive. There would be vehicles at your disposal, but everything would be limited so you usually feel you have to conserve and strategize... but not to the point that it becomes an annoyance, but so that you always have the feeling of "I've got to survive!"

The co-op elements would increase the fun of all the game mechanics in a synergistic way. For example, you may find yourself in a situation where you have a limited amount of time to find a new tire for your vehicle. You split up already knowing that there are relatively few zombies around so it's ok, but maybe you go in twos because zombies are hiding around every corner. That's a simple game mechanic... tire blows, vehicle moves slower, find a tire, use it on your vehicle, vehicle is repaired. I could go on, I love thinking about it.

For the record, that's exactly how I feel about Battlefield 2142, but I don't mind waiting for my friends if I was going to play my perfect game.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I'd say it depends on what makes the game fun.
If the game is about finding your strategy and seeing how it works out then it should be MP. AI can't compete with human opponents.
If the game is trying to tell a story/build up tension SP (maybe with small Coop) is better.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I wouldnt say that Illwinter is NOT going to create a solo game (as someone did) because they have. Has everyone forgotten that Conquest of Ellysium came before Dominions? (available for free download at Shrapnel along with some other great games)
Or do you people consider that to be a natural progression with no return?

As to choosing....
If I HAD to choose one or the other then Id prefer solo over a game that only supports MP. But Illwinter has not created such a game. They created a solo game, then a game which supports MP and Solo together quite nicely. So Im not sure why we would ask the question. Do you consider it a natural progression that it goes Solo, Solo/MP, MP? If I were to consider such a programming stereotype I MIGHT consider it to be Solo, Solo/MP, Online World.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I have no interest in mp only games, usually.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Gandalf, CoE has MP support, even if only hotseat.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I have difficulties playing SP games for long. JK is even worse :) I do like adventure games, but more in idea than in actual game play. I guess I'm more of a adventure maker than an adventure player. I prefer game-mastering to playing in most cases. I liked torment a lot, but didn't even get half through the story. Watched my brother play a bit and thought that it looked awesome. Same with fallout. I think I'm more into the mood and setting than into the stories themselves.

I do like coop-play. Especially coop vs coop games. Starcraft was most fun when you were 2vs2. GAmes are generally more fun when they have a social aspect. Together or against.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I have zero interest in MP only games, and marginal interest in MP heavy games where the SP is left to wither and die (like Dom2 and 3).

I came back to Dom3 because I had the time and money to fool with it, but frankly, the same reasons why I eventually shelved Dom2 are starting hit me for dom3. Though that's not all an MP/SP issue, more of an ease of use of the GUI after you've mastered enough of the game to want to be able to cruise through certain things.

Of course I understand that due to the archaic code base modernizing dom3 isn't happening, so I guess I'll have to look at the new product and decide if its going to be worth it for the long haul.

Otherwise I don't mind supporting teams like illwinter and shrapnel, even if the product isn't directly in my wheelhouse.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I dont think SP is left to wither and die. Its just that the forums automatically provide a slanted view. To play MP you pretty much have to create a login here and visit frequently, which tends to lead to posting commentary. While a large majority of this games purchasers seem to be happy lurking and reading, grabbing an answer then leaving. Im guessing they are mostly soloists.

Also there are mods and maps and server games for soloists but they dont tend to get much mention in the lists which, being forum members, might tend toward being created by MPers.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

The SP problem is much deeper than that Gandalf.

The AI cannot possibly compete with all the options in the game, so there is no real impetus to actually improve the AI.

I know this, I accept this.

Can you get a satisfying SP game out of Dom3? Sure, with some caveats.

Is Dom3 designed for the SP game? Uhh... we all know the answer to that one.

Like I said, I don't begrudge illwinter the decision they made, they make the games they want to make and more power to them. But the facts remain that for whatever reason, the GUI and the AI make playing SP a much less enjoyable option than trying MP. Of course this is my opinion, I'm sure there are some who prefer SP, though I cannot really fathom why, but to each their own.

Anyway, the SP issues are not addressed directly by illwinter, they are addressed by kind folks as yourself and others making mods and randomizers and whatever else.

I don't see how difficult it would be for illwinter to at least include some reasonable pretenders for AI nations, nor do I see why some minor tweeks to the AI would be overly difficult.

Oh I know why it doesn't happen, because it's not fun to do. So yeah, I'll stick with my statement that the SP game is basically left to wither and die, however overly dramatic that might be ;)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I'm pretty much with Argitoth on this one. Computer RP doesn't float my boat. I like short or action type SP games a bit - shooter, RTS, video games etc, but strategy games are my real love and for strategy games there is no substitute for a human mind. (I'm going to give War Plan Pacific a try as soon as i can afford it.)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I happily played only SP until I got BF 1942, then I discovered the awesomeness that is FPS multiplayer. As for strategy games, I didn't play MP until about 6 months after I got Company of Heroes.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I nearly passed out from adrenaline rush the first time I did Starcraft in MP.

To this day, the excitement is mostly in MP gaming. The obvious exceptions are really beautiful settings/stories like Bioshock, Fallout1/2/3, Dreamfall, etc. I still do tons of SP gaming, but I find it more relaxing, more meditative. I like being able to take my time sometimes. Get up and get food or otherwise tend to the body, without worrying about inconveniencing someone else, that sort of thing. :p

I guess my point is, both are important to your diet. It's like MP is meat and SP is vegetables, most people require some of both to survive, with a relative balance based on personal tastes.


Oh and that said, I was also under the impression that the new IW project had a heavier SP emphasis. But that could be totally off-base. In actuality, maybe it will end up something like Warlords as far as gameplay goes, though maybe with extra depth in your "heroes", however that all works. Either way, I'm excited for it, because despite what Dominions lacks from having such a small team, what it has are some of the most important things to my gaming enjoyment.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I like this discussion. I don't have time to respond in depth... will do soon.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Well we all know that I dont tend to agree with much of that.
And I would of course appear to be a huge minority since so few soloers login here so its hard to know any hard numbers for agreement or not.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I would completely agree with licker on SP. Well said.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Hey, Fallout 1 is actually very short, so even an impatient person can finish that ;)

For me it seems like a game profits from being geared towards either singleplayer or multiplayer for it to be fun. Most strategy games don't shine until they are played in multiplayer, but role-playing games are better enjoyed as SP games, I feel (computer rpgs that is).

It's too bad Dom3 doesn't have a campaign though. Few game worlds encompass such a rich mythology as this one.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I don't think soloers are so few here, unless you mean "people who *only* ever play SP games," which would disqualify even you, Gandalf. I feel like it's maybe 50/50 on these boards, although of course in "balance" threads the multiplayer gamers are more vocal.

-Max

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

This is a big post. I'm going to bold what the casual reader should see. CASUAL READERS, read the bold, skim the rest. Gandalf Parker, read everything!:)

Well said! But don't forget, singleplayer games can have a social aspect, too. Totally forget what game I did this with, but I used to play a singleplayer game at the same time that my friend was playing the same game. We would stay on the phone and communicate while we played. I know I'm being counter-argumentative with that statement, but I would rather have just played co-op instead of being on the phone and pretending. But I know there are other examples of situations where a singleplayer game would have a social aspect.

I would love to make a blanket statement and say any singleplayer game would be more fun with co-op, but I can't say that because each singleplayer game would have their own problems and would need some redesign for co-op to be a realistic idea. But,for example: I played Oblivion IV for a short time. I got bored. I think it should have co-op. I think Half-Life 2 should have co-op.

Here's a good example of Singleplayer VS Co-op. I used to download free fantasy games off the internet, games that had horrible graphics, some text-based graphics too. Anyone know of OpenGlad?: A lot of you gave examples of great singleplayer games like Half-Life 2, Fallout, etc. Those games have amazing graphics and amazing physics. But in my opinion, an old game with crappy graphics and no physics could make a horrible singleplayer game OR a fun-tastic co-op game. [b]Anyone ever played OpenGlad? http://snowstorm.sourceforge.net/cgi...?page=openglad This game was near perfect for its time in my opinion. I'm going to tell you what my perfect Illwinter game would be...


Explain yourself. Why is singleplayer more fun than co-op? The argument that you'd like to play whenever you want is not a valid argument. Explain why it would be more *fun*, not more *convenient.*

No, so let's start coming up with ideas for the perfect Illwinter game (remember, in realistic, doable terms). To answer my question "why singleplayer?" I would suggest you come up with an idea for an Illwinter game.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Hmm, I loved to play the Marine in Alien vs. Predator SP. You know you're just a human guy running through dark and filthy corridors trying to survive the aliens (from the Alien movies) who hid in corners or were only visible on your motion tracker until they were extremely close. I wasn't very good at it so my ammo was always low and I had no idea where to go, just went onwards barely surviving every encounter. One night I played it in complete darkness for some hours. I reached some stairs and thought they are up there waiting for me so I used the flamethrower on the stairs.
When I looked down again a small facehugger that I hadn't noticed before jumped at me. Instead of dodging (in game) I jumped backwards and tried to cover my face with my left arm (in real life). Of course the chair got a bit in the way and hitting the floor at full speed got me out of it.
Point is painful is not meditative. :p

I don't think SP and MP should be compared at all just like movies and board games. The "movie" (or for some games tinkering) part of a game is better done in SP while the competition part is better in MP.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

For me, SP games need to have a good story (Thief series, The Witcher), that makes it feel sort of like I'm reading a book, but with influence over what happens and how. For strategy games, I like co-op games and I'm very much a sandbox style player, so I don't mind single player at all. I play far more SP than MP, though playing against humans is more fun than against the AI, especially in something as deep as Dominions is. The time and organizing things are usually the main stepping stones, especially since I have so many commitments to so many different directions.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Ahah, great story :D

Made me remember bout my childhood, a friend of mine playing the second, IIRC, Resident Evil and one of those things with the long tongue breaking a window to enter the character's room and attacking with a scream, my friend just left the pad and we jumped up a couple of meters probably :D

Totally agree with your last sentence, I think it sums up the whole thing the best way :)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

This may sound like Conquest of Elysium, but I’ve never played it.

My Perfect Illwinter Game:

Imagine Dominions III except played from the commander perspective. You play as a C’tis/R’lyeh/Ulm/etc… Mage/Prophet/Commander/etc… whatever you want. It’s not an RPG, you don’t play as one character. You play as a commander in your army and you can switch between controlling a commander. In co-op mode, two or more players control commanders. Commanders are no stronger than hired/summoned/trained units, any unit/commander can become very strong. Your commanders can be complete weaklings while your hired units can be very strong if that’s how you like to play.

But you may still pretend to “be” one commander, for example:

You can acquire a mage commander and be the kind of mage that spends your time collecting death gems and raising a powerful undead army 300 units strong and your strategy is to sit back and enjoy the show. You never have to have more than one commander. Or you can be a strong commander that only has hired 5 other units, but they are just as strong as you so you can take out much larger amries. You can be a mage that focuses all your time on learning devastating battle spells. Or you can be the vanilla commander that just hires the biggest army possible.

Here’s the best part!: You can have a 4-player co-op and never hire any units and just become extremely powerful and play in a very RPG-like way.

Anything a commander could do in Dominions III, you can now do. Search for sites, forge, cast ritual spells, but it would be a realtime game and one game would take days to complete. The graphics would have to be 2d of course, but keeping the particle spell effects, that’s always nice.

DISCLAIMER: There’s many ways to come up with how my game idea would fundamentally work and function, how it could be feasible, etc. I’m not going to get into that, it’s a whole other beast. There’s lots of problems to sort out with this idea, too. But anyway, just take it as is, not trying to promote my idea, just putting it out there for you to read and think about.

Let me see your ideas

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

It does sound as if you should check it out. Its free

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Actually I love co-op. But if I had to choose a game which supports ONLY Solo or ONLY MP then I would choose solo. Just because a game supports MP doesnt mean it supports co-op.

The reasons I enjoy solo more is because I just cant get into player-vs-player. Im not a competitive player. People who arent competers should not be delegated to only playing games of solitair. :) I play Dominions in a more RPGish way.

More scenarios and campaigns and AI nations would help. I did push for larger maps. And I did do a number of co-op scenarios for Dom2 which I keep meaning to update for Dom3. And I did do a mod for a co-op game for Dom3 which I should do more of. I am working on a chaoticized version of AI nations to go with my chaoticized maps (which might shift to SemiRandom the same as my maps did).
So I dont complain too much since I havent gotten off my tail to do my part in fixing it. :smash:

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

You might note that two of my "exceptions" to the idea of relaxed/meditative, were FPS games (Bioshock and Fallout3), because while most FPS games have enjoyable SP campaigns, they are not the peaceful experience that you can get from a TBS that only moves at exactly the pace that you want it to.


I want a Dominions MMO. :( Maybe just a MUD? :p

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Id love to see a DomMMO. Something like City of Heroes. Or even something like Ultima Online which is closer to the graphics Dom3 has.
And a mud would be fine also. I host one and the programmable interfacing is fantastic for keeping it surprising.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Can you expand on the Dom MMO idea? How would it be different than other MMOs? What would be cool about it? I don't want to hear, "it will be cool because Dominions is cool." Give me some depth to your answer.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

It's simple really, because your characters, while highly defined, would all benefit from the same wealth of options that you experience in the TBS version of Dominions. Want to play a Troglodyte Champion? Maybe a Starspawn? Perhaps a Centaur Heirophant? Quest to gain gems, "research" new spells, and have mighty artifacts forged with a new customizable item system™. Also, an entirely MP/PvP component (I can dream too!), wherein players determine the fates of the mightiest armies in the war for ascension, through the actions of their hero on the battlefield - games of Dominions4 being played out by real players. Become a GoRed Gargoyle, or a Tarrasque. Have modes of play that allow humans to enjoy the months long MP Dominions PBEM game, and/or enjoy the RPG as the heroes of the nations, or to even jump in for some quick action just playing various soldiers and summons in combats.

Mmmmmm. I'd love that game, til death do us part. <3

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

JimMorrison, I'm hardly convinced by your idea. It seems like you are simply saying "MMO but Dominions Themed." What I'd like to see is a "Dominions-like MMO." A Dominions-like MMO would be focused on recruiting computer-played units isntead of focused on the individual. Each person would basically be a commander of a small army, it would have to be totally different from a normal MMO for an MMO to be Dominions-like and that's what I'd want to see in a Dominions MMO.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

I'd like to see MMOs with epic battles and I wouldn't mind it if the graphics were very 2d and lacking in a physics engine. It's the feeling of power you get. Very few games give you that. Instead of each player being a member of an army, each player IS an army (a commander of an army that is). I've yet to see a game that is in first or 3rd person where a mage can actually be powerful and summon an army of undead to do his bidding or destroy waves of units with battle, or be a small group of fighters and cut down 50 weaklings. No, it's always 2v5 3v7 4v2 2v1, small RPG battles. I want to see 300v500, 2v70, battles like that!

I want to be a mage that hides away in a dungeon slowly building his army out of clay men, gathering clay, gathering gems, etc, and then BUST OUT with 30 clay men and take a nearby province.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

But, you could do that in my game. You could do whatever you wanted, with the tools that your chosen character has access to - including spending your time developing other tools, by acquiring gear to supplement your abilities, or by hoarding gems to Empower yourself, etc.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

ok now i like your idea :)

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Well who would play a fighter in a MP game where a mage can summon an army to kill 10000's of fighters :D seems suicidal to say the least

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

You're kidding, right, Aezael? :) Would you rather play a plain vanilla commander with an army of 80 Barbarians, or a thugged-out Tartarian? That's not to say that playing a mage commanding hundreds of longdead wouldn't be fun as well.

-Max

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Beginning to sound like an MMO version of Illwinters first game, CoE

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Obviously some sort of balance mechanism would have to be built in to account for the disparity between different chassis - probably borrowing on the fact that you can start with your indie commander on turn 1, and the Tart is fairly late game.

If it interacted with large scale real Dominions TBS games, then there could be systems whereby you generally start with a character that is much weaker, but you may at a certain point use your accumulated wealth to gain favor from your liege, convincing him to summon you a Tart, and GoR it.

Even if the overarching game progression took place completely in real time, and you were just fighting for AI pretenders, there could be quests that simply allow you to trade "X for Y", where "Y" could be a new incarnation as a powerful mid-late game summon of some kind. Then everyone would be fighting for the ascension of their god, of course, and the AI would fumble around as they will tend to do in every game against themselves, but the actual war of ascension would be won and lost through the actions of the individual players.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Hey, that's an interesting idea JimMorrison, a game based on the idea that the AI controls us (so like we can't automatically get certain powerful summons or something).

My original idea was that even a weak fighter could gain lots of hitpoints and attributes, this is more akin to standard RPG, but I figured it would work well. A mage wouldn't be able to gain as much HP as a fighter for balance, just like other RPGs. Not only that, your regular hired units can become just as strong or stronger than you. We can do that...

OR...

We can say that you can only become slightly more powerful more akin to Dominions and your main source of becomming stronger is by upgrading your army in different ways. However, then how do you balance magic commanders with non-magic commanders? That's why I had the idea of RPG-style. Mages got spells, fighters got endurance. Plus, like I said, I wanted to see 2vs70 battles, you and your friend in co-op vs all, give the player the choice not to have an army.

The main joy from realtime battles is all the joys you don't get from turn-based battles. The ability to use buffs in the most effective way, the ability to target spells correctly, etc.

Edit: But don't get me wrong, we are all just dreaming about such a game. It's fun to contemplate I guess. I think one day we'll see a game like this.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

You could get your increase in ability by earning the favor of your god. Say, you have to prove yourself by performing certain actions and once you earn enough favor your god will offer you a blessing they will bestow upon you. Maybe you could be turned into a different creature, or be promoted to a different sort of commander, or be empowered. There are lots of different ways you could go about it depending on what way you chose to go for the base of the game.

Re: Illwinter, are you keeping it multiplayer?
 

Part of the fun of playing OpenGlad was the fact that no unit had a limitation on how much power they could gain. Just because you are a commander shouldn't mean you have more abilities than a soldier. You should be able to have a small team of undefeatable falchioneers, how cool would that be to be the most feared group as opposed to the most feared person who commands a bunch of weaklings.