Hmm. Maybe Monarchs are sub-factions.

Starting to think that the game will be the third option in my thread

Supcom 2 is pretty much just 1 branching faction. The difference among the starting armies are very small (before research). 1 Branching faction would be kinda cool if the differences became pronounced later in the game.

Like, it depend on the monarch, only certain tabs were available. (One monarch could only upgrade air, one only land, etc.) Or, each monarch would just have a monarch-specific tab of upgrades, like the ACU upgrades, except they can affect the whole army. Or, another solution still, each monarch starts with innate buffs to the basic armies... +20% move speed, +30% firepower, -10% cost... stuff like that.

Do not like paying for a single new unit. Do like DLC packs a la supcom 2. Also wouldnt mind DLC factions. WOULD mind if DLC factions are imba. Especially if theyre OP: Pay = win.

If anyone asks me to pay for a mount I am going raeg.

xD +1

I cried. Poor pink guy

i hope it wont be downloads like in supcom2
imagine in how many groups the multiplayer community would be broken.

Imagine the 5 to 10 balance, OP, and whinnneee threads that spring up every month. At least there's going to be consistent. I hope GPG isn't using this as an excuse to push out a half-baked game with 5 units per faction with the promise of "more on the way!"

...How does GPG expect to balance this with a few new units every month anyway?

Maybe if you buy the monarch before it, you are entered into a beta for the following monarch. Easy to balance, easy way for a beta to survive.

I like that idea.

Concerning the monarchs. I expect they will start with one monarch per faction and then add monarchs. The first monarch could be a necromancer, the next a demon summoner and a third maybe a half-demon who's good in melee. Balancing a single monarch will be easier than a bunch of new units.

I'm fine with DLC as long as it is fun and the main game doesn't get shafted like in Mafia II. Monthly DLC is a good way to keep the game alive. That (hopefully) means longer patch and balancing support for everybody. I would have payed for FA DLC in a heartbeat if it had meant continued support.

Of course the original KnC will have to be an exceptional game to build a strong community that is interested in monthly DLC.

This.

Cant be overstated enough.

yeah, i agree, defo DLC is way forward rather than a download every month to add new content, such as with the DLC with SupCom2

Still needs more emphasis.

im not a micro transactions kinda guy, but i dont mind the idea of buying armies the same way you might for tabletop wargaming.

Maybe they can do like TF2 and open up a man store so we can all buy hats?

no, please no. i like that for team fortress but keep it out of RTS, please.

Sounds like they might be following "fighting game balance" like Ive mentioned a few times.

With 3/4 factions, they need to be perfectly balanced. But once you get to about 10 or more, perfect balance is less important as long as everyone is viable and the top tier is sufficiently varied. There will still be enough variety to be interesting, and the designers get a great deal more freedom to experiment.

As long as people with dlc can play with people without (without needing to turn it off), and new additions are quarantined from ranked/tournaments until sufficiently community tested, I dont see a huge problem.

uhh... is this another spambot? Sniper rifles in a medieval game? Nice siggy...

Id love monthly downloads, as long as it does not cost money. same with online play, I wont play if it costs monthly!