I was playing CK2 with one of my friends the other day and we started talking about speedrunning. He asked me if I knew whether or not speedruns could be done as multiplayer. I looked into it, and the rules do not specifically say that you can't. So it's kind of like an Airbud, as I see it (For context, it doesn't say that it's not allowed, so it could be interpreted as being allowed). You can do Ironman Mode in multiplayer and also you can't use console in multiplayer anyways. If multiplayer runs are eligible runs, this would make runs very, very easy.
To give an example, if I were to do an HRE run, that normally takes me about 7 and a half months. Most of that time is spent at war with Lombardy. If I did a multiplayer game. If I had my friend playing Lombardy then he could just surrender right after I declare war on him. Meaning that that would cut off 3-4 months off the run. It's the same situation with Stamford Bridge runs. Just have England immediately surrender and you're run is complete.
Now that I have gone over that, I would like to say that I think that they should be allowed, but they should have their own tab. I see this as a way to get multiple people into speedrunning CK2. Also, it adds some different strategies to runs. You could have your friend that your speedrunning with be a vassal (which is actually fun to do outside of speedrunning), or you could have them play as somewhere else to do specific things. I just like the Idea.
With all that being said, what are your opinions on this?
EDIT: the airbud context
I don’t run CK2 and I lack the skill and in-game time to consider doing so in the near future - I do however run and mod EU4 and I think whatever is decided here might set some sort of community precedence for games that are alike (CK2HOI4), which is why I decided to join the debate.
My opinion is that in no circumstances can singleplayer runs ever be displayed on the same leaderboards as multiplayer runs, so as @datrandompanda says they would need to be separated. I do see some value in multiplayer runs, but not necessarily in the way datrandompanda describes it; I don’t think making an already short run even more trivial is the right way to go about MP speedruns.
Where I do see multiplayer runs potentially shine is longer completionist runs. Like a world conquest or whatever long runs CK2 might have, where cooperation can be a key factor to actually make the run faster rather than one player just being a surrender slave. Imo surrender slaves is not that far from speedrunning Fortnite where all your buddies just suicide instantly. But a 2-player World Conquest speedrun actually sounds like a pretty damn fun idea - and it may actually appeal to some runners that never would have touched something like that otherwise. Either way I don’t think more than 2 player MP speedruns is viable, as the more players you add the closer the run is to becoming trivial.
That’s my 2 cents. Awesome to see some grand strategy speedrun love out there :)
Let start by clarifying some things about my original post. When I used the example of the HRE speedrun. I didn't necessarily mean that every run should have a MP. I was more of using it as an example to show what is technically allowed by the rules. I didn't mean that it was a good thing.
Runs like the HRE and Stamford Bridge should not have MP. The HRE run, I would say I average about 7 months and 16 days (This is a really rough estimate). Seeing a run on it that lasts less that a month because one player is just being a surrender slave, to me it just seems like it wouldn't really fit, especially as one of main runs. If you had someone being a surrender slave on a Stamford Bridge (This includes all 3 categories of it), you would end up with a 1 day run. With this being said, I don't think that every run, especially short runs should have MP categories (Unless the mods want throw it in misc. "For the Memes" like they did with the 'Always Bet on the Duke Run'.)
I do agree with @MiklMaar that a 2 player (maybe 3, but that's pushing it) World Conquest would be fun. A MP World Conquest is actually what made my friend ask me if MP was allowed on runs, because if it was, he said he might do one with me. This is more of what I meant when I was talking about when I made this post. Looking back at my original post when I said that you could have people not be you're vassal brings up a lot of problems, so I think that if MP is allowed, then there should be a rule that only one player can be the head ruler of a country, and all the other players have to be a vassal in his realm. This is so we don't have to worry about players being a surrender slave.
I think that the idea of have at least 2 players coordinating on objectives to make a run faster is really interesting. I'm looking forward to see what the mods other people think about this. :)
Edit: Grammar
