Author Topic: Soldier Experience  (Read 722 times)

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 244
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2017, 05:36:55 PM »
How does that help?
If this is paired with combining all nearby battles, people who can log in two times a day will be able to be competitive. They won't have to play that "log in every hour" game to maneuvre with the opponent into a more beneficial set of battles.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2017, 05:57:17 PM »
If this is paired with combining all nearby battles, people who can log in two times a day will be able to be competitive. They won't have to play that "log in every hour" game to maneuvre with the opponent into a more beneficial set of battles.

If that is the game you want, BM already exists. We aren't trying to replicate two turns a day and provence level interaction. If we want to go that route we should remove hour travel ticks and return to movement only 1 per in game day like it was to start with, and do away with the fancy map that allows for such freedom of movement. If I can attack anything in a provence why have any movement that doesn't result in arrival at the settlement?

It's not like the BM model doesn't suffer from its own issues, like how the realm with the most players active just before and after a turn generally having a massive advantage.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

silvershot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2017, 10:35:14 PM »
No the solution is easy, you don't allow new battles to be created with X yards of an existing one. Then you.don't need logic to combine battles that are close.

Thought about that after I posted too. But I guess I was thinking that you might still want to try to draw people into the battle.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2017, 12:15:12 AM »
Thought about that after I posted too. But I guess I was thinking that you might still want to try to draw people into the battle.

They can always pick a side and join if that is.what they wish though, and it eliminates whining about mistakes any algorithm makes.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Gustav Kuriga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 459
  • Karma: +22/-34
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #19 on: July 29, 2017, 03:34:57 PM »
They can always pick a side and join if that is.what they wish though, and it eliminates whining about mistakes any algorithm makes.

De-Legro, we aren't saying to make EVERYTHING provincial. Just battles. As it is, players who are able to log on constantly (meaning those who do not have a job, such as students, or those with a job involving a computer) can massively outplay those who are on twice a day because we actually need to fucking work for 8 hours in a non-office environment. I'm sorry, but it's very, very difficult to play Might & Fealty when I'm powerwashing a stadium in 110 degree heat for 8 hours. So I apologize if I'm not exactly empathetic with those who have the time to leverage the absolutely tiny view range circle and the even smaller, insignificant interaction circle that might as well be as large as the dot on the map where you are for all the difference it makes. You cannot make a strategic game of this scale, and yet have things happen in real-time without some kind of compensation. As it is, they hyperactive (and yes, they are hyperactive in the sense that they are far, FAR more active than the average player) can just form thin wall of nobles and wait for one of their nobles to spot someone, then have all of his characters gang up on that one person.

This is the reason that there hasn't been a huge war up until right now. The average player often just gets curbstomped by a single person who is microing better than a competitive Starcraft player with multiple characters.

Weaver

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2017, 06:47:59 PM »
That argument makes no sense. In 6 hours, a Noble with 100 troops can't make it from one end of a spot circle, to the other, if you have 20 scouts. At 200 troops, he'll be able to cross only the semi-axis. There is military aid, and anyone can make a dumb circle of blocking Nobles, doesn't matter how active they are. If you walk into a trap of that nature, you weren't outplayed by a dude who is online 24/7; you got outplayed by a dude who guessed where you were going and was correct.


Usually, when this happens, you lost a settlement or are under attack at a settlement, and you sent your troops to reinforce or take it back. That is a mistake. If he is there before you, you are shit out of luck- you shouldn't even bother going there if he has superior troops.


In short, it has nothing to do with the system, or the spot range, or the interaction range, it has everything to do with following up a strategic error with a tactical one.

Gustav Kuriga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 459
  • Karma: +22/-34
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2017, 06:52:43 PM »
That argument makes no sense. In 6 hours, a Noble with 100 troops can't make it from one end of a spot circle, to the other, if you have 20 scouts. At 200 troops, he'll be able to cross only the semi-axis. There is military aid, and anyone can make a dumb circle of blocking Nobles, doesn't matter how active they are. If you walk into a trap of that nature, you weren't outplayed by a dude who is online 24/7; you got outplayed by a dude who guessed where you were going and was correct.


Usually, when this happens, you lost a settlement or are under attack at a settlement, and you sent your troops to reinforce or take it back. That is a mistake. If he is there before you, you are shit out of luck- you shouldn't even bother going there if he has superior troops.


In short, it has nothing to do with the system, or the spot range, or the interaction range, it has everything to do with following up a strategic error with a tactical one.

Oh hi Weaver, knew you'd take any chance to respond to one of my comments. Hey guess what's longer than 6 hours? The 7 hour prep time for a battle. You know what else is longer? the 8 hour working day. That's if you don't have overtime. So 6 hours really isn't that long of a time after all, especially if you overlap the sight circles.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2017, 06:55:38 PM by Gustav Kuriga »

Weaver

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: +53/-42
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2017, 07:48:35 PM »
You know what else is long and lasts more than 8 hours?


Why do you assume that everything that will happen, will happen exactly when you sleep or work? That's a poor excuse. Watchtowers extend the viewrange to crazy amounts, so really, if you don't see him coming, then why not delegate war to someone who will. If you do not have the preparation and skills necessary to receive a mobility push, then no amount of 'fixes' will help you.

silvershot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2017, 01:52:42 AM »
They can always pick a side and join if that is.what they wish though, and it eliminates whining about mistakes any algorithm makes.

That's something else entirely different.

If an enemy wants to try to avoid a battle, and they pass nearby, and I can't engage them in a new battle or draw them into the other battle, then they just get a free pass. If they want to avoid it by going a longer way around, that's something else entirely.

300 yards away? The battle line could theoretically expand that far, and so could a camp during planning. A longbow has a useful range of approximately 200 yards, killing range even higher than that; they better be running or sprinting their forces away from and past me if they don't want to get picked at.

Late crossbows could reach well over 300 yards; early crossbows could kill as far as 300 or so yards with training and a little luck but granted were probably far more lethal and useful on a flat plain at 50-70 yards.

Though I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2017, 02:48:47 AM »
That's something else entirely different.

If an enemy wants to try to avoid a battle, and they pass nearby, and I can't engage them in a new battle or draw them into the other battle, then they just get a free pass. If they want to avoid it by going a longer way around, that's something else entirely.

300 yards away? The battle line could theoretically expand that far, and so could a camp during planning. A longbow has a useful range of approximately 200 yards, killing range even higher than that; they better be running or sprinting their forces away from and past me if they don't want to get picked at.

Late crossbows could reach well over 300 yards; early crossbows could kill as far as 300 or so yards with training and a little luck but granted were probably far more lethal and useful on a flat plain at 50-70 yards.

Though I suppose you have to draw the line somewhere.

Yes, I want to revisit the fact that once you are in a battle you can't force others in. I think it makes sense that you can choose to also attack new forces in the area. I also think that join battle needs to be more sophisticated, so that you can choose your side and forces others into battle on the other side. Not necessary though if the first change is made since you could join then initialise battle.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #25 on: July 30, 2017, 03:01:05 AM »
De-Legro, we aren't saying to make EVERYTHING provincial. Just battles. As it is, players who are able to log on constantly (meaning those who do not have a job, such as students, or those with a job involving a computer) can massively outplay those who are on twice a day because we actually need to fucking work for 8 hours in a non-office environment. I'm sorry, but it's very, very difficult to play Might & Fealty when I'm powerwashing a stadium in 110 degree heat for 8 hours. So I apologize if I'm not exactly empathetic with those who have the time to leverage the absolutely tiny view range circle and the even smaller, insignificant interaction circle that might as well be as large as the dot on the map where you are for all the difference it makes. You cannot make a strategic game of this scale, and yet have things happen in real-time without some kind of compensation. As it is, they hyperactive (and yes, they are hyperactive in the sense that they are far, FAR more active than the average player) can just form thin wall of nobles and wait for one of their nobles to spot someone, then have all of his characters gang up on that one person.

This is the reason that there hasn't been a huge war up until right now. The average player often just gets curbstomped by a single person who is microing better than a competitive Starcraft player with multiple characters.

No for several reasons. First maintaining the infrastructure for the current map becomes almost pointless without localised battles. Manevouring troops is the primary purpose of the map, if we can see everything in a provence and engage there is simply little purpose to having fine grained movement.

Secondly the same arguments have been used in BM for years, with only two ticks a day. I have little confiendnce complaints about the hyper active will cease, just that there will be a bigger potential pool if people to complain about.

I am happy to talk about increasing interaction ranges, happy to talk about removing scouts increasing interaction zones, or tweaking Thier effect in scouting range so people don't feel they need 100 of them.

Battle timers, battle ranges etc are also things we can look at. If you can't just start a new battle in top of an existing one you limit a major advantage of the very active, they ability to control easily whom enters a battle.

Andrew might feel differently, I have not had the chance to discuss it with him, but it is certainly not something I am going to invest my time into making a reality.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

silvershot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #26 on: July 30, 2017, 08:48:10 AM »
Yes, I want to revisit the fact that once you are in a battle you can't force others in. I think it makes sense that you can choose to also attack new forces in the area. I also think that join battle needs to be more sophisticated, so that you can choose your side and forces others into battle on the other side. Not necessary though if the first change is made since you could join then initialise battle.


Awesome!

And if it's feasible, it might also be worthwhile to afford players the ability to try (a chance) to avoid being drawn into the battle, perhaps if they have the evasion option enabled. Obviously not guaranteed, but if they are trying to avoid you, they should still be able to try, but with risk of course.


Honestly, evasion might be worthwhile as having other risks associated... Skirmishes of scout parties/vanguards or whatever. But that's an entire new mechanic. I understand that might be far too complex to even be considered. The risks could effect both parties, though.  As an example of consequences of evading, there could be a risk of losing carried supplies (perhaps some recovered by the attacker?), lost equipment or risk of minor casualties for both sides.

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3070
  • Karma: +105/-54
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #27 on: July 30, 2017, 09:58:56 AM »

Awesome!

And if it's feasible, it might also be worthwhile to afford players the ability to try (a chance) to avoid being drawn into the battle, perhaps if they have the evasion option enabled. Obviously not guaranteed, but if they are trying to avoid you, they should still be able to try, but with risk of course.


Honestly, evasion might be worthwhile as having other risks associated... Skirmishes of scout parties/vanguards or whatever. But that's an entire new mechanic. I understand that might be far too complex to even be considered. The risks could effect both parties, though.  As an example of consequences of evading, there could be a risk of losing carried supplies (perhaps some recovered by the attacker?), lost equipment or risk of minor casualties for both sides.

Is this instead of the existing evade mechanic?
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Gustav Kuriga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 459
  • Karma: +22/-34
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #28 on: July 30, 2017, 07:31:07 PM »
No for several reasons. First maintaining the infrastructure for the current map becomes almost pointless without localised battles. Manevouring troops is the primary purpose of the map, if we can see everything in a provence and engage there is simply little purpose to having fine grained movement.

Secondly the same arguments have been used in BM for years, with only two ticks a day. I have little confiendnce complaints about the hyper active will cease, just that there will be a bigger potential pool if people to complain about.

I am happy to talk about increasing interaction ranges, happy to talk about removing scouts increasing interaction zones, or tweaking Thier effect in scouting range so people don't feel they need 100 of them.

Battle timers, battle ranges etc are also things we can look at. If you can't just start a new battle in top of an existing one you limit a major advantage of the very active, they ability to control easily whom enters a battle.

Andrew might feel differently, I have not had the chance to discuss it with him, but it is certainly not something I am going to invest my time into making a reality.

It seems you are hellbent on not listening to anyone here, so I will stop talking.

silvershot

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 46
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Soldier Experience
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2017, 03:22:30 PM »
Is this instead of the existing evade mechanic?


Perhaps in addition to. It may not offer enough to be worth development time, but even a successful disengagement or evasion might carry some risk. They could, for example, send skirmishing forces to try to force you into battle, or at least slow you down. I don't know, though. I definitely think a perfect disengagement/evasion would be difficult if the enemy is already hunting you.

Perhaps it would be easier for a noble and a few guards to escape -- leaving behind his men to fend for themselves and perhaps branding him as a coward.