Author Topic: Making players an asset  (Read 2115 times)

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 259
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #15 on: November 23, 2017, 02:42:44 PM »
And why do I need to talk to start a war? If I want to march 2000 soldiers to someone's city and attack them, why do I need to delcare that I'm attacking them? Just do it. They'll figure out they're under attack pretty quickly I assume.
That's what I'm talking about. In a feudal world simulator you'd expect to interact with envoys a lot, send runners to other courts, invent casus belli and parley at least as often as you fight. Instead you foster the Destiny Sphere mentality, when you always attack silently and preferably in the dead of night. And when the defender reaches out to you, you stay silent or go "kek". Because you don't need to ever talk to people unless you're really bored. This makes M&F extremely gamey and poor in flavour department.

There are other things knights can do though, it's just not as obvious anymore. At one point someone was trying to handle the lack of a ruler conversation by creating an organization that coordinated contact between people. There have been dungeoneering guilds. Trade companies. Mercenary outfits. Religions. Technically, these are all "knight game", just without mechanics to support them (for the time being).
A separate activity, adding nothing to lords game. Have to agree with Legro here.
Religion is different though. It needs infrastrcture to work.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1821
  • Karma: +75/-7
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2017, 03:19:55 PM »
They all need infrastructure to work. Trade companies will have actual game changing mechanics down the line. So will mercenary outfits. Not so much on religions though, as I don't want to recreate BM in M&F.

This is all pretty time intensive for one guy to do though, for the record.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

Demivar

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Purveyor of cunning plans.
    • View Profile
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2017, 03:28:36 PM »
This is all pretty time intensive for one guy to do though, for the record.
If only there were some helpful, well trained individuals with knowledge of how to work on these things who would be willing to provide this unsupported  individual with tangible assistance.....
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Radovid's like you
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: but then insane
22:34 - Roran Hawkins: Dijkstra is like you

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3129
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2017, 09:49:02 PM »
Aristocrats dont just go to the pub! They book out a private room n stuff

One would think they avail themselves of the far superior beverages and company at the local lords manner, or at dining facilities that cater to their taste. Mostly to me Taverns just feel odd in the way we use them. They could be a First One only thing, though I would probably rename them to something like Guest House in that case. But that is a mostly inconsequential side issue.

We're not tied down by Tom's vision, you know this right? He very clearly told me that this is the community's game now, and we have creative liberty on what we want to do with it.

Adding a system in the tavern to show what wars have recently started or what large battles have recently happened could be a neat addition. I'd prefer not to clog up people's already expansive list of event logs with more event log things.

And why do I need to talk to start a war? If I want to march 2000 soldiers to someone's city and attack them, why do I need to delcare that I'm attacking them? Just do it. They'll figure out they're under attack pretty quickly I assume.

There are other things knights can do though, it's just not as obvious anymore. At one point someone was trying to handle the lack of a ruler conversation by creating an organization that coordinated contact between people. There have been dungeoneering guilds. Trade companies. Mercenary outfits. Religions. Technically, these are all "knight game", just without mechanics to support them (for the time being).

I would agree here, if there were better systems in place to get forewarning of the troop build up. There should be ways for at least a chance to exists that you find out the troops are coming before they cross the border. Perhaps large troop build ups could be subject to the gossip system, or perhaps this is the place spies should fill.

As for your example of knight activities, let us be realistic. 90% of the things you listed die off within a month, and those that don't have largely been the vanity project of a single player. M&F is getting pulled in two directions and needs to decide what it is going to be. A character centric RPG, or a Grand Strategy/Political sandbox. To do both would require far greater resources then we have available, as well as some extremely careful thinking and clever mechanics.

That's what I'm talking about. In a feudal world simulator you'd expect to interact with envoys a lot, send runners to other courts, invent casus belli and parley at least as often as you fight. Instead you foster the Destiny Sphere mentality, when you always attack silently and preferably in the dead of night. And when the defender reaches out to you, you stay silent or go "kek". Because you don't need to ever talk to people unless you're really bored. This makes M&F extremely gamey and poor in flavour department.
A separate activity, adding nothing to lords game. Have to agree with Legro here.
Religion is different though. It needs infrastrcture to work.

Casus Belli are simply excuses you make to people that object to your attack. Sneak attacks have been a part of warfare since well before medieval times and remained so. However the point about silent attackers/troops in general is a annoying point. I am not sure about trying to force something though, we have the attack messages which are almost universally rubbish. To me this seems like a problem that is only fixed through changing the actual attitudes of players rather then mechanics, but if I are being honest we are moving beyond a the sphere that I am able to provide much insight.

I have been thinking about religion quite a bit lately. To me it would seem Religion is a two faceted thing in M&F, in that we potentially have the religious practices of the First Ones, whom having known and shared the world with the Gods potentially have very different religious beliefs then we are familiar with, potentially far more secular. On the other hand we have the mortal whom to my mind at least never encountered the gods and either view the First Ones as the gods, or at least a type of angel/lower level gods.
He who was once known as Blackfyre

Constantine

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 259
  • Karma: +19/-10
    • View Profile
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2017, 12:58:19 PM »
I would agree here, if there were better systems in place to get forewarning of the troop build up. There should be ways for at least a chance to exists that you find out the troops are coming before they cross the border.
More effective watchtowers?
However the point about silent attackers/troops in general is a annoying point. I am not sure about trying to force something though, we have the attack messages which are almost universally rubbish. To me this seems like a problem that is only fixed through changing the actual attitudes of players rather then mechanics, but if I are being honest we are moving beyond a the sphere that I am able to provide much insight.
This is the point I was arguing against from the very beginning. There can be no doubt that players' behaviour is indeed heavily influenced by gameplay. If a player improves his standing in a game mostly by accumulating villages and resources, he will interact with other players in a certain way. If a player can actually get ahead in the game by gathering other players under his banner, he will be forced to interact with other players in a completely different way. Think about it.
Not so much on religions though, as I don't want to recreate BM in M&F.
Andrew, that's not fair. Having mechanical religions in a game is not intrinsically a BM's thing. It's like saying that you don't want to have feudal hierarchies in M&F because you don't want to recreate BM.
Religions offer another parallel hierarchy and in a game of fealty this could be really interesting.

Andrew

  • Game Master / Lead Developer
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1821
  • Karma: +75/-7
  • Mildly Amused
    • View Profile
    • Lemuria Community Fan Site
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2017, 06:32:14 PM »
I didn't say I wouldn't add religions, I said I wouldn't give them mechanics in game. Religions are on the TODO list but you shouldn't be able to take over a region just because the locals believe in the same faith in M&F--you play what the mortals effectively consider a demi-god.
Standing for the creation of interesting things since Year 1, Week 5, Day 4.
Favorite cold beverage: Strawberry Shake
My hobbies: Fixing computers, video games, anime, manga, some other stuff, sleep (in no particular order)

De-Legro

  • M&F Dev Team
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3129
  • Karma: +105/-55
    • View Profile
Re: Making players an asset
« Reply #21 on: November 24, 2017, 10:34:03 PM »
More effective watchtowers?


Watch towers might need a range boost, particularly if we boost scouting and interaction ranges. However I was more thinking of the following case. Suppose you are a border lord. Your neighbour is mustering troops 3 settlements from the border. There is no way your towers are going to spot that, but there is no reason merchants etc would not be spreading that sort of unusual activity as they travel.


More effective watchtowers?
This is the point I was arguing against from the very beginning. There can be no doubt that players' behaviour is indeed heavily influenced by gameplay. If a player improves his standing in a game mostly by accumulating villages and resources, he will interact with other players in a certain way. If a player can actually get ahead in the game by gathering other players under his banner, he will be forced to interact with other players in a completely different way.


Well he already is if we wants to be truly powerful. Even the most prolific of settlement hoarders for example didn't amass the number of settlements the largest realms have. There are plans to tweak corruption so that it becomes relevant at a lower level though, which should help with some of that. Changing the trading/resource system may also remove the mentality of needing to control everything.


We could look at something like realm rating that we used to have displaying how many players vs realm size each realm had. Perhaps something a little less gamey but along the same lines. Once dynasties are in rulers could have a renown rating based on the number of dynasties present.
He who was once known as Blackfyre