Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by AlfaVita on June 14, 2018, 04:25:28 PM »
Stats as a whole seems like a bad idea, especially if it's based off of amount of time character has existed and what the character has gone through (i.e. battles). It rewards old players, sure. But it bludgeons new players to death. "Ha! You can't beat my level fifteen knight you peasant! I have so much battle skill even if you use heavy infantry I will destroy you!" I think simply adding more diverse traits (as Andrew said) and having them have *slight* bonuses would make more sense. You may also want to get rid of the heredity of traits since people can abuse that if they actually do something (i.e. make a bunch of ancestors, check their traits, use the best ones as mother and father of your new character). You really don't want to make traits too overpowered, else it'd be a game breaker. Though if you add in effects and new traits all of a sudden all the old characters would have messed up ones. I've seen plenty of people with just two of the same traits (Judge Judge, Xerarch Xerarch), so that may be a problem all by itself.
2
Realms Chat / Re: Newcommer
« Last post by Mateitna on June 13, 2018, 10:33:43 PM »
Usually realms aren't *dead*, but are just inactive because not much is going on. If that's the case, say something in any Realm Discussion, and someone should eventually pipe up within 2-3 business days.
If your liege has this: Then it's pretty likely he's no longer with us in the community and your character should look elsewhere for companionship.
And yes, this browser game does take a bit of time for things to happen, but if no-one replies to your posts within a reasonable timeframe, it is usually safe to assume that your realm is a ghost-town. Feel free then to take control (and make it a thriving community again), or look elsewhere. There are realms that are active, and they are always looking for more active members.
3
Realms Chat / Newcommer
« Last post by merunes on June 13, 2018, 07:44:50 PM »
Dear community,


i just some Days ago came into this Game, joined one of the Knight offers, in the First Empire. Now im abit lost, nothign seems to happen all the "Discussion" chats are empty, my Liege seems to be...away? does this game jsut takes alot longer for something to happen, is my realm "dead" am i in the Wrong realm or did something terribly wrong?


i hope for some answers :)
4
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by De-Legro on June 11, 2018, 11:55:50 PM »
If we do stats, which I am not a fan of personally but I see the allure, I would like to see them be somewhat vague. Being able to say I have 18 strength etc is in no way immersive to me.
5
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« Last post by Andrew on June 11, 2018, 01:00:41 AM »
The draft feature list for 1.2 is above, for the curious. Once I complete that list, I'll take a look to see if there is anything small/quick I can finish from the larger TODO list, before pushing it all live. I'm pretty confident in saying that it'll be pushed live this month, now that I've got both Houses and Game Requests being made properly.
6
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by Andrew on June 10, 2018, 08:48:20 PM »
Quote
There are basically two ways that games traditionally create player attachment to characters - on an emotional level (the character has or develops some story that makes the player attached to them); or by making the character more valuable as you progress through the game (new skills, etc) - or, of course, by some combination of the two.

My suggestion would be to allow characters to gain something as they go along (experience; abilities; skills; or some thing of that sort). When you create a new character it's a blank slate but becomes more valuable as you go along. Then players wouldn't consider characters to be so disposable and spamming new characters wouldn't be an easy option.

I'd suggest things like giving characters a bonus to settlement production; a bonus in battle; and so on depending on their past actions - i.e. charcters actually have to do something to earn experience (in the form of players clicking options while playing them). They wouldn't gain experience just passively. That may mean that people who really focus on development of a few characters might then actually gain advantages over players who just spam large numbers of disposable characters. Possibly, you could also make it so that experience/skills degrade if they are not used for a time. That might somewhat guard against the creation of super-characters who become amazing at everything by being rotated through different duties so they max out experience in all areas.

I'm all for stats, but I know a few people have been against them. This is something we'd need to sit down and really figure out before we start implementing them. We'll need some sort of stat system before I implement duels and tournaments and the like though. Personally, I'm for some sort of infinite-yet-diminishing system, where 10 vs 9 is a greater gap than 100 vs 99 which is itself a greater gap than 1000 vs 999. But I'd also be liable to code a chance for a ridiculous victory (skill 1 triumphing over skill 1000) just because.

Quote
Also, it would be a help if the trait system actually worked. Part of the reason it was introduced was to make characters different from each other, but it does no good unless fully implemented.

True. I think if I touch the trait system though, I'll likely start over from scratch on it. Add more traits, make it more diverse. Code in some special combos. Stuff like that. Might even add some special ones that are regularly obtainable.

Quote
Maybe having more achievements would help?

I'm game. Tell me what I should make an achievement! A lot of them are just one-off checks, so they should be pretty easy to do.

Quote
Focus on things that 'build' character./family legacy.
eg. a family crest and related.
make that cheaper and more encouraging to get.
It adds more diversity if people can have banners.
All are nobility or first ones after all, not bandits, and most houses had some banner/shield/crest identification.

Houses having crests will be in the next update. This code is already finalized and tested.

Quote
Houses could perhaps marry to get more benefits of some sort. eg. to have a 'kid' in the family you need marriage between houses, else its just another independent character.

I'd like to not add any complicated features with the initial release, as it'll just draw out the development time needlessly. As it stands, you can make and edit a house, apply to join a house, and manage applicants to your house. Down the line, I'd like a way to merge houses, create cadet houses (already in the code, actually), split cadet houses off into their own (family feuds). There might even be code to auto-assign new children to a house upon creation, but I'm not sure. I'll have to look.

Quote
I used to be exited for this game and was even responsible for introducing some of the game's original hero funders when it started, they no longer play. We dont even talk about this shit anymore. Its a bad topic.

I hold on, hoping for better days, but like bmaster, its been years of no improvement.
I consider deleting often. Losts a couple of large realms and many friends in this due to powerplayers storming through.

It's unfortunate that you think there's been no improvement. Unlike BM, which has 3-5 people coding, I'm a one man team here, but I've managed to keep pace with their own developments. I will admit, a lot of my work has been refining existing systems, or laying the groundwork for future ones, rather than big, flashy new features. I taught myself PHP by coding this game, and as a few people will attest, I've gotten a lot better over the nearly 2 years I've been at it.

At some point I plan on inviting old players back to the game to check it out again, when I'm confident they'll enjoy it and immediately be able to tell it's not the M&F they remember, but something better. We're not there yet, and won't be for a while I imagine, but people sticking around to help me figure out what to do (or even coding themselves, if they know how or want to learn), will help us get there sooner.

Quote
The game only rewards powerplay or pay to win for those spending credits.
you then have more nobles and towns than many free players and can can overpower any realm alone even.
This has chased many of our players away from the game and left horrible review or taken down good reviews actually bothering to mention the game.
Quote
Picture this scenario for newbies. you start off in some realm, or alone and are given say a town to manage. great. A year later (real time, if you stuck around) that town should be somewhat ok with a few buildings, maybe walls.
You may have had a battle or two.

Then comes a power player wih multiple characters  and takes over your towns that you built up because he has many more towns and resulting troops (paid account) vs. his few free-play settlements.

Sure you could spend another 2/3 years tryng to get towns back and such, or just quit game and go play something newer that came out - so many choises out there and often free games handed out on occasion if you know where to look. Why bother with this really?

I do want to create a system that makes it harder to lose settlements. So people aren't so quick to lose all they've invested. I want players to build stories and lore for their lands, and I want that to be possible to lose, but not easily so. If you quit, in time, your mark will be erased, but if your town is invaded, well, why should it just magically forget you? That's just wrong, but there's no silver bullet to fix it, as far as I can tell. I'm tempted to add an occupation system, that grants occupiers certain privileges while maintaining the previous lord's role. My concern with that though, is you'd need some mechanic to eventually force your demands on an opponent, because if not they could simply just refuse to ever accept your terms (and thus prevent the attackers from EVER gaining a true lordship).

Quote
Summary: by all means, reward paying customers with props or things (maybe a special building/palace) for their characters, but not with 'power' or such that unbalances the playing field or you'll only have their clones left in the end. Go back to the drawing board and create a 'fun' game for all. And wipe the dungeon minigame, nobody plays that.

Hm... It'd not be hard to bring the character limits down, and grandfather existing accounts in to their current ones, but doing that means the people who want more will just make more accounts. And I'd prefer to not have to spend my time hunting people with more than there allowed number of accounts.

I like the dungeons, for what it's worth. And they function, so there's no real reason to remove them. Tempted to code some unique achievements in for them, actually. I'd love to see someone fight a dragon, to be honest.
7
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by wecarelittle on June 08, 2018, 02:55:54 AM »
So, Might & Fealty, is a game about characters and what they do, but we have a problem in that players realize that they're easy to make and will spam them.

I'm open to ideas on how to get players to value their characters more, and will start with proposing my own idea for how to do it.

Make it so captivity cannot be escaped by chance. Either your captor becomes captive (and you pass to the new captor) or they release/kill you. Captivity will either prevent you from killing your character, or massively up the spawn timer. The goal here is to tie up people who abuse the character setup, and at the same time, build up recognition between families and characters of those families that act in ways we want (not spamming characters to use as weapons).

Your thoughts please!



Focus on things that 'build' character./family legacy.
eg. a family crest and related.
make that cheaper and more encouraging to get.
It adds more diversity if people can have banners.
All are nobility or first ones after all, not bandits, and most houses had some banner/shield/crest identification.


Houses could perhaps marry to get more benefits of some sort. eg. to have a 'kid' in the family you need marriage between houses, else its just another independent character.


The game only rewards powerplay or pay to win for those spending credits.
you then have more nobles and towns than many free players and can can overpower any realm alone even.
This has chased many of our players away from the game and left horrible review or taken down good reviews actually bothering to mention the game.


Also, the playerbase.. some have real lives, work etc. and don't benefit much from a pay monthly plan when they only play a little each night after work or every 2nd day when there's time. It makes more sense for someone like a kid or student who has lots of time to play full-time to manage multiple characters and stories/rp etc in their realms than for the casual player who then barely have time to play three of his chars per day.


I used to be exited for this game and was even responsible for introducing some of the game's original hero funders when it started, they no longer play. We dont even talk about this shit anymore. Its a bad topic.


I hold on, hoping for better days, but like bmaster, its been years of no improvement.
I consider deleting often. Losts a couple of large realms and many friends in this due to powerplayers storming through.


But enough about me.


Picture this scenario for newbies. you start off in some realm, or alone and are given say a town to manage. great. A year later (real time, if you stuck around) that town should be somewhat ok with a few buildings, maybe walls.
You may have had a battle or two.


Then comes a power player wih multiple characters  and takes over your towns that you built up because he has many more towns and resulting troops (paid account) vs. his few free-play settlements.


Sure you could spend another 2/3 years tryng to get towns back and such, or just quit game and go play something newer that came out - so many choises out there and often free games handed out on occasion if you know where to look. Why bother with this really?


Summary: by all means, reward paying customers with props or things (maybe a special building/palace) for their characters, but not with 'power' or such that unbalances the playing field or you'll only have their clones left in the end. Go back to the drawing board and create a 'fun' game for all. And wipe the dungeon minigame, nobody plays that.
 

8
General Discussion / Re: First Challenge of 2018: The World in Words
« Last post by Andrew on June 01, 2018, 06:11:19 AM »
So, I've been pretty busy lately, but I sat down today and reviewed all 28 settlements that had descriptions (27 subtracting my own), and have reached the following conclusions.

Starting with the Honorable Mentions....

Shortest Description goes to Arescod (id: 2410) with a description of:
Quote
The ancient City of Arescod is the Capital of Ascalon.

Longest Description goes to Sudenbourg (id: 889), with a description of:

Quote
"The fortress-town of Sudenbourg, originally called Vis Requis, has been ruled by the Marquess Alphonse ""*the Fish*"" Peisson since 15-29-6. It serves as the capital town of the surrounding region; both of the Baronie von Niedertiefland and the March of Randland.

Many of the inhabitants of Sudenbourg suffer a harsh existence; rough men bred from a rough life. Industry is functional, though a lack of resources significantly reduces productivity, while encouraging ingenuity. Weaving, hunting, leather-working and scavenging remain strong industries for Sudenbourg. What metals are scavenged are used to maintain a small, though respectable, blacksmithing industry, while the limited supplies severely hamper any serious endeavors by the local armorers.

Outside the gates, a large population of poorer folk and laborers form a ramshackle slum, lightly protected by mud, clay, wood and flagstone entrenchments. Farmers grow what they can in one of the last fertile locations at the border of the Western Confederation's wastelands. Many of the remaining laborers tend to the small forestry industry, while many more find themselves in the salvage pit, breaking rocks and broken equipment into a trickle of usable metals.

The walls of Sudenbourg are visibly less impressive than the wealthier parts of the world. While predominantly cut stone, clay and flagstone are used in layers. Wooden 'spikes' protrude from the walls in places to deter siege equipment, while many of the battlements are also of wood construction. Burgundy banners holding the crests of Randland, Niedertiefland and the Marquess himself hang over the gates and from the wooden towers dotting the walls.

Inside the walls, things are much better. While still not wealthy by any means, broad streets and well constructed buildings of flagstone, wood and clay crowd most parts of the city. Several minor markets across the different quarters absorb much of the hustle and bustle, while a surprisingly pleasant city plaza keeps the governmental and religious buildings close.

Beyond the plaza, a smaller, though better constructed, wall separates Sudenbourg's keep and major military buildings from the rest. Hardy militia men are constantly training and shuffling around the city."

Agricultural Mention goes to Syrupleaf (id: 2038), with a description of:

Quote
Due to poor soil type in the area surrounding Syrupleaf, traditional farming is unproductive and crop choice is limited. However, this hasn't stopped the people of Syrupleaf from taking efforts to establish communal gardens for a special vegetable called "sweet beet." Concentrated use of watering and fertilizing (primarily using horse manure from Otramold) in these communal gardens leads to small plots of relatively productive soil used to grow the sweet beet.

While edible, the beet itself is bitter and unappetizing, but the crop is primarily cultivated for the sugary taste of the oil obtained from grounded up sweet beet leaves. As such, the largest building in Syrupleaf is the local windmill, devoted entirely to the grinding of these leaves.

With those out of my way, my top three picks are....

#3: Otramold (2037)...

Quote
Otramold is nothing more than a quiet, quaint, lazy village on the Steelhold countryside. Nothing about Otramold particularly stands out, but the people here seem friendly enough and there are always a few people in the local tavern up for a game or two of cards if you catch them between or after shifts.

Aside from all this, it seems the populace utilize the inactive military riding ground as a space to gather for horse shows and one can see many small stables scattered around the village.

#2: Mizhpole (2920)...

Quote
Mizhpole is a bustling and ever-so lively town. In taverns, inns, and bars people can often be heard singing or seen dancing. Other than that, it has a distinct look, almost made to look older and to replicate - with a twist - the old buildings of Ravenmark. It simply has a more rustic feeling. Shops and business are flourishing and the walls are in near-perfect condition. The men who roam the streets as the guard have a usually look, they're either on horses with light armor or on the ground with a mix of heavier armors, many of them have recurved or strong bows. Many men are also armed with a mix of halberds, maces, and sabers, almost all of them have shields just in case.

Yet in the center is a large stone castle, a rather intimidating one at that. It seems to be a mix of Ascalonian and old Ravenmark architecture, if not more accustomed for archers though. Its keep is just as impressive, it is adorned with the banners of the Halyckyj family and the colors of Malenzhia.

And, lastly, my #1 pick has to be Morgwen (307), for reasons you'll hopefully understand:

Quote
You enter the village of Morgwen, found amidst the sprawling meadows of central Tyvia. A palisade surrounds a handful of buildings, proudly displaying the yellow-black Moselberg banners. Above a wooden gate, a kettle-hat appears and a wrinkled member of the local militia points a crossbow towards you.

"State yer business, trav'ler."

The old man's raspy voice does not surprise you. What does is the other kettle-helmets popping up around the palisade. It seems like the village, despite its desolate location, has been heavily militarised by its new overlord.

I'll be distributing credits later this weekend once I've gotten some proper rest. I've learned not to play with game-changing commands without making sure I'm in the right mindset for it.

If anyone has an idea for another contest or challenge like this, please let me know.

TL/DR: Threatening the "trav'ler"s gets you credits, it would seem.
9
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by Andrew on May 09, 2018, 02:24:26 PM »
I did some look into allowing lake travel a long while back, and allowing docks on lakes would be nearly a two line change to the game's code.

Allowing boats on rivers, on the other hand, would be.... comparatively intensive. I'd prefer not to make them just thin strips of a new biome, because I'd likely have to rework how bridges work. There are a few things I'd like to do that would involve larger, strategy affecting constructions, but that's a bit down the line. I mention them because they involve me figuring out how to better work with PostGIS functions and ensuring the game interprets user inputs correctly. PostGIS, for what it's worth, is what the game uses to interface is with it's GIS mapping data. There are some functions in PostGIS that let you do some pretty cool things, but getting them in a user-editable state will be... a process.
10
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« Last post by Cipheron on May 07, 2018, 11:37:57 AM »
This wouldn't be hard to do or implement, as far as stealing and burning ships.

Making rivers navigable would be.... tricky, due to how the game handles the land/sea logic, and how it handles you coming ashore. I'd like to do this, and I think it's sorta on my TODO list already, but it's nowhere near as easy.

A quick fix for the river thing would be to treat travel near a river the same as travel by road, e.g. you get a speed boost by following the course of a river but still aren't able to cross it unless it's at a bridge. This would allow effectively the same benefits as trying to work in a river-travel system but without the coding headaches, and having to place docks on rivers.

An alternate solution would be to edit the map, and make major rivers wider and just treat them the same as ocean spaces, and allow docks on adjoining provinces. That way, the code shouldn't need to be touched, the map would just need editing.

Also, there are lakes in the game which you can't cross. It would be nice if docks were allowed there, so sea travel could short-cut settlements on each side, would that just be a matter of editing some database settings for the adjoining settlements?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10