Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Andrew

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 108
1
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« 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.

2
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« 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.

3
General Discussion / Re: First Challenge of 2018: The World in Words
« 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.

4
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« 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.

5
General Discussion / First Challenge of 2018: The World in Words
« on: May 03, 2018, 11:41:09 PM »
Alright everybody, I'm here to challenge you all to use that fancy new description system we have on all those places you've only been able to describe in roleplays before this--that's right, I want you to describe those settlements!

This will be purely determined by which descriptions I like best, but I will reward 500 credits to whomever does the best "Single Estate Description", 300 credits to the runner up, and 200 credits to the third best.

I am also toying with a categories based on realm-wide consistency/cohesiveness. Consider that a hint.

This challenge will end on May 18th @ 23:59 game time.

6
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« on: April 09, 2018, 04:15:15 PM »
Removing old roads shouldn't be a hard add, but I'd have to look at it.

Towers and docks might be converted to full fledged places. I was toying with it at one point, certainly. Technically speaking, the game already understands that Places can have soldiers garrison them. It'll probably be a bit before I come back to places though.

That said, I have udpated the TODO post with a bunch of stuff about sieges.

7
Announcements / M&F 1.1 Update
« on: April 08, 2018, 07:47:42 AM »
So, after realizing that trying to do a big massive update was a bad idea, I stripped out all the unfinished bits, finished all the easily finishable bits, and packaged it all up for release.

Might & Fealty is now on version 1.1.0.0, which includes a number of new features for realms, characters, settlements, and more:
  • Characters
    --Characters are no longer restricted to heterosexual relationships. This is a setting that must be enabled, in the characters setting menu though, as this game is loosely based off medieval society.
    --Validation of character suicide form is now performed server side as well as client side. -- Finishing one of Tom's TODOs.
    --Character suicide screen now lets you edit the death message, and redirects you to view the character page of the fallen upon submit. -- Finishing one of Tom's TODOs.
    --It is now possible to retire a character. In other words, you can remove them from play without killing them.
    --Retired characters get to have a retirement background field, explaining why they retired or what they're doing in their retirement.
    --It is also possible to un-retire characters, bringing them back into regular play, after a bit.
    --Prisoners now properly and fully affect travel speeds. They also slow down travel overall, as transporting prisoners is not routine travel.
    --Account character list now sorts unplaced characters first and retired characters just before the dead characters.
  • Conversations
    --Realm conversations will now identify themselves as a realm conversation when read.
    --Character & message summary unread conversation listing will now identify which realm a conversation is part of, if any.
  • Description Manager (Back-end Service)
    --Added the Description Manager for tracking historical descriptions, linking them to who made them, when, and for what thing.
    --So simple and useful, I convinced the BM'ers they should use it too.
  • Realms
    --Realms can now designate a capital.
    --Realm Positions will now sort between active and retired on the position management page, letting you see at a glance which ones are currently in use.
    --Realms can now be abolished. If sovereign, all sub-realms/estates become independent. If not, all subrealms/estates move up a level.
    --Realm descriptions are now handled by the Description Manager.
    --Realms can now be abolished. Handle with care.
  • Settlements
    --New buildings: Apothecary, Arena, Dockyard, Moats, Guild District, Guild Square, Quarry, Race Track, Royal Seat, Warehouse, Regional Seat, Local Seat, Imperial Seat.
    --New permissions: "Create Place Inside" and "Create Place Outside"
    --Settlements now display their realm when select on the map, and their top-level realm if that is different.
    --The game will now inform you of existing militia and recruits when trying to train more.
    --Settlements now have user-editable descriptions, handled by the Description Manager.
  • User Experience
    --New players are no longer able to place new characters directly on the map. Knight offers are now more important.
    --Invalid credentials on login attempt will no longer dump database info.
    --(Shorter) Announcements will now display on login page/box.
If you find any bugs, please let us know!

8
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« on: April 05, 2018, 01:39:17 PM »
So, the consensus is that races are not something to look at right now, but perhaps down the line if we expand the map and incorporate them in a way that makes sense. I'm fine with this.

The other consensus is that cultures need to be a thing that exists in game, proper like, which I'm happy with, and a simple implementation shouldn't be hard to do. If anything though, I'll probably make it a subscription time reward rather than a spend, or possibly do both and make it cheaper if you wait.

Your input on how cultures should work in a more detailed matter would be greatly appreciated, either here or in a new topic, so I can not get too in the weeds, but at the minimum I will implement at least the following at some point: a name, an origin area, can be applied to realms, can allow new arrivals to use it, and will have settings to make certain things toggleable; This is to make it so i can implement my own dual-culture Iuna, where there's a newer culture post-cataclysm that contrasts with the old Iuna ways pre-cataclysm.

I'm also toying with make it so cultures are like ethnicities here, and characters can have certain percentages of each. Just an idea though.

9
General Discussion / A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« on: April 05, 2018, 01:21:19 PM »
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!

10
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« on: April 05, 2018, 12:42:34 PM »
Alright, I've thoroughly concluded that this bulk updating idea was a bad one, so everything not completed is being stripped and I'm sticking to a more "release-as-ready" format for future updates. This'll mean smaller updates, but far, far more frequent. Think along the lines of the last one which took me all of like a day to implement, and many of the 1.1 items listed above which took me just hours.

This'll also mean that this topic will probably start to serve as a roadmap of future updates as well, beyond just the next version.

Places
...and all the things about them:
  • New Feature: Places
    --You can now create "Places". Places are user-customized locations.
    --The options depend on: your character, what roles they posses, what permissions they have, whether or not they're in a settlement, and what buildings are built if they are.
    --Your ability to see a Place also depends on your permissions in relation to that place.
    --Right now, you can only edit descriptions and enter/exit them. Eventually you'll be able to garrison and build stuff at them, and they'll offer type-specific actions.
    ----This does not apply to capitals. You MUST have a capital built if you wish to edit/conduct a lot of the Realm management stuff. You must also be at the capital to do said stuff. (So if you're going to rebel, lure the hierarchy away from the capital for better results!)
    --Current types include: Academy, Arena, Capital, Castle, Cave, Fort, Inn, Library, Monument, Plaza, Portal, Passage, Race Track, Tavern, Tournament Grounds.
  • Still Needing Finished:
    --Places can be created and edited, but not entered/exited.
    --Places can not yet have permissions be managed.
    --Interactable Places list not a thing that exists yet.
    --Restrict realm-management stuff at the capital (should just be a change to the dispatcher entries for realm management.)
    --Make it so the capital Place is always buildable, regardless of subscription status.
Sieges
...and all the things about them:
  • New Feature: Teams
    --Will primarily man their associated equipment in battle.
    --Teams will be regularly armed and equipped soldiers, but primarily operate siege equipment unless needs or orders dictact otherwise.
  • New Feature: Sieges
    --Sieges will be anything from encircling an unfortified village to a multi-week or month long process of sieging a larger, heavily fortified citadel.
    --Sieges will, if they fully encircle, suspend all trade to and from.
    --Sieges will optionally include siege equipment
    --Sieges will have a designated leader
    --Ranged units on both sides may opt to attack the other,
  • New Feature: Team Equipment
    --Will have varying types: Ladders, Battering Rams, Covered Rams, Siege Towers, Tunnelers, Catapults, Ballistas, Trebuchets, etc.
    --Will be manned by Teams, varying in quantity based on equipment.
    --Ranged weapons may fire during a siege or during an assault (outsiders attacking walls) or rally (defenders attacking besiegers)
    --If firing during battle, ranged weapons may hit friendlies.
    --Ranged weapons during siege itself may sometimes
  • Buildings
    --Buildings may be damaged during a siege, active militia will risk being injured if manning the walls.
  • Settlements
    --Population won't grow during a siege, or at least not at regular levels.
    --People will eat less though, as rationing is enforced (no, this won't have starvation penalties)
    --People may be killed by siege fire hitting the town itself. :'(
Version Mu: "NaN"
  • Change slumbering to be based on account rather than character last access. See: https://github.com/Zanaras/MaFCDR/blob/master/src/BM2/SiteBundle/Command/PaymentCommand.php#L31
  • Command to move old realm descriptions over to DescMan.
  • Only display retired realm positions paragraph if there are retired positions.
  • "Edit Background" for new, unplaced chars displays "Place" for some reason.
  • Translation strings:
    -- Apparently we indicate somewhere that you can destroy roads, but I can't figure out where.
  • Spacing on capital list for settlements needs work.
  • Re-add surrendering as a character action.
  • Add option to disband prisoner soldiers, or steal their gear, or what have you.
  • Make empty moats take longer.
  • Rework full moat requirements / offer alternative moat type ("spiked moat"?)
  • Capital designation screen should tell you what the current capital is, if there is one.
  • Translation string for "realm.abolish.done"
  • Don't fire abdication message for ruler if realm is being dismantled.
  • Option to abandon settlements remotely.
  • Logic "newbackground" doesn't exist for play route. Should lead to edit history page, I think. Whatever page you go to after naming a character anyways.
  • Add a way to check heirs before inheritance to make sure they're active, otherwise, check their heir, and their heir, until one is found or none qualify. Implement this as relevant.
Code: [Select]
$heirs = [];
$bestheir = NULL;
$heirs[] = $character->getSuccessor();
foreach ($heirs as $heir) {
    if (!$heir->isActive() && $heir->getSuccessor()) {
        $heirs[] = $heir->getSuccessor();
    } else {
        $bestheir = $heir;
    }
}

11
General Discussion / A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« on: February 22, 2018, 02:36:00 PM »
So, the topic has come up again and I'd be interested in hearing as much input on it as possible this time, as I'll probably not bring it like this again for quite a while (years?).

Should we allow First Ones to be non-human races?

Alternatively, should we allow people to say that they are playing elves, orcs, or other, pre-defined races?

I say pre-defined because it allows us to have specific descriptions of what the races look like in one place, and it means we won't get people coming in and just creating another race simply because they can.

Personally, I'm for it because it allows us to introduce a new dynamic into the social-aspects of the game. I will state though, this will be purely a cosmetic addition (if we add it). No sort of in-game bonuses or penalties regardless of whatever race your First One claims to be or actually is.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

12
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« on: February 17, 2018, 09:45:06 PM »
(double reserved -- just in case!)

13
General Discussion / Re: Why M&F peaked so young
« on: February 11, 2018, 11:30:11 PM »
So, I've a few ideas to address these problems, and yes I recognize them as such. Firstly, the new player arrival experience needs changed, and I've talked about this elsewhere. If I had more time, I'd repeat it here. Basically, arrival to the realm as an unaligned, but part of the realm, first one, then choose from there, with having already gotten some sort of brief on what the realm is like.

Second, with that first change, you'll no longer drop out of the realm if you liege quits/dies/whatevers, as the game will track what realm you're part of via a new primary means of figuring it out.

Third, I'm looking to get away from this whole fear of unknown people a bit by adding dynasties, which will be the next major update after this one. I can't gaurantee it'll make people less paranoid, but it should make it easier for them to trust people.

As far as trusting people goes, if someone wants to make a separate topic about that, I'm all ears (or eyes, as is the case here). If someone has given some thought about how we can prevent spies from learning things so easily or has some idea about how we'd encourage people to not be so paranoid, I'm willing to hear about it.

Regardles, Ayruin, I'm sorry that's how the experience in your first two realms went. It's not an attitude I encourage, but I'm only seriously active in one realm.

14
General Discussion / Re: A discussion the importance of lore upon gameplay
« on: February 05, 2018, 10:07:19 PM »
When I say the game isn't a medieval simulator, what I'm saying is that it's not simulating medieval life on earth. If it was, you'd be looking at a map of Europe, rather than whatever it is we call the continent. If we make it a medieval simulator, we lose a LOT of the liberties on how things operate or work, and I'll probably stop developing it because I don't have the time to research how much food a medieval baker can produce.

The mortals in game aren't human. At least not so much as we are. The game doesn't even explicitly state that the mortals, or first ones, even look like exactly like humans, just that they are "not unlike". The closest you get is these:

"So the gods went about creating a new creature much more similar to themselves then all the others ones. The First Ones. A race not unlike man, but stronger, smarter and not subject to aging."

"First Ones look much like mortal men at first glance, but you can spot very fast that they are not the same. No disease or illness can touch them, save one. As such, they never need healers or herbs, and they can recover from wounds that would strike every mortal down for sure. Their teeth and skin are perfect, their hair is fair and their eyes are awake and shining, deep as a clear lake on a summer day."

Personally, I'd love to go a little less low-fantasy and add other races into the game. People seem to be against this idea, for some reason though. You could, for what it's worth, argue that we're all playing Tolkien-esque elves, and that this is where the Elves from early BattleMaster originally came from. :P

And yeah, most of the art and images do reflect European standards, though I think that's more so we have something to look at that's standardized more than anything. A few people are aware of the debates I've had about weapon effectiveness and how it could be altered. I'd love to break away from this purely European thing though, and am toying with the concept of making culture packs more than just name lists, but there are many things that don't have similar conventions across geographic areas.

My goal is to make M&F a good game, one that's interesting, not necessarily historically accurate. If there's an area that can be fixed or improved upon in such a way that makes sense and adds to the gameplay, I'm more than willing to try it, but I try to avoid major changes without serious consideration as to what the consequences might be.

Quote
Sure. Though I still think that they should have to read about realms *before* they spawn in anywhere and preferably before they even make the character. If they knew of the major cultures of the game, they could make an Ascalonian and spawn somewhere else but still have an idea of what an Ascalonian should perhaps be like to some extent.

"A new player should, before placing a character down, be able to get an idea of what a realm is like, what opporunities there are there, and know a little about where they are going." --Me, my previous post.

Quote
Sure, why not. Seems like a sensible thing. Perhaps the liege can choose what his knights will be a part of?

Ideally, it'll be part of the revamped knight offer system.

15
General Discussion / Re: A discussion the importance of lore upon gameplay
« on: February 05, 2018, 08:32:49 PM »
I'm not against creating more game lore, but there'd have to be a good reason to add something that would constrain, possibly even overwrite, the creative activities of players. I've toyed with putting some game history into the game's fiction, so there's an understood "hey, this happened" that can't be argued, but that means it can't be argued, and there's less opportunity for contention on the subject.

One might suggest that we limit the setting of Might & Fealty to a specific era in our history, to which I'd respond that M&F is not a medieval simulator, is not set on earth, and does not humans (unless this is actually a sci-fi title, which it might be). Even then, which time era would we set it to? From which area of the world? Based off which group of people there?

A better question would be, what exactly does the game lore already establish, as fact?

And a follow-up would be, what do we need to expand on from there, so that people can better enjoy the game?

To switch gears to your discussion of Knight Offers, a rework of the new character arrival system is on the TODO list, for a later update. Before I tackle it though, I need a few things, some of which I'm already experimenting with in 1.1. The main things are a I need a way for characters to be part of a realm, without holding land, titles, or vassalage in it, and a place for those new characters to arrive to that actually improves on the new player experience rather than just dropping them in a sea of information. For the previous, it will require some effort. As for the latter though, the first part of that will come in 1.1, with Places. Ideally, the bulk of it will happen in 1.2 or 1.3 when I roll out Complexes.

That said, I'm not saying I won't change things in a smaller update somewhere rather than waiting for a major update, but I'd like to make it so rather than arriving as a knight, you arrive as a person. Rather than just being a knight, your first choice is becoming a knight of someone, or not. A new player should, before placing a character down, be able to get an idea of what a realm is like, what opporunities there are there, and know a little about where they are going. When they arrive, they should have an opportunity to learn more about a realm, talk to people in it, and decide if they want to stay or go someplace else. They shouldn't have to kill their character to go someplace else.

Oh, and what realms you're a part of should be more obvious. This silliness that you inherit the realms of your liege will be ending when I get around to figuring out the alternative to how it'll work instead.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 108