Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by silvershot on April 06, 2018, 03:16:34 PM »
I am concerned that an inability to escape would simply give more power to the players who do not care about the stories of the world that other players have created. When your characters means nothing, and their character(s) means a lot... Only one person really has anything to lose.

It may be better to revisit how one should be able to escape; what risks might be involved. Additionally, killing yourself why captured might eventually be a viable option, but it's unlikely if it's a character you care about (unless it fits within their personality assuming you role play).

If you cannot escape, and you cannot under any circumstances kill your character while they are captured, then I find it highly likely that someone will just hold prisoners, blocking that character slot from being used, and then just simply execute them after getting what they want afterwards.

Perhaps the latter point makes sense under some circumstances in story, but there's definitely room for power-gamey abuse.


To put it in a more succinct manner... A meaningful character captured by a meaningless (e.g. drone or what have you) character will just be killed or be held (until likely killed) by a player who does not care about creating a story nor the IC consequences of their actions. Basically, if you don't play the game to develop stories, then everyone else's stories are probably irrelevant and IC feelings about you and your characters will basically never matter to them.
22
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by Cipheron on April 06, 2018, 01:10:01 AM »
I think there's often a vision in game design that a problem can be solved by a big stick rather than a carrot - punish a player to encourage them to behave in certain ways, rather than offer them some incentive to behave in a certain way.

That's right. Richard Bartle, the creator of the original MUDs also talks about this as a common stumbling block when creating online games. Devs often believe they can dis-incentivize a behavior and that players therefore must switch to the "preferred" behavior. But they can easily switch to the behavior of playing a completely different game or activity. When trying to shift players from Choice A to Choice B, you should take into account the risk of Choice C, which represents "play something else".

Quote
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.

I don't think if that would help tip the balance in this particular scenario. Consider a players with a 10-character account, they've trained up their core characters, then during a war, they bump up to a higher-tier account and spam additional commanders. They're still getting the benefit of the high-focus training on their core leaders, but that in no way dis-incentivizes them from spamming disposable grunts. This is not a criticism of the idea, but we need to think through real-life examples to see if the policy would actually affect behavior in the way that's claimed.

The thing is, there's a huge disconnected between how many troops an account can have in their settlements, vs how many troops you can effectively mobilize. It's this imbalance that creates the scenario in which massive character spam is a winning strategy in warfare. So while putting a dampener on character creation could slow this down, it's only hiding the exploit below an extra level of paperwork, not removing the core issue of game balance.
23
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by Foxglove on April 05, 2018, 05:30:53 PM »
I've never been a fan in any game of the concept of putting characters semi-permanently in to a place where you can't play them unless someone else allows it (i.e. if you are captured you stay there until another player decides to release you). The game would effectively punish you for taking part in a battle by depriving you of use of the character if it gets captured. Not a good idea.

I think there's often a vision in game design that a problem can be solved by a big stick rather than a carrot - punish a player to encourage them to behave in certain ways, rather than offer them some incentive to behave in a certain way.

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.

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.
24
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by The Vintroth on April 05, 2018, 01:57:08 PM »
I believe that Might and Fealty, to a large extent, is interesting because of the stories that come from actual characters that develop in various situations in a certain setting.

The only thing I'd point out is that if your captor slumbered, it'd be nice to be able to escape. Other then that, ransoms should work well enough to get your characters free in most places. To massively increase or even stop you from killing the character will likely lessen the problem of FO commanders that are not characters. - Though there is always the chance that they won't be captured and remain the worthless 'character' they already are.

I would raise another idea that could complement your idea. To have characters approved before they can be spawned. It would increase the amount of time it would take to get a character spawned since a "Moderator/Admin/Character checker" needs to read through your description and general idea. For the negative effects this might possibly have, it would force everyone to actually put some effort into creating characters. Furthermore, it would force people to write descriptions which I believe is always nice to see.
25
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Last post by Andrew 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.
26
General Discussion / A Discussion On The Value Of Characters
« Last post by Andrew 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!
27
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: M&F Changelog
« Last post by Andrew 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;
    }
}
28
General Discussion / The biggest mistakes I ever made in MF are...?
« Last post by WVH on March 12, 2018, 02:42:09 PM »
Half asleep this morning, I accidentally disbanded (instead of set as militia) 330 warriors, most of them heavy cavalry.

Made me wonder what other very stupid mistakes people have made?  Anyone?
29
General Discussion / Re: A Discussion On Allowing Non-Human First Ones
« Last post by Esotericus on March 08, 2018, 06:47:35 AM »
I agree strongly with both Foxglove and Ayruin, above.
Adding new races just to do so would only cause confusion, really.
There is a LOT of potential culture already existing that should be worked with and emphasized that will provide the same effect with less confusion ans potential game imbalance.
30
Off-topic Chat / Hello! Peeps :)
« Last post by Rolandarise on February 28, 2018, 12:33:58 AM »
Hello :)
 
How is everyone doing today? :)
 
a few photos of my dog Rosco to brighten the place up :)
 


 
Does anyone else have anyone pet pics to show? :)
 
Regards
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10