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 ... 106
1
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Burn ships!
« on: December 08, 2017, 01:18:35 PM »
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.

2
Announcements / November 2017 Report
« on: December 01, 2017, 03:37:17 PM »
Salutations Everyone,

I'm back again with the numbers from November!

If you're the type who's curious where the funds go or how much things cost, or even the condition of the game, well, here you go!

First and foremost, lets talk funding.

Income & Must Pays
(Keeping the Lights on)
TypeAmountNotes
Credit Purchases+15.00 EURHow much we received from player's purchasing credits
PayPal Transaction Fees-0.44 EUREstimated Percent lost in fees to PayPal
PayPal Transaction Fees-0.60 USDPer Transation fees to PayPal
Hosting Costs-40 USDAmount spent on server hosting

Total= -24.03 USDMonthly Total for November
Total+ 52.20From October
Total= 28.17 USDYTD Total

Well, it's certainly nowhere near last month. This kind of comes with the territory though, with how the credit system is setup. Sometimes players have a lot of credits, and sometime they don't.

What else would we, ideally, pay for though?

Additional Costs
(Things that improve the situation)
Advertising Costs-60.77 USDAmount spent on Google ads (Results will be broken down below)
Test Server Costs-40 USDAmount spent on the test server's hosting

Total-100.77 USD

As you can see, that costs a bit of money. The test server uses the exact same hosting plan as the live server, and has much of the same data, allowing us to push big updates to it first in order to make sure they don't catastrophically break something. It's not a required costs, but it's very much a nice thing to have. In regards to the advertising costs, that's got its own table below that goes more in-depth. These are the things I handle myself, as the game can't currently afford their cost.

Advertising Info
(New players are good thing)
TypeViewsClicksInteraction RateCost
Text Ad11,6363062.63%30.38 USD
Display Ad58,7728121.38%30.39 USD

Total70,4081,1181.59%60.77 USD

Like I said before though, this is something I've been paying for, myself, for quite a while now. From March of 15 through October of 16, I was paying for just a text ad. In November of 2016, I added the display (picture) ad. Lifetime, they've gotten 26,006 people to at least look at Might & Fealty.

Subscribers & Purchases
(What credits are spent on)
TypeAmountNotes
Subscriptions9,200 Credits
Heraldry0 Credits
Culture Packs0 Credits

Total9,400 Credits

How many players do we have though? I did say I'd share that this month. I will preface this with these numbers aren't as accurate as I'd like them to be, as the method I use to collect isn't ideal, but....

Players
(How many gods?)
Count TypeAmountNotes
7-day131Players
14-day147 Players
30-day163 Players

Is that what you expected? More? Less? I'll admit, I'm kind of curious.

3
General Discussion / Re: Making players an asset
« 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.

4
General Discussion / Re: Making players an asset
« 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.

5
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: The 1.1 Update Topic
« on: November 23, 2017, 03:18:06 PM »
Oh, I've also added logic for restricting new players to only knight offers or with family, so we can steer them towards player interaction.

Furthermore, I'm adding a proper description table into the game, that will track the various descriptions used for settlements, artifacts, places, etc., over time. This will allow us to see how things change over time.

6
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: The 1.1 Update Topic
« on: November 23, 2017, 03:14:54 PM »
Well, I've made a lot of headway tonight. No more sub-settlements, because that'll be a literal pain in my ass to code (as in, it will hurt from the many hours I'll have to sit here to do it).

That said, places are being fully implemented as quasi-settlements. They'll be buildable locations, semi-garrisionable locations, that will be enterable, and have description histories. May give them their own event logs too, not sure now.

7
General Discussion / Re: Making players an asset
« on: November 23, 2017, 12:50:59 PM »
I never said hanging out with the Second Ones. I just said we're not tied down by Tom's vision.

8
General Discussion / Re: Things to Do
« on: November 23, 2017, 10:46:42 AM »
I like the idea of being able to interact more with settlements too, though I also like the ease the existing interaction system allows when it comes to accessing things, so rather than replace it, I'd like to add something in tandem that allows a more immersive experience.

Tavern chat rooms could be added I think. I'll add it to my todo list.
Buildings with descriptions, already on my todo list.
Custom buildings, sort of on my todo list.
Add jobs. . . . . . Elaborate please.
Scale back the required power level, there's a thing I'd love to do involving new player characters being created and arriving in a city but it requires player complexes to be added first.
Players needing to eat, I'm going to decline on the grounds of M&F not being a survival game--maybe when I add the warrens though, we can reapproach this.
Zero sum rule, we might bend ti down the line, when I manage to teach the game what an actual storage system is, but I don't plan on removing it anytime soon.
Player armies, doable. Could you elaborate more on what you'd like to see with this?
Crafted items, me and De-Legro were discussing this at one point. I think our visions are a bit different.
Player economy, eh.... Technically we already have a player economy. Most of the players seem to be against me adding new resource types to it though. :(
Player owned businesses, I've discussed this with De-Legro before, but at the earliest this won't even be considered for adding until player complexes are added.
Owning land, this is sort of already on my todo list.

9
General Discussion / Re: Making players an asset
« on: November 23, 2017, 10:32:35 AM »
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).

10
General Discussion / Re: Discussion - Subscription Levels
« on: November 23, 2017, 10:28:02 AM »
I'm a little new here, so I will likely be commenting in at least partial ignorance. Brace yourselves.

I come from Renaissance Kingdoms, where we had 1 character per account (and having multiple accounts was worth a ban). One of the key things there was that roleplay was heavily encouraged, partially because it had very few actual mechanics, but also because most people had only one main character (aside from "cheaters"). The characters required investment, you had to keep them fed to keep their stats up, you had to buy swords which could break, same with shields and spears (staves) and you could own 2 plots of farmland with 1 shop/business.

So I would argue that what we're really facing here is a lack of value placed on the individual characters, mainly because they all start out as knights/kings/etc. We're focusing on the nobility, when a player who we want to appreciate their character should come in as a peasant and work their way up. Because there is little progression placed on a character and you can have so many, it's only natural that the player's perspective on these characters (especially new players coming in from the modern era of online gaming) is going to be diluted.

With that said, this seems to be a multi-faceted issue. Part of this is the issue of coming in as at least a knight, part of it is the lack of anything to do unless you own land and soldiers (which eventually translates to war with little personal risk). So we have a lot of problems to fix before we really look at subscription levels, in my humble opinion. I have more I can say on this but I feel it's probably for a different post.

Side Note: Maybe we can make a subscription level to turn off these damnable CAPTCHAs on every post!

Yes, characters aren't worth much right now, especially when you've just made them. There's no attachement to them yet, because they're only known to you and have no history.

You are correct, there isn't much to do if you're not a lord. This is why the first thing that happens when you join a realm is usually that you're given a settlement to manage, which will hopefully keep you interested long enough to get into the political side of the realm.

If anything, I'd say M&F suffers from paralysis of choice and the lack of a helping hand to guide people. Redoing the entire new arrival system for characters is on my todo list, but I'm not sure when that'll happen.

No just no. Read the Lore. Player character are a completely different species to the peasantry they lord over, a species in decline that must now rely on the inferior mortals to maintain the remanents of their civilisation. Knights simply shouldn't exist in this game in my opinion. They do because they did in BM, which is the game Tom made before M&F. In BM knights have a role, there is a recruitment system devised around their existence etc. Also BM has real character limits and very limited land.

The idea of progression is not a bad thing but I don't believe it needs to start at peasantry. Besides doing so would promote a upwardly mobile social hierarchy that seems to be the antithesis of medieval society.
Thats great, so devise a system that works within the actual game world. Look I will be frank, the forum is a great place to come and see the same complaints rehashed again and again and again. Which is mostly pointless since Andrew and I were some of the first people to bring up the same short comings years ago when the game launched. Identifying the core issues is not what is lacking. Concrete implementable solutions, remembering that they need to be implemented by two devs that have full time jobs in addition to this game, are what is lacking.

De-Legro, relax. Not everyone reads every page of a game when they start, and the fact that you're not the same as the people you rule over in this game is something that should be made more apparent when you create a character, especially your first few.

Also, the joys of this not being set on earth mean that "society" in game is whatever we make the game be.

All he's saying is that some obvious progression system or clear direction in what to do would be a good thing to add to the game. I agree. We can't expect a new player to know the best way to do that though, nor can we expect them to know how to implement it. That's up to us to figure out.


11
General Discussion / Re: Talking Point - Character Relationships
« on: November 17, 2017, 02:01:00 PM »
Sharing heraldry across family lines was an attempt at encouraging players to intermingle their lines, a bit. Mostly, that's targeting the free players, but I'm open to things that encourage intermingling. Sad how few suitors my characters get.

12
Could you be a little more specific about what pages you're referring to, please?

13
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: The 1.1 Update Topic
« on: November 10, 2017, 11:15:23 AM »
Heh, I figured this would've been a faster update than it's been. It's been a month and a half now. It's getting closer though, but I've not gotten into actually creating the player options that'll enable a lot of it.

14
Announcements / October 2017 Report
« on: November 10, 2017, 06:28:34 AM »
Salutations Everyone,

This will hopefully be the first of a series that will, normally, be done in the first few days of the month, as part of the game being a community project.

Some of you have been asking, where do the funds from the game go, how much does it cost, why subscriptions are still a thing, so I hope to answer that, along with any other future questions, here.

First and foremost, lets talk funding.

Income & Must Pays
(Keeping the Lights on)
TypeAmountNotes
Credit Purchases+85.00 EURHow much we received from player's purchasing credits
PayPal Transaction Fees-2.47 EUREstimated Percent lost in fees to PayPal
PayPal Transaction Fees-3.90 USDPer Transation fees to PayPal
Hosting Costs-40 USDAmount spent on server hosting

Total=52.20 USDMonthly Total for October

That's a fair amount of income, no? This is why I kept saying the game isn't actually doing bad. It's not doing great, but it's not dying.

What else would we, ideally, pay for though?

Additional Costs
(Things that improve the situation)
Advertising Costs-55.94 USDAmount spent on Google ads (Results will be broken down below)
Test Server Costs-40 USDAmount spent on the test server's hosting

Total-99.94 USD

As you can see, that costs a bit of money. The test server uses the exact same hosting plan as the live server, and has much of the same data, allowing us to push big updates to it first in order to make sure they don't catastrophically break something. It's not a required costs, but it's very much a nice thing to have. In regards to the advertising costs, that's got it's own table below. These are the things I handle myself, as the game can't currently afford their cost.

Advertising Info
(New players are good thing)
TypeViewsClicksInteraction RateCost
Text Ad11,8522972.51%25.53 USD
Display Ad61,4647981.3%30.41 USD

Total73.31610951.49%55.94 USD

Like I said before though, this is something I've been paying for, myself, for quite a while now. From March of 15 through October of 16, I was paying for just a text ad. In November of 2016, I added the display (picture) ad. Lifetime, they've gotten 25,244 people to at least look at Might & Fealty.

Subscribers & Purchases
(What credits are spent on)
TypeAmountNotes
Subscriptions10,400 Credits
Heraldry4,000 Credits
Culture Packs400 Credits

Total14,800 Credits

How many players do we have though? Well, I don't have an exact count at the moment, but I know how to get one. I'll put that information up next month, though, when I've got it properly integrated into the game's admin views.

15
Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Notes on the Conversation Bundle
« on: November 08, 2017, 12:41:38 PM »
Just remembered that Doctrine supports "findOneBy", which makes this shorter. Also, since there's no reason to turn php strings into variables unless we reuse them, we can cut out some rows.

Code: [Select]
   public function markReadForMany (ConversationMetadata $m) {
      // get the actual conversation id.
      $myconvo = $m->getConversation();
      // find this user's characters.
      foreach ($m->getUser()->getAppUser()->getUser()->getCharacters() as $char) {
         // see if this character has this conversation.
         if ($char->getMsgUser()->getConversationsMetadata()->findOneBy('Conversation' => $myconvo)) {
            // mark the conversation read.
            $this->markRead($char->getMsgUser()->getConversationsMetadata()->findOneBy('Conversation' => $myconvo);
         }
      }
      return true;
   }

This does the same thing as the slightly updated second bit of code in my earlier post. It will look to see what other characters of the given player have a conversation, and mark it read when this function is ran against a given conversation.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 106