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 - Amble

Pages: [1]
1
Creating Might & Fealty / Re: travel dates and battle timers
« on: August 07, 2017, 12:22:55 PM »
Thank you, that's really interesting to hear.

2
Creating Might & Fealty / travel dates and battle timers
« on: August 03, 2017, 08:10:28 AM »
Just a minor issue that bothers me. I know that I could understand this if I cared to do maths and calculate time zones, but as a casual player I really can't keep up all the time.


Battle timers report as estimated time of completion in server time or something. I think you can tell what time it is currently by checking server time in the bottom, I think. Then it also tells you at the bottom what in-game day it is. But doesn't tell you when the battle will end in-game or in your local time. Most useful thing for it to say is: Battle will end in x hours (or in x in game days).


When travelling all you get told is how many in-game days your trip will take. I know you just have to divide by four and then multiply by 24 for real hours. That's fine that it reflects the in game timeline and adds to the atmosphere. But please can we use the same units in the battle timer and the travel and stop us all having to do this struggle every time?


Options I can suggest of are either tell us the estimated battle start and end in in-game dates (this adds a little more uncertainty to it as there are no hours marked, I think thats a good thing really because you wouldnt really know when the battle will end) or just say in x hours, or in 0.4 in-game days. Or add to the general travel section with how many hours real life travel the trip will take. Any of those would solve the problem.


Also, I understand that roads do have an effect, but does the travel time estimator know and report this?

3
Developing Might & Fealty / Re: Restoring Sub-Realms
« on: June 09, 2017, 08:13:14 AM »
Maybe an alternative approach would be for every estate to track which sovereign realm it has been part of for the longest time. The estate would consider such realm its de jure owner and maybe ahowbot on their estate page so a noble can click on that marker and it might then do the check to see if the realm is extinct and if the noble owns over half of its de jure land. Then he can reform it and it should reappear at the rank level it was, but with no land to its name.

4
Rage Zone / Re: raising 200 militia
« on: June 04, 2017, 07:18:39 AM »
Oh that's really exciting. Thank you

5
Rage Zone / raising 200 militia
« on: June 01, 2017, 01:02:15 AM »
I know that there's only a few of you guys working on things, and I'm really grateful. But I have this issue that I am certain will make me give up the game if I can't find a good work around.

The game can't assign actions to over 200 soldiers at once (or is it 100?). Either way I have faced this issue more times than I can count.

Now I know someone made a grease monkey work around for this, but I can't use that on my phone which is the only way I can play the game really.

Is there any solution for this that I don't know about?

6
General Discussion / Re: On the Effectiveness of Roads
« on: May 28, 2017, 04:24:44 AM »
Thank you for this, that's really interesting. It seems to me that the estimated travel time when you set travel doesn't factor in the roads at all though. Is that true? If so, could you add a little text note to the estimate to say "..though roads may reduce travel time" because I've spent my time playing the game thinking roads didn't work at all.

7
Creating Might & Fealty / Re: Top Level Position Types
« on: May 12, 2017, 12:41:25 AM »
Hey, I love the idea of adding roles with mechanics. I just don't like the way you've proposed to rearrange the realm page to allow it.

I feel like there are two things you're proposing. 1: specific roles with mechanics. 2: have the mechanical roles listed with their members on the main page and whatever other offices are deemed important enough showing.

I think part 2 doesn't add much and will detract from the flavour of realms. If I want the Judge mechanic to be held by my Oracle, I would always want my main realm page to say
Oracle: Hvitserk Farthing and then the game can mention that this makes him have the Judge role in a separate column or in brackets somewhere. I just wouldn't want my page to say Judge: Oracle Hvitserk Farthing. Then everyone would think his office is as a Judge and that he should be addressed as such and behave as such. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. 

8
Developing Might & Fealty / Re: Artefacts
« on: April 30, 2017, 01:19:58 PM »
Awesome, thank you.

9
Developing Might & Fealty / Artefacts
« on: April 29, 2017, 12:26:38 PM »
Quick question about artefacts. I haven't seen any on any character in the game. The idea seems pretty cool, but are they implemented?

10
Creating Might & Fealty / Soldiers battle report
« on: April 22, 2017, 02:46:26 AM »
I had this idea of one hopefully small change which might improve the game a little (at least in my eyes). I love that as a new player you get the challenge of trying to discover as much as you can about the realms and their histories. And as a new player it's great to get a town of your own and maybe a little realm to invest in. And the names and experience and logs of soldiers help you really care about them when you only have a few. A way to improve both aspects would be to allow the owner of a soldier to read the battle report of a battle that the soldier was part of even if the noble wasn't. I mean, it's reasonable that the soldier should be able to tell me which nobles fought and who won etc. This would help me learn about the history and politics around me better, it would give me a reason to care more about particular soldiers - for the stories they tell. And you might find some soldiers who know about such famous battles that they are as valuable as historians as they are as warriors.

A down side potentially is that it makes it even easier for experts studying the combat mechanics to gain the upper hand. But this seems like a realistic mechanic to me and this con is probably outweighed by the pros. 

Anyway it's just a feature I thought might improve the game and might not be too difficult to implement.

Pages: [1]