Messages

1

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Activity & Activity Buildings

« on: October 21, 2017, 01:10:24 AM »

One good thing about traits is that getting access to new traits could become a carrot-and-stick approach to encouraging players to intermarry more.

Letting people choose traits would be a quick way to balance it but I feel like it takes some of the proceduraly generated "neato" factor away. I think random traits are still enough carrot to intermarry on it's own...the how/why of genetics just needs a bit of work. Maybe a bit of both random chance and choice, let people choose a few 'dominant' traits for their account (that pop up at a higher rate). The stick would be useful to curb abuse (at least quickly). Something like "Oh, you're into the 20th character this IG year by killing/creating characters...your bloodline is now weak and only has one trait rather than that double duelist character you pushed for". Any advantage will be optimized by some, just make them do it over time. Then you can just call it FO-husbandry by the gods(players) and it's a mini-game.


As long as the traits aren't too powerful it won't be incentive for min-maxing to me. Say, a warrior trait is only the equivalent of 1.2k experience for the character rather than the 1k base xp. Fairly marginal but still desirable. I'm more worried about people becoming overly attached to their killable characters based soley on "oh, a good roll that I'll get salty over losing"... rather than being attached to characters because they've built a story they don't want to end.

2

Stories to tell / Re: The Greenwardens

« on: October 21, 2017, 12:29:36 AM »

It does seem to rub some the wrong way but I still enjoy my little band of odd-balls. I think the primer did help retention but only by a few weeks (rather than long-term). The end-goal is still the same: a mentor guild that gives knights a variety of options to pursue (rather than the de-facto 'you are mine, go do this'). Sadly, folks seem to default into "yeah, I'll just take the nearby slumberblighted estate under the Confederation". I'm still incubating ideas for now...and/or being lazy.

I did some IC stuff and the Wardens are back to just the west (Gillie is back to being daddy's little champion). I'll probably be trying again in the central north at some point....but damn it's hard to get people to take a vow of (sorta) poverty.

As to this:

All I have to say is NO..

I m already too bad at the game dont want to get even worse

Mind elaborating? If you want to 'git gud', all it really takes is overwhelming force (vassals/soldiers/allies) for tactics, brown-nosing for diplomacy, or just waiting for people to slumberblight/quit then nick their stuff. Personally, I count good at the game as just making robust characters that lead to interesting stories. I'm not a pro on either front but I have enough fun to not slumberblight...so that's something.

3

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Activity & Activity Buildings

« on: September 19, 2017, 01:05:33 PM »

Skills developing as you use them does sound neat. Just implementing the traits to have an impact would tickle my fancy, even if they were static/flat. Maybe making traits into skills that you can build would be a neat combo. Letting skills/traits naturally build with use until you have a leviathan W/W FO or levee master R/R. Maybe a nice secret bonus for roleplay traits. Might be harder to balance but would be interesting.


As far as tournament/dueling/jousting grounds, I guess it wouldn't hurt to ask what mini-game you want to introduce. I think letting people show off their best human warrior would be neat, a kind of 'game of swag units'...help build npc's with interesting backgrounds, maybe find a way to give access to histories. I'm not fond of the Battlemaster style skill investment for tournament/duels. I'd rather duels between player characters be pure rock/paper/scissors (or some other even match between players) than the same time/effort route to supremacy. I have thoughts about combining dungeons and tournaments. Make FO teams and the monsters are humans. It's an idle thought I haven't fleshed out, but there's something there.

4

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Activity & Activity Buildings

« on: September 14, 2017, 06:01:18 PM »

I like the idea of a few buildings/tools for mock battles and duels. The more people have to do during peace (or as knights), the better. Especially if it promotes visiting neighbors and interacting.

Are 'skills' being created for characters? I wouldn't mind the glory/battles/capture records being used, that might be a neat thing to tweak/integrate, but I grew tired of the "farm such-and-such skill" you see in Battlemaster and everything else. Human soldier proxies for duels would work, too. Get a mini-game of cock-fights/human-pokemons.

5

Conduct & Design Discussion / Monsters, Dungeons, and Brigands

« on: August 02, 2017, 03:09:27 PM »

So it was kicked around in IRC, but I think it's a gold idea. Combine brigands/dungeons, convert dungeons to a brigand estate, and shackle the brigand character to the the nearby regions of the dungon. The brigand has an estate with a bit of defense, a production site, and the dungeon has a reason to be cleared. Then turn the brigand and troops into monsters.


Ideally, piggybacking off some of the monster dungeon thread, make brigands into fantasy creatures and such. Brigands would have different 'classes', the class and location would still be a 1-slot-per-account random draw. Necromancers, beastmen, and dragons....popping up among the demi-gods as they try to rule over humanity...their lairs and crypts needing to be dealt with or they become lords of their domain. It can go Hesoid, Tolkien, or any lore you want to draw from.


Might change the game dynamic a bit much, but it would be more robust.

6

General Discussion / Re: Quests

« on: June 29, 2017, 08:48:54 AM »

Sure, except for when new player realise they can't actually be completed. If we need public notices, let's implement that properly, not maintain a system that will only cause confusion within the player base.

You can't complete a quest? I've been able to, I thought at least. Lord places quest, someone takes it, then lord marks it compete and it goes away after the adventurer confirms payment.

7

General Discussion / Re: Quests

« on: June 29, 2017, 05:43:10 AM »

Makes for a good 'public notice'. I think they actually function fine, at least between my own characters.

8

Stories to tell / Re: The Greenwardens

« on: June 25, 2017, 03:08:48 PM »

I've also come up with some in-game plans. Estates that demonstrate things fairly well (village, town, capital), and some watchtowers with enough blindspots to play a game of hide-and-seek. I can tell them about the overtly complicated tribute system the Wardens pay out.


I'm also going to try a more RP heavy Greenwarden in Molk. I'm not sure if I've mentioned the Molk Town Melee, but slumberblighted-old-man Greymane demands blood. It's about as quirky, but I'm going in an entirely different direction with how to keep knights.

9

General Discussion / Re: Wanted: Your Top Ten Changes

« on: June 23, 2017, 10:19:05 AM »

I had an idea about troop training. Why not a building, that modified militia? Is it feasible to have a "practice field" where your veteran troops (humans with experience) can train your newbies for you? Say, 1 veteran at 50 xp can give 5 or 6 fresh recruits 1 xp a week (or month, whatever balances. Probably cap max training xp, too). Suddenly those human veterans aren't just expensive fodder, but start to flesh out as individuals. It could even modify production in an estate, and be a proper burden to stack too heavy.


It's a bit of a twist on the drill grounds idea above, I suppose.

10

Stories to tell / Re: The Greenwardens

« on: June 22, 2017, 05:05:07 PM »

So I've worked grammar and spelling some. Fleshed out odd bits that were suggested. I'll post a foreward I did, something kind of orienting new players for 'wat do'...rather than 'how do'.

Foreward


So you have taken the prerogative of a First One, the rightful command of humans. A worthy deed in itself, but there is much to it that you will need to know. Your first step, swearing to a liege, should be complete (if you've taken a knight offer). Finding a position in a power structure (a realm) is vital to survival and finding out about your surroundings. There are those who strike off on their own, but such a task is risky.


Now what to do? A liege may have tasks for you. They are your go-to for questions, problems, and concerns. What you intend to do will require different things, some of which your liege may provide...some you may have to find on your own. You'll find realm chatter, which varies from quantity to quality, tyrannies to paragons of freedom of expression.


Were you able to find help to decide what to do next? Good, do that...and figure out what might be best for the long term. No? Greenwardens typically offer mentoring, you may find others nearby in similar situations, or this might be a chance to come up with your own goals. Big events can take time, sometimes, First One's living life at different paces.


So now you have a goal. Be it grow and prosper as lord of an estate(s), or serve as a warrior knight commanding troops in glorious battle for your liege. You'll need to know how best to do these things effectively. So here is the Mad Keeper's Primer, the first entry in a helpful collection of observations by mentor Greenwardens. Presenting, the Steward (or Marshal's) Handbook.

A bit bare-bones like the handbook drafts, but that is the essential keypoints. I'll flesh it out some, maybe incubate a few more ideas before I post it... then I'll run some knight offers and see if it helps retention. Maybe it goes full blown academic journal-ish if other authors/armchairexperts get interested.

11

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Equipment Overhaul

« on: June 17, 2017, 08:17:17 AM »

Again it is going to depend on tactics. If you have ambushes that can negate the advantage of heavier armour. Of course you are now talking an entirely different form of combat then general battle. Pitched battles within forest are going to favour those with shorter weapons in general. Solid battle lines are less important then you think here, since you aren't fighting against an enemies battle line either. What counts in forest combat (and I am generalising here since my own military training extends to jungle warfare not forest, but many concepts remain) is the ability to fight in loose formations, ie the training and awareness to maintain close proximity to your comrades. Most assuredly narrow visors would limit that, but then narrow visors presented awareness and vision problem in all terrain and by no means were universal among heavy infantry.

Like I said, its not that in certain cases, under certain conditions and certain enemy troop compositions that forest would not confer advantages, simply that it is rubbish to say that light infantry in all circumstances gain some sort of advantage from forest.

Oh, I agree that lighter gear wouldn't always help in the real world. I'm more talking about a general "what can be helpful" in the real world...then a way to translate that as a minor game mechanic that gives the world flavor. Where the battles are calculated for us (and with some randomization), all the 'tactics and formations' of battle are RP after the fact. A mechanic that gives skirmishers and non-shinies a (minor) boost would simply help promote more flavored variety in how the dice can fall for combat. XP already kind of covers combat awareness/training, but that would be a great modifier for forests.

12

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Equipment Overhaul

« on: June 17, 2017, 07:43:25 AM »

I'm not gonna say that heavy armor would slow someone down a great deal, 25-60 pounds evenly distributed isn't harsh, but I will say that a narrow vision helm and bulky grieves would probably be a bitch to try and charge an enemy in dense brush/brambles (with trees all around for quicker troops to flank from). I just don't imagine heavy infantry being as effective in forests where they wouldn't be able to form a solid line and engage an orderly pitched battle.


Think of Teutoburg forest. Not an ideal case (experience, familiarity with the grounds, and other things factoring more than Germanic light vs Roman heavy), but if you abstract the battles in your head you get the idea. 60 pounds isn't much if you are hiking or for a short sprint, but climb a tree with it (or try to hide with reflective surfaces on you).


Wouldn't want modifiers to be 'make or break' type things, though. Just little advantages that add up or can be capitalized on.

13

Conduct & Design Discussion / Re: Equipment Overhaul

« on: June 17, 2017, 06:04:47 AM »

I like the idea of expanding on equipment but I wouldn't throw too many redundant options at people. A high class shield (metal instead of the low-class wood shield) and cheap slings (as a low-class javelin) would be great additions. I figure most people go with 'what is best' with high investments or 'what will suffice' with less investment, then a bulk of mids. Cheap, middling, and elite gears seem a good spread that shouldn't confuse anyone.


I'd like to see specialty gears available for culture-packs. Maybe orientals get metal-less scale armor, maybe northern European axemen are more frightening. Little quirks that might see a large effect en masse, but are tied with flavor/RP. Mostly swag, but with a small yet noticeable effect they become swaggier.

Talking of different types of terrain there makes me think how useful it could be to the game as a whole if this greatly expanded list of equipment types could confer advantages and disadvantages based on where a battle takes place. For example, cavalry would get their advantages in grasslands but lose them in dense forests. Heavy infantry would be at a severe disadvantage fighting in marshes, where light infantry would get greater bonuses. That sort of thing.

That would force people to put greater thought into where they intended to fight, rather than pumping out the best equipment they can produce all the time. It would also present the interesting possibilty of 'inferior' troops outclassing 'superior' troops if they were clever about where they brought them to battle.

The drawback is whether it would be possible to make terrain count enough across the board for it to have much of an impact. Most of the weapons we have here could comfortably be used in any terrain.

I do like that, equipment/terrain modifiers. Buffs to cavalry in grass/scrub (charging/flanking), buffs to light-inf in forest (where dense growth restricts maneuvering), buffs for archers in marshes/hills (where it's a rougher time for infantry charges). It would at least add an extra dimension to war.

14

Realms Chat / Re: Something That Probably Shouldn't Happen: The Realm

« on: June 15, 2017, 12:36:26 PM »

Steeples fingers in contemplation. Soon the seahorse shall kiss the shaft, and a ancestral homeland will be born. Checks map. Damn...Tor Dun and Strenvale did look like a seahorse a month back, at least.


Not gonna go full Tor, though. A little barony or county for Givenses within a larger barbarian hierarchy. I probably will keep the wacky stuff to one estate and a jester character, innuendo and quirkiness more common.

15

Stories to tell / Re: The Greenwardens

« on: June 15, 2017, 12:27:47 PM »

Hmmm, I had an estate's total go up after mobilizing some heavy cavalry. Not sure what mechanic would be doing that, though. Might just be too many militia and efficiency went up per human.


I'll incubate the primer a week or two more. Good stuff rolling in here and there. Other characters are taking priority right now so I could do without a knight for a bit.