Monsters/Undead per Island Discussion

[Tom]

continuation of: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,4995.0.html


The game already supports different spawn rates per-island. So here's the place to post which islands you think should have less/same/more monsters and/or undead.

[Daycryn]

Beluaterra - less undead and monsters. With the last Invasion over, the continent has earned a golden age!
Dwilight - more undead and monsters. The wilderness and frontier fights back.

The others, no real opinion on.

[Anaris]

On Beluaterra, there should be some kind of threshold of scrolls used, above which something breaks, and the spawn rate starts rising all over the island, at least for a while.

[Revan]

Interesting. I'm trying to think where spawn rates are different. I think perhaps Colonies has relatively more monster/undead spawns than most islands. Then again, it might just be that hordes are more noticeable on a small island with one turn a day!

Anyway, I think Colonies could do with a lower undead and monster spawn rate. One turn a day combined with some lengthy travel times can make them very difficult to deal with. I think it is a distraction from war and when war comes, if you suffer from spawns it can be a major headache to try and get rid of them.

Atamara possibly needs a higher undead and monster spawn rate. Atamara definitely feels like it gets off lightly compared to other places.

[Tiridia]

More monsters for Dwilight, please. I much enjoyed the former frontier feel of the continent, even if it limited interaction with the other realms. It has been ages since I have been playing on any of the other continents, so I will say nothing of them.

[Indirik]

On Beluaterra, there should be some kind of threshold of scrolls used, above which something breaks, and the spawn rate starts rising all over the island, at least for a while.

Very interesting idea. Turn down the base rates on BT, but greatly increase the effects of scrolls. (Then put some kind of threshold above which further scrolls increase the rate across multiple regions. )

[Geronus]

I've noticed the difference, but never commented on it. The testing islands have always had jacked up rates compared to Atamara. The spawns on Atamara are so weak they're a joke for the most part, nothing more than an irritating but necessary means for knights in realms at peace to gain some honor and prestige.

I'd actually most like to see the rates adjusted on the stable islands, myself (particularly Atamara), but if we need a guinea pig Beluaterra is always a good option.

[SaDiablo]

the colonies could do with less per turn.  seeing 3 to 5 spawns is a lot in one turn.

[Vita`]

I still think each island's rate should be dependent upon the respective island's density.

[pcw27]

Definitely Atamara.

[Indirik]

I would actually disagree about Atamara. Atamara is the "plain vanilla" island, really. It has no special features. If you want a monster heavy island, go to Dwilight. Or go to BT and start tossing around some scrolls. Monster spawns won't help Atamara. The big realms will barely notice, and the small realms will get 1-2-punched by the monsters and the MiCE.

[Geronus]

I would actually disagree about Atamara. Atamara is the "plain vanilla" island, really. It has no special features. If you want a monster heavy island, go to Dwilight. Or go to BT and start tossing around some scrolls. Monster spawns won't help Atamara. The big realms will barely notice, and the small realms will get 1-2-punched by the monsters and the MiCE.

Depends on how high you crank it up, and whether you apply the "seasonal" theory where the spawn rate changes over time.

[Chenier]

I would actually disagree about Atamara. Atamara is the "plain vanilla" island, really. It has no special features. If you want a monster heavy island, go to Dwilight. Or go to BT and start tossing around some scrolls. Monster spawns won't help Atamara. The big realms will barely notice, and the small realms will get 1-2-punched by the monsters and the MiCE.

This is my biggest concern: that powerful realms will be the most equipped to deal with these new menaces, and that they'll be even more able to dominate the continent.

To prevent this, we must make sure that hordes remain small and well spread-out, so that it's their presence more than their strength that is a nuisance, and that this nuisance scales proportionally to realm size.

Large hordes would just stomp the weaker realms and ruin PvP.

[pcw27]

Remember larger realms mean more regions which can suddenly spawn a big monster horde. Quite a problem if your army is half way across the continent fighting a war.

[Tom]

I think the idea someone posted about bandits had something to it.

Peasant uprisings WERE a constant problem during the middle ages.


This could also ADD gameplay, and here's how:
First, we add a few flavours of human rogue forces. Peasant mobs, bandits, something like that.
Then, we add random spawn chances for these, including movement like for monsters and undead. Spawn chances would depend on region stats, so unhappy regions are more likely to spawn them - much like they already do, just enhanced and more common (and earlier than absolute rock-bottom stats).
And then we add options for infiltrators and some other classes to finance rebels, pay mercenaries to pretend they are a peasant mob (oh the surprise when you go facerolling a peasant mob and realize too late it has 60/60 equipment...) or stuff like that. This way, we would not have a random PvE element (well, we would, but it mostly serves as plausible deniability for the real thing), but add another PvP option.