Monster Problems

[Anaris]

To be quite clear: the dev team has no intention to destroy any realms on Dwilight to increase density. We certainly have no particular belief that destroying southern realms will improve matters.

The monsters being dependent on player density is not in any way intended to indicate that we want realms to be destroyed. We don't have a solid plan for how to increase density in a healthy way, but we do believe that doing so is necessary.

If players chose to abandon outer realms to migrate to inner realms and increase the density there, we would be very happy about it—but it would only work if they did choose to do it.

I do have, in development, a change that would stop monsters from hammering repeatedly on the chokepoints and instead spread their attacks out across the east: allow them to cross sea zones. However, it is still not quite working right.

[Zakilevo]

More volunteers will certainly help make necessary changes come faster to relieve everyone of this situation.

[Gabanus family]

To be quite clear: the dev team has no intention to destroy any realms on Dwilight to increase density. We certainly have no particular belief that destroying southern realms will improve matters.

The monsters being dependent on player density is not in any way intended to indicate that we want realms to be destroyed. We don't have a solid plan for how to increase density in a healthy way, but we do believe that doing so is necessary.

If players chose to abandon outer realms to migrate to inner realms and increase the density there, we would be very happy about it—but it would only work if they did choose to do it.

I do have, in development, a change that would stop monsters from hammering repeatedly on the chokepoints and instead spread their attacks out across the east: allow them to cross sea zones. However, it is still not quite working right.

Anaris, right now I'm getting more and more the idea that forcing this decrease on anyone will do more damage than good and we'll lose more players. So far we've seen some action again on Dwilight and it looks promising. Perhaps the density is less of a concern for now, if we can make some other changes also? So far all the actions against density have always done more harm than good, so perhaps go with the 'evil' we know? After all, we've platead our user base apparently, so people are good with the current ways.

Why not block the West again (hard or soft) and make the monsters far less on the East.

Combine this with a higher difficult to TO rogue regions when density is too high (this will avoid expansion) but still allow TO's of other realm regions (or regions that recently went rogue (last month?) to go at normal speed. This would facilitate normal war between wars and allow realms to retake some regions also if they lose it, so as to not force unnatural shrinking and abuse during war fare.

In my opinion we should also remove the long distance penalties allowing for 2 types of warfare for those who wish and wish to take the risk. But this is a different matter and I understand it's sensitive among the devs, so please do see the earlier 2 recommendations separate from this one as they'll function without as well.

[Zakilevo]

USA is on holiday this week so no one is available. Things will have to wait.

[Gabanus family]

USA is on holiday this week so no one is available. Things will have to wait.

Alright but you seem to be here, so tell me. What do you think of the suggestions I gave above, would that solve something in your opinion?

People have been asking here for alternatives to the current plan, we might as well discuss the alternatives that are given no?

[Zakilevo]

I am not supposed to reveal anything but since you are asking what I think, here are MY THOUGHTS meaning they will do little to change anything.

1st, you can not freeze the western dwilight like they were before since that means destroying Westgard. That will anger players there. I think monsters should still attack anyone trying to stay on Western Dwilight. That is fine I feel.

I like the idea of making rogue region TOs very difficult. Maybe almost impossible as long as the density isn't there. This means if people lose their regions to monsters, it will be hard for them to recover. This might not work very well for Westgard so I am not so sure but I know you want Westgard dead so you probably don't mind it.

I also agree with removing long distance penalty but it got shot down. There is a way to work around this however. You can make an ally close to the realm you want to fight. This will encourage realms to ally more I feel but it does work.

[Nosferatus]

Combine this with a higher difficult to TO rogue regions when density is too high (this will avoid expansion) but still allow TO's of other realm regions (or regions that recently went rogue (last month?) to go at normal speed. This would facilitate normal war between wars and allow realms to retake some regions also if they lose it, so as to not force unnatural shrinking and abuse during war fare.

In my opinion we should also remove the long distance penalties allowing for 2 types of warfare for those who wish and wish to take the risk. But this is a different matter and I understand it's sensitive among the devs, so please do see the earlier 2 recommendations separate from this one as they'll function without as well.

I like these ideas, especially the first one.
If there is no lord available for the region thats about to be TO, it could even be made impossible.
The people aren't convinced they can be ruled if the TOing realm doesn't even have a noble available to become its lord.

Making a long march easier like during the ice age(emigration code) might also work, but i am not so sure if any realm will use it.
Some realms like Madina cant really expand anywhere and will most likley be hit the strongest even with seazone travel for rogues.
Its nobles could pack there stuff and march north east to take a new capital from one of the existing realms.

Another idea could be to temporarily make it easier for adventurers to become a noble, perhaps one recommendation is enough.
This will create a small spike of noble count, helping noble density along the way without damaging or destroying realms.
Sure, they might not always be that welcomed by the local nobility due to their questionable nature, but i am sure this could make a difference.

[Gabanus family]

I am not supposed to reveal anything but since you are asking what I think, here are MY THOUGHTS meaning they will do little to change anything.

1st, you can not freeze the western dwilight like they were before since that means destroying Westgard. That will anger players there. I think monsters should still attack anyone trying to stay on Western Dwilight. That is fine I feel.

I like the idea of making rogue region TOs very difficult. Maybe almost impossible as long as the density isn't there. This means if people lose their regions to monsters, it will be hard for them to recover. This might not work very well for Westgard so I am not so sure but I know you want Westgard dead so you probably don't mind it.

Actually I'm moving away from that statement more and more, although if we decide on one realm to fall I would personally favor Westgard that is true, simply because they don't have the history that the other realms have and they can continue their monster fighting mission elsewhere as well, keeping the same values. But at this point we can also do it without destroying them and just letting the current situation/density be for a large part.

Destroying realms through dev actions makes people leave, which is bad, period. No matter the intention I think.

Secondly, you'll find that my suggestion actually an exception for regions that were rogue for less than a month (also becase otherwise a realm can just drive a 'line of regions' rogue and make it an impossible barrier for the enemy). So in this case Westgard would still be able to retake their lands in my proposal.

I also agree with removing long distance penalty but it got shot down. There is a way to work around this however. You can make an ally close to the realm you want to fight. This will encourage realms to ally more I feel but it does work.

I would prefer realms to ally less rather than more, so it's a more dangerous workaround. In all honesty, the density is a tool, not a goal. It's a tool to create more fun and possibilities for war, but if it makes people leave it will not have the desired effect. So in stead implement other tools that allow people to do it. I don't think a lot of realms will do long distance wars cause it's very difficult to coordinate, but at least it offers possibilities and options. Along with the other suggestions it would have Dwilight fun and active enough to not have to destroy realms if you ask me.

[Anaris]

I do like the idea of making TOs of rogue regions much harder if the realm attempting the TO has low density.

We will not be blocking off the West. We will not be destroying Westgard.

[Gabanus family]

I do like the idea of making TOs of rogue regions much harder if the realm attempting the TO has low density.

We will not be blocking off the West. We will not be destroying Westgard.

My original suggestion was actually based on total density and not so much realm specific, but I suppose you can wel find a good mix/balance for that actually. Not a bad addition to it.

At the current rate of monsters you will in fact be destroying D'hara, Fissoa prob as well and maybe even Westgard and/or Astrum and who knows even LN unless you manually start saving these realms. That is the current effect at least of the coding as it is now. At this point the 'cure' is worse than the 'illness' and softer guidance measures would be better in place I think.

I do think it's very good you guys are at least listening and also considering other options, which means that even for those who are frustrated there is hope.

[Chenier]

Making takeovers harder for realms that have lower density sounds like a good idea to me. I don't like the idea of basing this off continental density, though... that'd result in a "first come first served" effect, with low-density realms in safer spots able to choke the denser realms from attaining a sustainable economy.

Takeovers of near-adjacent or non-adjacent regions is an idea as well. If you want wars that can increase density, though, it needs to be made easier to drive regions rogue, in my opinion. Wars of expansion are the main method of hurting an enemy as is, because taking regions is the only reliable way to deny them from the enemy. Being able to conduct a pseudo-TO to drive regions rogue would grant incentives to realms that want to project their influence but have zero interest in gaining more land (because the regions are too far, because density is already too low, because it'd be too hard to feed, because said regions are poor, etc.).

As for history, I'd doubt anyone could convince me that half of Dwi's current realms have much more of one than Westgard... Some certainly do, but Dwi saw a large number of newish realms spring up, plus Luria Nova and Morek that, despite having a history, seem almost dead already. Westgard's current position does have some perks. It's close to Astrum and Avernus, allowing for relations with those realms, and allowing for our actions to have an impact on others. It's also *not* in a chokepoint, sparing us for the most ridiculous hordes and giving us a lot of freedom into what lands we take, where we make a hold, where we want to block the monsters, etc. Displacing us to Nifel, for example, would take much of this away.

If you want to increase that interaction potential and are redrawing Dwilight anyways, one "simple" solution might be filling in the Channel of Gelene. Add 3-5 regions connecting Ammando, Mose's End, and Nidhogg's Mark. Bam, suddenly you have 4 realms able to interact with eachother in a much more meaningful way than ever. Plus another land passage to relieve the pressure at other chokepoints.

[Chenier]

Geography is a huge part of Dwilight's problems... since volunteers were asked to redraw its map, maybe it should be drawn differently. If we modified the geography, we could make a lot of realms much closer to each other without forcing much in the terms of migrations and realm destruction. Example: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,6915.30/msg,155823.html

[pcw27]

Don't block off the West, that was a mistake to begin with. Part of what makes Dwilight exciting is it's unique shape. Blocking off the West turned it into a long vertical landmass, realms were pretty much restricted to fighting with their neighbors. The central sea is what makes Dwilight what it is but it doesn't matter if the Western continent is inaccessible.

We need to do something about the monsters attacking the ferry lanes to Port Raviel en mass, it's incredibly annoying, not to mention absurd. I think it would correct the problem if they just made it so they couldn't cross the Golden Farrow route. It makes sense since that's the longer one and would be harder to cross. That would put D'Hara on equal terms with Madina, and any realm that might form in the Valkyria area by having just a single bottlenecked route monsters and undead can take to attack their lands from the West.

As for density, the simplest fix is to make regions virtually impossible to hold without both a lord and at least one knight. That's how it was when Dwilight was created (maybe not impossible but we were pretty reluctant to have a region with only a lord). With a system like that you could turn the monster spawns way down. Instead of being worn down in a PVE experience realms would have to decide which regions to keep and which to leave rogue. Plus there could be plenty of conflicts over claims on rogue regions. Maybe we could ad "land claims" to the dynamic map which show whatever realm a rogue region most recently belonged to.

By the way, one of the big draws for Dwilight is the opportunity to conquer new lands and form new realms in the rogue lands. That was the case when it was first founded. It's a great sales pitch for new players.

Side note, why don't we just let everyone have one active noble character for each continent? Wont that almost double player density in every game world?

[Feylonis]

How about increasing the rate that Realm Loyalty falls depending on that realm's density? This is sort of a different approach to the above idea regarding harder TOs, but with the same goal in mind.

However, one thing I'm concerned with is that this might too heavily force players to clump in big, monolithic realms. Smaller realms will lose even more players in favour of bigger realms, and newer realms won't be created. From what we know of Atamara and the CE block, a healthy amount of the player population favours safety over risk, even if it means boredom over fun.

[Beldragos]

Either way, something needs to be done. 

Currently any number of realms could wage a war upon the gateway realms by simply expanding and let the game send waves after waves against them. 

This alone is indicative of a broken game.

Also, currently there are a number of players already playing two characters on the island, a Noble and an Adventurer.  This allows them to use both in their own ways against the monsters.  Allowing two Nobles will only shift the Adv characters to Noble characters but for the most part, the island population will remain the same.  Just to get an idea of how many are already using the double character method I mentioned, just check out the Character listing and arrange by family. 

Just allowing players to run two Nobles will not magically double the player base.  Things need to be done to attract players, not drive them away.