Nerf the Academy

[Norrel]

As I see it (and as many others see it, looking at the "BM culture" post), duels are oftentimes not used because of the over-reliance on the academy for skill. Some other really cool ideas are shot down out of necessity because of this as well, like the Tourney that Luria would have had to determine the Emperor, but which was ultimately defeated because of the impracticality of having boatloads of people burning through gold like nobody's business.

A solution: nerf the crap out of the academy.
Putting a cap of one training session per week would serve both to limit the usage of the academy, as well as change its focus- rather than being something which you use to increase your skills, it would be something you use to keep them sharp and to test your skill level, which seems to be what the flavor text for the academy hints at.
To compensate: double (quadruple? I dunno) the amount of skill gain from actual infantry combat. Giving archers and cavalry some small amount of SF skill gain from watching combat would also be cool, but not necessary.
This would serve to not only change the playstyle of individual characters, make duels and tournaments more legit (so the battle-scarred vet matters), but also encourage warfare, as well as to discourage unfair, boring and stupid methods of play.

Thoughts?

[De-Legro]

People could get past the idea of only issuing/accepting duels if they think they can win. That would work also.

[Norrel]

People could get past the idea of only issuing/accepting duels if they think they can win. That would work also.

That is hardly a realistic solution

[Zakilevo]

I rather see people gain a skill level more often from fighting something.

[Indirik]

It seems to me that a few days in the academy with a personal instructor would teach you much more about dueling than an hour or two on the battlefield. Getting to be a top-notch fighter would probably take much longer if all you did was fight battles than if you spent all your time with a private instructor.

Not that I don't think that a bit faster gain fro fighting battles might not be worthwhile.

But having trained swordfighting for one character to the limits of the academy, I have to say that it takes  LONG time, and a LOT of money. The number of people actually have the time and money to do that is probably pretty limited.

[Norrel]

It seems to me that a few days in the academy with a personal instructor would teach you much more about dueling than an hour or two on the battlefield. Getting to be a top-notch fighter would probably take much longer if all you did was fight battles than if you spent all your time with a private instructor.

In this case, I think that realism might have to take a backseat to a more balanced game. Also, you could assume that nobles would train with their men quite often, so it wouldn't just be "an hour or two". Adding a slight skill gain for training a unit would be realistic, but it would also encourage peacetime skillwhoring.

But having trained swordfighting for one character to the limits of the academy, I have to say that it takes  LONG time, and a LOT of money. The number of people actually have the time and money to do that is probably pretty limited.

The fact that it takes so much time and money is the root of the problem.

[De-Legro]

That is hardly a realistic solution

Depends on your point of view. In mine the idea is for people to play as medieval nobles. Largely nobles were so entranced with their concept of honour (largely because it actually did translate into power) that they were pressured to accept duels regardless of their respective ability. This is lacking in the game right now, and making so its simply easier to ignore this an ensure you have the higher ability doesn't fix anything in my mind. Maybe we will see more duels, but will the atmosphere benefit in any real way? I don't see how it would.

Further I don't see how this would really fix the issue of people not accepting duels. The real issue to my mind is not that the academy is needed, it is that people will shy away from duels they don't think they can win. Changing how skill is gained would maybe see more people with high skill levels, but unless someone knows with reasonable accuracy that they have a significant advantage the won't accept the duel.

Case in point is my character Juan. He has spent most his life claiming to be an excellent swordsman, a tournament champion and claims to have won several death duels. In actual fact he has attended two tournaments and never got past the first round, and never had a single duel. But based solely on the lies he has spun people refuse to duel him, even when I offer duels to first blood. I've even had OOC messages from people telling me I'm power gamming by using a ex advy (Juan was never an advy) and ex-infiltrator (also never one of those) to issue duels because its not fair to other characters.

[Norrel]

Depends on your point of view. In mine the idea is for people to play as medieval nobles. Largely nobles were so entranced with their concept of honour (largely because it actually did translate into power) that they were pressured to accept duels regardless of their respective ability. This is lacking in the game right now, and making so its simply easier to ignore this an ensure you have the higher ability doesn't fix anything in my mind. Maybe we will see more duels, but will the atmosphere benefit in any real way? I don't see how it would.

While people should (and many do, including myself) play that way, there is still an underlying root to the problem and just telling people to behave differently without backing it up with game mechanics changes will do nothing.
Nonetheless, my suggestion was not specifically to encourage duels (though that was one of the reasons), it was more to encourage more useful and fun behavior for everyone.

[De-Legro]

While people should (and many do, including myself) play that way, there is still an underlying root to the problem and just telling people to behave differently without backing it up with game mechanics changes will do nothing.
Nonetheless, my suggestion was not specifically to encourage duels (though that was one of the reasons), it was more to encourage more useful and fun behavior for everyone.

That is my point, in my opinion the underlying problem isn't going to be addressed by changing how skills are gained.

[Norrel]

That is my point, in my opinion the underlying problem isn't going to be addressed by changing how skills are gained.

Considering how the underlying problem I was addressing is "people waste time and money on the academy", actually, it will.

[Broose]

Keep the academy the way it is, but make gaining skill through battle -much- more viable. I don't remember the last time I've got any improvement that way.

[Zakilevo]

I say we get rid of the numerical system on skills. People won't accept duels if they know they have only 20% in swordfighting while their opponents have something like 50%.

And about a person trained in academy being better than someone hardened on the battlefield, I say the trainee might be able to beat a soldier in a duel to surrender but doubt he can defeat the other person in a death duel.

[Chenier]

As I see it (and as many others see it, looking at the "BM culture" post), duels are oftentimes not used because of the over-reliance on the academy for skill. Some other really cool ideas are shot down out of necessity because of this as well, like the Tourney that Luria would have had to determine the Emperor, but which was ultimately defeated because of the impracticality of having boatloads of people burning through gold like nobody's business.

A solution: nerf the crap out of the academy.
Putting a cap of one training session per week would serve both to limit the usage of the academy, as well as change its focus- rather than being something which you use to increase your skills, it would be something you use to keep them sharp and to test your skill level, which seems to be what the flavor text for the academy hints at.
To compensate: double (quadruple? I dunno) the amount of skill gain from actual infantry combat. Giving archers and cavalry some small amount of SF skill gain from watching combat would also be cool, but not necessary.
This would serve to not only change the playstyle of individual characters, make duels and tournaments more legit (so the battle-scarred vet matters), but also encourage warfare, as well as to discourage unfair, boring and stupid methods of play.

Thoughts?

So instead of people who train too much and ex-advies being able to own everyone, now it'll only be ex-advies?

Academies are already rather bad, as you need quite a while to get good, and a ton load of gold.

I'd rather see your second suggestion implemented, boosting the gains through combat, but without the first.

[Norrel]

So instead of people who train too much and ex-advies being able to own everyone, now it'll only be ex-advies?

Academies are already rather bad, as you need quite a while to get good, and a ton load of gold.

I'd rather see your second suggestion implemented, boosting the gains through combat, but without the first.

If we're going to only do the second, then, it should be more than doubled.

[De-Legro]

Considering how the underlying problem I was addressing is "people waste time and money on the academy", actually, it will.

It is their time, their gold and their choice. People choosing to spend time at the academy is not a real problem.