Feature request: "Fame points for realms"

[Radigand]

As requested by Tom, this threat (http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,1638.0.html) is re-opened in Development section.

Any ideas/suggestions "about replacing fame with a kind of achievements system like other games have it now, and the same could be given to realms as well."?

[Zakilevo]

(Points)
[1] High walls = Have a fortress with at least lv6 fortification.
[3] Impenetrable = Have a fortress with lv10 fortification.
[2] Best Friends Forever = Make a federation with at least two realm.
[2] Popular = Have 3 allied realms.
[1] Militaristic  = Have at least 30k CS in total
[1] Great Army = Have an army with at least 20k CS
[1] Can't touch this = Have a region with at least 10k militia CS
[1] My kingdom for a horse = Have at least 5k cavalry CS
[1] Heroic = Have at least 25 heroes in your realm
[1] Holy Land = Have at least 25 priests in your realm
[1] Hater = Your realm hates at least 3 realms.
[1] Enemy of Many = Your realm is hated by at least 3 realms

[Vellos]

Stable ruler- have a ruler last 1000 days
Revolutionary state- have 2 successful rebellions within 1 month
Warring States Period- have 4 successful rebellions within 1 month
Mother-Realm- Found 2 colonies
Realm Destroyer- Conquer the last region of another realm
Exterminator- Conquer the last region of 3 realms

[Zakilevo]

[1] Noblesse oblige - Have at least 25 Cavaliers in your realm
[1] Glorious - Have at least three tournament champions
[1] Center of Trade - Have at least 25 traders in your realm
[2] Conqueror - Conquer at least two realms under a single ruler
[3] Emperor - Have at least five cities in your realm
[1] Agnostic - Have temples of at least three different religions in your realm
[3] Longevity - Your realm has survived over 5000 days
[1] Pious - Have a temple in every region in your realm
[1] Grand Cathedral - Have at least one lv10 temple in your realm

[1] City Nation - Your realm has only 1 city.
[1] Principality - Your realm has at least 5 regions
[1] Kingdom - Your realm has at least 10 regions
[1] Dynasty - Your realm has at least 15 regions
[1] Empire - Your realm has more than 20 regions

[egamma]

[1] Noblesse oblige - Have at least 25 Cavaliers in your realm
[1] Glorious - Have at least three tournament champions
[1] Center of Trade - Have at least 25 traders in your realm
[2] Conqueror - Conquer at least two realms under a single ruler
[3] Empire - Have at least five cities in your realm
[1] Agnostic - Have temples of at least three different religions in your realm
[3] Longevity - Your realm has survived over 5000 days
[1] Pious - Have a temple in every region in your realm
[1] Grand Cathedral - Have at least one lv10 temple in your realm

25 traders? I think D'Hara has the most traders in the game, and we have 3.

[Zakilevo]

well those numbers are just randomly thrown there. 5 or 10 should be fine too.

[Tom]

Obviously, many achievements can come in steps, one at 5, one at 10, one at 20...

[De-Legro]

I don't like achievements based on player class. I think it provided too much incentive for people to either push against the IR rights, or create characters simply to push up their count in a certain class category.

Many of these other ones don't make sense to me in a BM history sense. For things like City Nation Principality etc, are we going to record the first time the realm ever meets those requirements? Is the achievement going to log the date and perhaps a map showing the extent of the realm? Or will achievements only show the current state of the realm, so when you get your 10 region the old achievement of Principality is lost and the new achievement Kingdom is gained? That would seem odd going the other way though, since we would no longer record that the realm was ever successful enough to have reached Kingdom level.

I really think the key is going to be included some context to the achievements. Whether this is automatic or something the players need to do on the wiki I don't know. I would find it far more interesting to see that a realm achieved Conqueror after their wars with realm B and realm C then just to see some little badge or something.

[JPierreD]

I don't like achievements based on player class. I think it provided too much incentive for people to either push against the IR rights, or create characters simply to push up their count in a certain class category.

Many of these other ones don't make sense to me in a BM history sense. For things like City Nation Principality etc, are we going to record the first time the realm ever meets those requirements? Is the achievement going to log the date and perhaps a map showing the extent of the realm? Or will achievements only show the current state of the realm, so when you get your 10 region the old achievement of Principality is lost and the new achievement Kingdom is gained? That would seem odd going the other way though, since we would no longer record that the realm was ever successful enough to have reached Kingdom level.

I really think the key is going to be included some context to the achievements. Whether this is automatic or something the players need to do on the wiki I don't know. I would find it far more interesting to see that a realm achieved Conqueror after their wars with realm B and realm C then just to see some little badge or something.

Perhaps a Realm History, like the Player's.

[Chenier]

I dislike a lot of the suggestions. I strongly feel that such fame points should reward desirable behavior. For example, do we really want to encourage having endless alliances and rulers staying on the throne forever? I can already see it: "Shhh, sure he's a bad king, but it would take forever to get that fame point if we replace him!"

A lot of them sound perfectly reasonable, though.

On the other hand, however, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have a dynamic and competitive fame system, instead of the traditional "achievements" like you get with Steam games. What if instead of being points that everyone can get and be happy, we used a system that mixed historical standing with current standing.

For example, instead of unlocking an achievement when you get X CS, how about when your realm gets the strongest army average for a month straight, you unlock a historic and a standing realm fame point. And then, later on, if you decline and another one gets a bigger army, you keep your historic but lose your standing point.

That way, it encourages realms to compete with each other instead of just trying to reach an abstract objective that has little to do with everyone else. It also means that you don't get stuck with achievements that rely on nothing else but pure numbers that make them way too easy to get on some continents and impossible to get on others. Makes it all feel more organic, instead of some meta-game objectives. Call it realm "Glory".

[De-Legro]

I dislike a lot of the suggestions. I strongly feel that such fame points should reward desirable behavior. For example, do we really want to encourage having endless alliances and rulers staying on the throne forever? I can already see it: "Shhh, sure he's a bad king, but it would take forever to get that fame point if we replace him!"

A lot of them sound perfectly reasonable, though.

On the other hand, however, I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have a dynamic and competitive fame system, instead of the traditional "achievements" like you get with Steam games. What if instead of being points that everyone can get and be happy, we used a system that mixed historical standing with current standing.

For example, instead of unlocking an achievement when you get X CS, how about when your realm gets the strongest army average for a month straight, you unlock a historic and a standing realm fame point. And then, later on, if you decline and another one gets a bigger army, you keep your historic but lose your standing point.

That way, it encourages realms to compete with each other instead of just trying to reach an abstract objective that has little to do with everyone else. It also means that you don't get stuck with achievements that rely on nothing else but pure numbers that make them way too easy to get on some continents and impossible to get on others. Makes it all feel more organic, instead of some meta-game objectives. Call it realm "Glory".

That is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind. Current "achievements" can be used to compare realms at the current time, the historical elements lets you relieve the glory days of your realm.

[Indirik]

I tend to agree with Chenier on this.

Although, personally, I tend to think that a lot of this appears to cheapen the game. I don't like the leaderboard or "Gotta get 'em all!" feeling that this seems to promote. Gaming the system is bad enough when it's just for family fame. Add it to realms on top of that, especially in something as easy to game as number of alliances, and it just seems to promote deliberate OOC-motivated actions.

[Norrel]

[5] Retentive - Have the best new player retention in the continent

[Zakilevo]

I was merely suggesting some stuff.

How about give some kind of special achievements which will boost a realm stats until they lose those achievements?

Like if you have highest CS for two weeks straight you get 10% morale boost until some other beats your realm? For two weeks the boost will not apply if your realm loses the highest CS unless you gain it back. If the other realm had it for two weeks, they take the achievement.

[De-Legro]

I was merely suggesting some stuff.

How about give some kind of special achievements which will boost a realm stats until they lose those achievements?

Like if you have highest CS for two weeks straight you get 10% morale boost until some other beats your realm? For two weeks the boost will not apply if your realm loses the highest CS unless you gain it back. If the other realm had it for two weeks, they take the achievement.

God no. We don't need to encourage people to game any achievement system any more then they already will.