Closing Islands ?

[Indirik]

But the medals will always go, overwhelmingly, to the minority who send many messages, get up to all kinds of shenanigans, and write novellas of RP. That's just human nature, and I don't see any good way to change it, especially when we have a low player density.

Doesn't that make sense? Why would you want to change it? I mean, the whole point of medals is to award people who make notable IG contributions to the game. If you start awarding medals to people who don't make that contribution by interacting in a good way with their fellow players, you make medals meaningless.

Which leaves with the problem of medals being required to play characters...

The game needs both of these types of players, and everything in between, and medals don't—and won't—reflect that. While it wasn't a bad concept, I think we need to stop using medals to determine who gets extra characters.

I think this is 100% correct.

[Indirik]

First, invasions. Running an invasion is pretty much a second job and it won't happen. I know some people volunteer, but you have no idea what you're getting yourself into. Trust me on that, please.

I understand that. That's why my suggestion was for it to be a mostly-automated process, with perhaps a human GM having limited influence over things. This would reduce the workload by a huge factor.

[Dante Silverfire]

I understand that. That's why my suggestion was for it to be a mostly-automated process, with perhaps a human GM having limited influence over things. This would reduce the workload by a huge factor.

Ya, just have it based less on RP and more on just fighting them off.

Let a human GM, determine general invasion strategies (what areas to focus troops, when to retreat from certain areas, how aggressive to be, etc...) but don't both with them actually playing an individual set of characters of daimons or monsters or undead or some such.

Much less work involved for the GM then.

[Indirik]

That was kind of my thought. You could make it a mini-game for the GM. :) Find some automated way for him to generate "spawn points" that he can spend to increase the spawn rates in certain regions. Then the GM can log in every now and then, and spend his spawn points. Give him access to the ruler's channel like Overlord in the last invasion, and maybe one character to move around on his own or something. It could definitely be made into a much more lightweight position. You could have two, one for Monsters, and one for Undead.

[Tom]

I understand that. That's why my suggestion was for it to be a mostly-automated process, with perhaps a human GM having limited influence over things. This would reduce the workload by a huge factor.

That would be even more work, only for different people. Creating an AI for a complex game like BM is no easy task, even if it is a limited AI that is guided by a player.

[Poliorketes]

I don't know how are the monster hordes generated, but if we want to 'cut' from the game some regions, it would be the easiest way to make them 'permanent-rogue'.

Make monster hordes much less prone to travelling, and make them much more numerous... at least in some regions:

MORE MONSTERS-> Badlands - Mountains - Woodlands - Rural - Townslands - Cities <-LESS MONSTERS

Realms will abandon the 'wilder' regions because they would be impossible (or impractical) to defend. I suppose it would be easy to code and it would cut as many regions as wanted.

[Kwanstein]

Monsters and undead aren't actually very detrimental to region stats. I recall one habitually rogue infested region that, despite months of almost unbroken occupation, wasn't doing too poorly. It was underpopulated, so it's economy was slow, but it's morale and loyalty were always high and it's control was always main. It also was never administered by it's lord, and it's taxes didn't appear exceptionally low.

[Poliorketes]

mmm... maybe this would change with 4-5 monster hordes in the region?  :P

[Tom]

Which part of "no invasion" was unclear? I've been running this game for over 12 years, and we've had invasions for 6 or 7 or something. Why can't you just believe the guy who wrote the damn game when he says that something is a ton of work? Don't you think I've had the idea of automating it in parts before? Don't you think I've considered simply increasing some spawn values?

Really, this is insulting. It's like telling a pro tennis player to hit the ball more often.

So please, if you want to be constructive, stop riding dead horses.

[Daycryn]

I wouldn't be for closing/sinking/destroying any continent. A lot of what makes BM special is the player effort gone into filling these things. While player density waxes and wanes, the player-created histories and etc. density just gets higher and higher as time goes on. Wouldn't want to lose that, personally.

It might be interesting to merge continents, in the sense of opening up sea travel routes between them. (Shipwrights are getting better at their craft, eh?) So you could travel by sea not just between regions on one map but on two. I can't imagine how much effort that would be to implement though.  While it might not increase player density it would increase the ability of player/characters to interact throughout the BM world. Presently, some folks prefer this island or that island, interacting rarely (if ever) with those on another island, but this winds up leading to a kind of systemic isolation that can contribute to boredom which might be affecting general interest in the game and thus size of player base. I don't know.

[Frostwood]

My rather hacked paint job.....

[trying]

I'm pretty sure the Colonies is always going to be in their little corner of the world.

[Atanamir]

Well that is his fault for not being active.

I STRONGLY disagree.
You can't expect people to be on EVERY half day.
This is a light weight game and activity is not something that we have to take for granted from anyone.
We want new players, not drones who can log in each turn.
In most realms though currently, that means that you will miss the main battle.
For example on AT: CE went to Darka, and hey, if you missed on all that way from Cagil (is that the capital?) till Darka 1-2 turns, you missed that battle that you would give you the h/p you desperately need. Even worse when you came from Strombran or Tara or Suville (!).
And then wait again 2-3 weeks till everyone refits and there is again a chance for battle.
I promise you, most new players quit before the second campaign.
Even in Armonia, travelling 5-6 turns till Perdan border got people bored.
So, we need to give them again more chances to have a battle.
That means that we need that 3rd char back, so they have more options to look for realms and gain their h/p.
Because I am also against "locusts" who join a realm and then abandon it after few days because they see no chance to find a battle.
With three chars, you can live with it if 1 or 2 are low on battle.

[vonGenf]

I STRONGLY disagree.
You can't expect people to be on EVERY half day.
This is a light weight game and activity is not something that we have to take for granted from anyone.
We want new players, not drones who can log in each turn.
In most realms though currently, that means that you will miss the main battle.
For example on AT: CE went to Darka, and hey, if you missed on all that way from Cagil (is that the capital?) till Darka 1-2 turns, you missed that battle that you would give you the h/p you desperately need. Even worse when you came from Strombran or Tara or Suville (!).
And then wait again 2-3 weeks till everyone refits and there is again a chance for battle.
I promise you, most new players quit before the second campaign.
Even in Armonia, travelling 5-6 turns till Perdan border got people bored.
So, we need to give them again more chances to have a battle.
That means that we need that 3rd char back, so they have more options to look for realms and gain their h/p.
Because I am also against "locusts" who join a realm and then abandon it after few days because they see no chance to find a battle.
With three chars, you can live with it if 1 or 2 are low on battle.

The game would be more fun if there were battles every two days instead of every two weeks. But, this is more likely to occur if there are more players around: more players means more war, more wars mean battles closer to the front lines.

[Wolfang]

I think the earlier suggestion of a new world where everyone is allowed a noble is a good one. This could of course be accompanied by the wiping of another continent.
From what has been said, this new continent would be best made in the same way as Dwilight started.