Modifying TMP Training Reductions

[egamma]

Nah, it would be a lot easier to simply start giving characters honor/prestige penalties. Small ones at first, and make them get larger. Make the penalties hit council members and dukes harder. Exempt those who have been in-realm less than 6 months.

[Jens Namtrah]

Nah, it would be a lot easier to simply start giving characters honor/prestige penalties. Small ones at first, and make them get larger. Make the penalties hit council members and dukes harder. Exempt those who have been in-realm less than 6 months.

why? That doesn't do much of anything, except punish players by not letting them try out different classes. Lack of warfare/lumping armies already does that enough.

If it is "ease" you want, I can assure you the code behind my idea is quite simple. Simpler than the existing code, actually.

[Phellan]

Carrot >> Stick.

Motivate people to play the way we want.

Beating them over the head makes them leave or turns them off.

I love a good war, but it's so hard to convince anyone to do it without it turning into a giant five on one.

Just bloody happy the Aurvandil vs Madina conflict has been left alone.

[Gustav Kuriga]

I say that TMP should either be limited to reducing production and causing soldiers to lose morale and eventually desert, or gotten rid of entirely and replaced by a system that provides positive motivation to create wars. Don't penalize for peace, but reward for going to war. After all, this is battlemaster, as so many of you in favor of TMP are so fond of saying. Reward people for going to war. Not the other way around.

[Bedwyr]

I say that TMP should either be limited to reducing production and causing soldiers to lose morale and eventually desert, or gotten rid of entirely and replaced by a system that provides positive motivation to create wars. Don't penalize for peace, but reward for going to war. After all, this is battlemaster, as so many of you in favor of TMP are so fond of saying. Reward people for going to war. Not the other way around.

Oh, I quite agree.  Rewards are far better than punishments.  But having some system that means realms that are fighting are in better shape than realms that are not is necessary, I think.

[Jens Namtrah]

"A carrot is better than a stick" is a nice expression, and it is true much of the time, but it is not some sort of Absolute, Inviolable Truth.

Sometimes you need a Stick.

You have a small group of players who already have everything they want. They run the councils, they rule the realms, they are long-time friends with one another and so have no fear of outside intervention. They are completely content with things the way they are.

What kind of Carrot do you have in mind that's big enough to change that?

What kind of carrot can you offer the rest of the players that's big enough that they'll throw out that group if they don't get their war?

[Bedwyr]

On Dwilight and the Far East Island (the only ones where I've played a Ruler), I can assure you that this...

You have a small group of players who already have everything they want. They run the councils, they rule the realms, they are long-time friends with one another and so have no fear of outside intervention. They are completely content with things the way they are.

Is just not true on those islands.  Atamara is involved in a major war to change the power structure on the island.  As I understand it, Beluaterra is in the same position.  North EC is in the final stages of a (ultimately, probably unsuccessful) war to challenge Sirion's power that came very close (who thought Old Rancangua would be destroyed?) to succeeding.  South EC, Ibladesh made a bold move for greater island dominance which came within a hairsbreadth of succeeding and now Caligus and Perdan are fighting the good fight.

Admittedly, I don't know anything about the Colonies, but I think that claiming that the game is run by people who are all friends, either IC or OOC, is so far from the truth as to be in another dimension.

[Jens Namtrah]

On Dwilight and the Far East Island (the only ones where I've played a Ruler), I can assure you that this...

Is just not true on those islands.  Atamara is involved in a major war to change the power structure on the island.  As I understand it, Beluaterra is in the same position.  North EC is in the final stages of a (ultimately, probably unsuccessful) war to challenge Sirion's power that came very close (who thought Old Rancangua would be destroyed?) to succeeding.  South EC, Ibladesh made a bold move for greater island dominance which came within a hairsbreadth of succeeding and now Caligus and Perdan are fighting the good fight.

Admittedly, I don't know anything about the Colonies, but I think that claiming that the game is run by people who are all friends, either IC or OOC, is so far from the truth as to be in another dimension.

Well, I was General in Caligus until recently - I can tell you your assessment of that island is wrong.

Atamara is in a wonderful war - but only after we finally decided to gangbang Coria. Before that, all the old friends had the place so tied up with "thou shalt not cross" treaties that it was completely gridlocked and people were moaning. Even now, I'm sure you won't see any changes of the old guard. When I see Ottar on the run, I'll believe.

Dwilight is dead  - one war happening, but it's two walled cities facing each other, with no one thinking to enlist allies or go around.

---

I know the game is more than OOC cliques, but it is too many long-term friendships, and too many Councils who get so wrapped up in roleplaying their (completely private) diplomacy that gridlock it. They need a bigger push than any of the suggestions I've seen will give it.

Most people just want to be able to log on casually and find that there is a nice little war on, or a group of monsters close by, that they can reach in a couple of turns and fight for a little bit. I'm not out to punish people - find a way to create that situation, I'm happy to go along.

As you and I both said before - at the moment, things are generally not too bad. At the moment, we also have TMP. Can't prove one lead to the other, but can't prove it didn't.

[Shizzle]

You have a small group of players who already have everything they want. They run the councils, they rule the realms, they are long-time friends with one another and so have no fear of outside intervention. They are completely content with things the way they are.

As you and I both said before - at the moment, things are generally not too bad. At the moment, we also have TMP. Can't prove one lead to the other, but can't prove it didn't.

Spot the contradiction?

If realms do not want to go to war, they shouldn't have to. Their passive stature will cause nearby realms to attack them eventually. And if the Ruling Class evades wars, but the majority of the realm wants to go to war, there's plenty of ways to overthrow the government.

If TMP is a problem of passive realms, it's because the whole realm is passive, not just the government.

[Jens Namtrah]

Spot the contradiction?

If realms do not want to go to war, they shouldn't have to. Their passive stature will cause nearby realms to attack them eventually. And if the Ruling Class evades wars, but the majority of the realm wants to go to war, there's plenty of ways to overthrow the government.

If TMP is a problem of passive realms, it's because the whole realm is passive, not just the government.

I don't really agree, (and I don't think Tom did either, when he decided to add TMP, but I'll let him speak for himself).


Passive realms don't get attacked just because they are passive.

But more importantly, you all seem to have forgotten the REASON that TPM was put in place.

Tom didn't decide "I think I'll make all the realms have to fight wars or get punished" just for the hell of it.

He had a REASON.

It IS important to force councils to get involved in more wars, whether they want to be or not.

Players who want war don't influence the inter-realm diplomacy in most places. They just get bored and quit.

cf., Retention Revisited

[Shizzle]

Did TMP change anything for Atamara's player retention, for instance?

Dwilight had the best restention, according to Vellos, and I don't think that's thanks to TMP. Quite the opposite, I believe.

[Chenier]

You look at everything from your own perspective - look at it from the perspective of a large group of players who came here to play BATTLEmaster and are instead ordered to do maintenance and training for a silent Council who refuses to go to war or let them in on decision-making.

If Rulers and Dukes are complaining (in this forum), and Common Nobles are lauding it, then it seems pretty good

I do indeed look at it from my perspective: the perspective of a militaristic war-monger.

I would much prefer a subtle and slow advantage over pacifist rivals so that I may march against them when my troops are ready to do so, then have them declare a war that everyone knows was for nothing else than to stave off TMP. Not to mention that these wars are much more likely to be an uninspiring gang-bang, where they join the side with which there is the least risk, than any truly inspiring involvement.

I don't see anyone "lauding" TMP, ever. The best I see is people saying "yea, we do need to push some people to do things somehow".

Also, if you are referring to me when you say "rulers and dukes", then you really are making quite gross generalizations. Does having a rulership or a dukeship suddenly make me some kind of bad player than the game must destroy? The realm my char is ruler/duke of on BT will most certainly not be seeing TMP for a very, very, very long time.

The only place I tolerate a peaceful realm is on Dwilight, anywhere else, I loathe it and never play in such realms, or otherwise work really hard to turn things around. I favor conflict, for without it how can I carve a place out for myself?

That being said, I am not arrogant enough to believe that everyone should be playing exactly as I am. It's bad roleplay if everyone are just constant fighting machines, that go to war for no other reason than to not get hit by TMP. If mindless fighting is what you want, then go play any of the infinite number of RTS or TBS out there. What's the point of playing with hundreds of other players if the game mechanics dictate that everyone must play the exact same way?

Peaceful realms already suffer from lowered attractiveness for new nobles. They also suffer from inertia leading to a generally less efficient army, player-side, and players spending less time on said realm to help it run better. And for this, they become vulnerable. TMP should only accentuate this vulnerability, not become a time bomb that resets every time you have a fight and that quickly brings down all of your troops training if it goes off. This is neither realistic nor fun.

And what's the point, anyways? If you force peaceful realms to go to war, then they'll get involved in a meaningless war where they run no risk. Likely, they will support like-minded realms, who also don't have much ambition. In the end, they'll just hinder the more aggressive and ambitious realms more than anything. Whereas if you don't incite them to go to war with drastic measures, then you can have the aggressive realm more easily win against the peaceful realm's neighbours, establish colonies, and then make the peaceful realm their next target. And then it'll be too late for that peaceful realm, and they will fall. The result will be the creation of many opportunities for many people.

I don't really agree, (and I don't think Tom did either, when he decided to add TMP, but I'll let him speak for himself).


Passive realms don't get attacked just because they are passive.

But more importantly, you all seem to have forgotten the REASON that TPM was put in place.

Tom didn't decide "I think I'll make all the realms have to fight wars or get punished" just for the hell of it.

He had a REASON.

It IS important to force councils to get involved in more wars, whether they want to be or not.

Players who want war don't influence the inter-realm diplomacy in most places. They just get bored and quit.

cf., Retention Revisited

Yes, there was a reason. And that reason was !@#$ing East Continent and Atamara, but especially the East Continent. The other continents did not have this problem. It was *clearly* a problem with the *players*, and not the system.

Also, it's not because he did it that it was a good thing to do. Over the years, we have been bombarded by countless mechanics that severely penalize us if we don't act a certain way. And I don't consider this to be for the best. While there are some things I'm quite happy to no longer see, I don't believe these features have made the game better over the years. Indeed, I think the game was more fun back when I joined in 2006 than it is now. Most of the problems that existed back then still do, but now I often feel I am struggling more against the game mechanics than against rival realms. The whole point of BM was being part of a team and playing against other teams. You now do a lot more maintenance and a lot less fighting with your enemies than you did then.

Carrot >> Stick.

Motivate people to play the way we want.

Beating them over the head makes them leave or turns them off.

I love a good war, but it's so hard to convince anyone to do it without it turning into a giant five on one.

Just bloody happy the Aurvandil vs Madina conflict has been left alone.

Indeed, carrots encourage wars in cases where two realms would have otherwise been at comparable strength, but one being peaceful gives the other one the edge it needs to risk itself in a war.

Sticks encourage people who did not want to take any risk to go fight in a war where they will not run any risk.

No risk, no fun.

---------

TMP should be SLOW. It should be GRADUAL, MANAGEABLE and SCALABLE. It should act with averages over the last month or two, rather than on a timer, with scaled penalties that never go higher than 1% training loss per day, and this only in the most extreme of cases. Declarations of war should have a temporary positive influence on tax tolerance (regardless of whether you declare it yourself or another does), declarations of peace should have a temporary negative influence. Starvations and a bad food supply should offer a scalable tax supply bonus. Amount of fighting should influence peasant strength: as many of these might have served as conscripts and are now retired, realms that often went to war will have more better-trained peasants to rise up against oppressors than realms that never went to war.

TMP should not cause realms to fear it so much that they join in on a lame gang bang just to spare themselves of it. It also makes no sense that whether you go and fight rogues 500 miles away once per few weeks influences what one's tax tolerance is. All it should do is make the realm more fragile.

Further ideas based on the fact that those who never saw any fighting are more likely to flee it at all costs could be:
Regions of regions that are peaceful are more easily TOed.
Regions that secede from peaceful realms do so with better stats.
Rebellions in peaceful realms causes militia to partly disband every TC (therefore making it easier for the rebels).

[egamma]

why? That doesn't do much of anything, except punish players by not letting them try out different classes. Lack of warfare/lumping armies already does that enough.

If it is "ease" you want, I can assure you the code behind my idea is quite simple. Simpler than the existing code, actually.

Hurting their honor and prestige--and accelerating it for council members the longer they go without war--will eventually force them out of office.

[fodder]

you don't need h/p for offices, do you? not for elections.

[Kain]

you don't need h/p for offices, do you? not for elections.

Actually you do. I tried putting one of my chars up for election a few days ago. I forgot that it was a relatively new char who hasn't been in too many battles. I couldn't. You need minimum 10 prestige to announce you're running in a election.