BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => BM General Discussion => Topic started by: mikm on June 15, 2011, 12:39:06 PM
-
This game has got me so bored latly.The bigest I say would be too much focus on game mechanics and too litle focus on roleplay.Plenty of so called IC mesages sound a lot like OCC mesages.Game mechanics are not intresting at all.Am tired of hearing words like CS,settings,persantege and other stuff like that all over the place.Sometimes all you get is system mesages.
-
This game has got me so bored latly.The bigest I say would be too much focus on game mechanics and too litle focus on roleplay.Plenty of so called IC mesages sound a lot like OCC mesages.Game mechanics are not intresting at all.Am tired of hearing words like CS,settings,persantege and other stuff like that all over the place.Sometimes all you get is system mesages.
While I understand some people's frustration with the use of technical stuff, sometimes you just want to get a clear message across and don't have the time to !@#$ around and write nice fluff text. Because whenever you don't use these terms, there *will* be people who don't understand. It's just the simplest way to explain certain facts.
-
Anyway, I don't need game mechanics explained in IC mesages.That's what OCC is for. Plus, it sounds too much like system mesages.
-
Anyway, I don't need game mechanics explained in IC mesages.That's what OCC is for. Plus, it sounds too much like system mesages.
You mean OOC?
Region stats are already 'fluffed', using words to describe production, loyalty, morale and control. Why not expand that into other things? For instance, use 'weak, average and strong' to describe bands of monsters in scribe reports?
-
Yes, that would be nice.
-
That might help the flavor, but will certainly do no favors to BM as a strategy game. Are some of us forgetting that BM is as much a strategy game as it is a roleplaying game? There will always be a conflict to get the right balance of both genres, but I'm pretty sure making everything too descriptive with no reliable way to make even semi-precise estimate is going to lead to lots of people going "this combat system sucks! (more than it already does!)"
-
There some people who play for the mechanics without saying a word.It feels so unfrendly.
-
Most of those people wouldn't say a word even if the mechanics got changed from left brain to right brain. That'll just make most of them leave to play another game where they can continue to powergame numbers with a calculator in hand.
-
BattleMaster requires both style of play to remain a viable game. If it was changed to pure RP, or pure strategy, it wouldn't be BattleMaster anymore. The mix of the two styles, and the appropriate balance between them, is what makes the game different.
-
The mix of the two styles, and the appropriate balance between them, is what makes the game different.
And has that balance been reached?
-
And has that balance been reached?
Honestly, I'm not sure. What do you think?
-
Honestly, I'm not sure. What do you think?
I would like to see more combat, including combat features. Here's a couple of suggestions, not sure how hard they would be to implement.
I would like for my troops to field standoff siege engines, such as catapults and ballistas (ballistae?), that damage walls from a distance.
I would like, on dwilight at least with its ring regions, to be able to have a good chance to interdict food supplies and starve a city.
-
I would like to see more combat, including combat features. Here's a couple of suggestions, not sure how hard they would be to implement.
I would like for my troops to field standoff siege engines, such as catapults and ballistas (ballistae?), that damage walls from a distance.
I would like, on dwilight at least with its ring regions, to be able to have a good chance to interdict food supplies and starve a city.
Tim was actually talking about both those possibilities with me the other week, so it's not pie in the sky, but as always, the bottleneck is coding.
-
It all depends on which realms you're in. There are some where numbers crunching is the number 1 national pastime, and there are others where you'll get a ton of RP. If one realm isn't to your liking, there's dozens of others you can try out.
-
Well,anyway, mechanics are not that complex.It's all about who has the most CS to throw at the enemy and who can recruit faster.
-
It all depends on which realms you're in. There are some where numbers crunching is the number 1 national pastime, and there are others where you'll get a ton of RP. If one realm isn't to your liking, there's dozens of others you can try out.
Riombara has complex math class from 1pm to 3pm. Each day. Weekends included!
-
Well,anyway, mechanics are not that complex.It's all about who has the most CS to throw at the enemy and who can recruit faster.
In a lot of cases, that's true. But then again, what else would you expect? CS is, after all, the "combat strength" of your army. All else being equal, if you have twice the combat strength of your enemy, then you *should* win. If not, then the system is messed up. Badly.
Your task as a military leader is to make sure that all else is not equal. There are things that you can use to your advantage to help you win. This includes things like troop type balance, fortifications, terrain, infiltrators, scouting, troop discipline, diplomacy, etc., etc. If you think the only way to win is "bigger blob of troops", then you're seriously missing out on a lot.
Not that "the bigger the blob, the better the job" isn't sometimes exactly what is required. Things like assaulting cities and strongholds come to mind.
-
Pherhaps if recruitment was harder,then you wouldn't throwing their troops on suicide misions.
-
Suicide missions are not always well-received by the players. It really depends on how well you can convince your fellow nobles that this missions is really necessary. Quite a few people are proud of their troops, and don't appreciate when they are thrown away on a whim.
About two months ago, there was a huge debate and series of complaints about a battle that, after it happened, many of the nobles in the army thought was known to have been a suicide mission. Darka barely won the battle, but succeeded in wiping out a rather large CE army. Even though we won, we were mostly wiped out, too, and left to straggle home with our own broken army. I almost thought the army was going to revolt over that one.
-
What good is a shiny unit if all you're gonna do is parade it around like an !@#$%^&? Soldiers are for dyin', man.
-
What good is a shiny unit if all you're gonna do is parade it around like an !@#$%^&? Soldiers are for dyin', man.
Soldiers are for killing. They can't do that if they're dead.
-
It's all about how many enemies they can kill before they die.
-
Well,anyway, mechanics are not that complex.It's all about who has the most CS to throw at the enemy and who can recruit faster.
If that is the extent of your understanding of what is possible with game mechanics, you really haven't investigated all that part of the game offers. If RP is what you are after, I recommend looking into a realm that is known for it, Arcaea, Arcachon and Zonasa on the FEI all have good reputation for RP.
-
That might help the flavor, but will certainly do no favors to BM as a strategy game. Are some of us forgetting that BM is as much a strategy game as it is a roleplaying game? There will always be a conflict to get the right balance of both genres, but I'm pretty sure making everything too descriptive with no reliable way to make even semi-precise estimate is going to lead to lots of people going "this combat system sucks! (more than it already does!)"
Most people I talk with, myself included, have no idea what the descriptive texts mean, other than the really good and really bad ones. When I see something else than Hateful, Worshipful, or Enthralled for loyalty, for example, I have no idea how bad or acceptable the situation is, and whether or not intervention is really required. So I'm just prompted to try to bring it back to Worshipful, which I know is safe and for which possible drops will not put the region in the danger zone.
Same with huge battle reports, and I'm actually the one to have suggested that, that we only know the number of men. Sure, it's more realistic, but I still feel a feeling of disappointment by not knowing if one's soldiers were any better than the other's.
I like when alternatives to raw numbers and the like are present, but unfulfilled when they replace them. That's just me and the bunch I tend to socialize with, though. I've gotten a liking to expressing myself simply and not wasting my time with a ton of fluff to say simple things over time...
-
Pherhaps if recruitment was harder,then you wouldn't throwing their troops on suicide misions.
Suicide mission quickly empty your RC's, requiring drafting measures which invariably lower the stats of your regions, aside from the fact that recruitment cost tend to drain gold reserves. Arcaea recently had to spend alot of effort to ensure we were fighting battles that preserved the majority of our force while still protecting our land in order to boost our armies back above the 13-15k mark that was our limit if most the army was refitting at the one time. All things being equal the fewer troops you lose and need to replace, the better and the larger the army you can support.
-
Just bored with the game mechanics.
-
Most people I talk with, myself included, have no idea what the descriptive texts mean, other than the really good and really bad ones. When I see something else than Hateful, Worshipful, or Enthralled for loyalty, for example, I have no idea how bad or acceptable the situation is, and whether or not intervention is really required. So I'm just prompted to try to bring it back to Worshipful, which I know is safe and for which possible drops will not put the region in the danger zone.
It's colourcoded and everything to give you an indication on how bad it is. If you spend some time on keeping regions in shape, you will figure it out quickly enough. The whole thing gives a lot less obsession with keeping it at exactly 100% at least.
-
If that is the extent of your understanding of what is possible with game mechanics, you really haven't investigated all that part of the game offers. If RP is what you are after, I recommend looking into a realm that is known for it, Arcaea, Arcachon and Zonasa on the FEI all have good reputation for RP.
While I have only an adventurer in Zonasa, I can favourably report that even the busier nobles (Council members) take time to RP.
Same with huge battle reports, and I'm actually the one to have suggested that, that we only know the number of men. Sure, it's more realistic, but I still feel a feeling of disappointment by not knowing if one's soldiers were any better than the other's.
It would be nice to have a report on which noble's unit distinguished itself on the battlefield. Say, whichever one killed the most men/did the most hits, with wounded Knights counted as extra points, wounded Lords more, and Captured the next, with killing a hero the most (although capturing a council member might be seen as more prestigious). And perhaps a runner-up unit.
The blurb would be something like: Keplerstan's unit was seen to distinguish itself on the battlefield, killing almost/over (so many score men), injuring (names) and capturing (name of nobles).
Edit: Or perhaps an alternate document that you can choose to view, which ranks all the units according to amount of men killed (and the whole nobles thing). Although this would not really be that realistic I suspect.
-
Most people I talk with, myself included, have no idea what the descriptive texts mean, other than the really good and really bad ones. When I see something else than Hateful, Worshipful, or Enthralled for loyalty, for example, I have no idea how bad or acceptable the situation is, and whether or not intervention is really required. So I'm just prompted to try to bring it back to Worshipful, which I know is safe and for which possible drops will not put the region in the danger zone.
I hated the idea of that particular change. Still don't really like it, but I can live with it. In fact, it wouldn't bother me at all if the words were completely removed and replaced with a simple colored box that went from bright green to dark red. (In fact, I think I would prefer that a lot more than the words.) But that's a bit hard on the color blind people, isn't it? :(
Anyway, the point is that I have no idea what all the different descriptive words are. If you put them all in front of me I couldn't arrange them in order. The effect that they've had on region maintenance in general, though, I think has been positive. You don't see people obsessing over "Gotta get 100%" all the time.
I still don't like it. But I can deal with it. Because they have colors.
-
Edit: Or perhaps an alternate document that you can choose to view, which ranks all the units according to amount of men killed (and the whole nobles thing). Although this would not really be that realistic I suspect.
I really don't think anything like this will ever happen. That's more of an RTS of FPS style "leaderboard" thing than fits within the feel of BattleMaster. The Huge Battle Reports already list some of the information, such as captured and severely wounded nobles. If you want all the details, get your hands on the original battle report and you get everything.
-
I really don't think anything like this will ever happen. That's more of an RTS of FPS style "leaderboard" thing than fits within the feel of BattleMaster. The Huge Battle Reports already list some of the information, such as captured and severely wounded nobles. If you want all the details, get your hands on the original battle report and you get everything.
Ok, then what about the first alternative?
-
It's all pretty much in the same category. medieval battles, especially the big ones, are chaotic things. And there's no one sitting on the sidelines with a score card keeping track of kills.
And the truly important stuff is already reported to the entire island for huge battles, and to all involve realms for regular battles. Take, for instance, the recent huge battle in Walefishire on Dwilight, with my added annotations:
Battle in Walefishire (1 day, 21 hours ago)
(rogue), Astrum, Corsanctum, Morek Empire vs. Caerwyn
Estimated strengths: 1400 men vs. 710 men
Armies, sponsors, marshals
The Halgawaras-Ingaevoangeln (Caerwyn), sponsored by Sir Hyperion Harte, High Magistrate of Caerwyn, Earl of Walefishire, were led into battle by Marshal Infaustus Godhelm Brythonic.
The Legion of the Golden Griffin (Caerwyn), sponsored by Feawen Aldaríon (Lord), were led into battle by Vice-Marshal Graviel Lupercal.
The Defenders of the Blood Stars (Astrum), sponsored by Sir Brance Indirik, Vasilif of Astrum, Duke of Libidizedd, were led into battle by Marshal Allison Kabrinski.
The Corsanctum's Sword (Corsanctum), sponsored by Sir Branthorpe Silverbear, High Inquisitor of Corsanctum, Marquis of Freke's Deep, were led into battle by Marshal Chlodio Cuvelier.
The Order of the Auspicious Star (Morek Empire), sponsored by Francois de Leon, Duke of Donghaiwei, were led into battle by Marshal Masaharu Hayabusa.
Unique items and wielders
Sergio Mozzoni, Strategos of Astrum is spotted wearing the Ornate Jacket of Protection.
Chlodio Cuvelier, Marshal of the Corsanctum's Sword is spotted wielding the Long-Lost Dagger.
Sir Branthorpe Silverbear, High Inquisitor of Corsanctum, Marquis of Freke's Deep is spotted wearing the Mysterious Chain Mail from the North.
Allison Kabrinski, Marshal of the Defenders of the Blood Stars is spotted wielding the Mysterious Club.
Thomas Greyson, General of Corsanctum is spotted wielding the Enchanted Shield of Reflection.
Captured nobles
Wulfric Lucifer (Knight of Grazne, Caerwyn) was captured by Allison Kabrinski's unit.
Jeremy Sedgwick, Viscount of Kybcyell was captured by Aram Stien's unit.
Chlodio Cuvelier, Marshal of the Corsanctum's Sword was captured by Daenah Dragoria's unit.
Attacker Victory!
You have:
- All the armies involved, listing the important noble things: Sponsors and marshals of each.
- Unique items, and who wields them. A short list, capped at five I think. All are listed in the full report.
- All the nobles who were captured, and who captured them.
- All the major woundings.(This battle just happens to not have any major wounds suffered.)
- All the noble deaths, and who killed them.(Again, no deaths in this battle.)
This seems to me to have most of what you want, minus the exact kill counts. Which won't be added.
-
That actually looks like really nice formatting for ingame :)
What would be nice, now that I think about it, is to get such a summary even if you've participated in that battle. The armies and unique items can easily be looked up, but the Captured / Injured / Killed Nobles thing would be nice to get as a summary afterwards. When you have very big battles, it's hard to easily see.
-
Splitting it out with spacing, headings, formatting, etc., could make the report quite a bit longer than it already is. Tom was hesitant to even let us add armies and items, fearing that the battle report summaries would start getting too long. That one is already 17 lines. Add a wounding and a death and it makes 19. Add in 5 headings, and a blank line spacer for each, and you're up to 29 lines for a battle summary. Yes, it's a big battle, but still, that's nearly an entire screen.
-
Splitting it out with spacing, headings, formatting, etc., could make the report quite a bit longer than it already is. Tom was hesitant to even let us add armies and items, fearing that the battle report summaries would start getting too long. That one is already 17 lines. Add a wounding and a death and it makes 19. Add in 5 headings, and a blank line spacer for each, and you're up to 29 lines for a battle summary. Yes, it's a big battle, but still, that's nearly an entire screen.
What if big battle reports like that could be expanded/shrank? Lots of people don't care, but some do, and that would be the best of both worlds.
-
could make the report quite a bit longer than it already is
That's a good point. What if we put a space between the Battle Setup (amount of men, armies, unique items) and the wounded / killed / captured Nobles? That would already help a lot for me personally. Having that last bit (wounded / killed / captured Nobles) as a summary after a battle you yourself participated in would also be nice, albeit you can also just look closer to the battle report for that.
What if big battle reports like that could be expanded/shrank? Lots of people don't care, but some do, and that would be the best of both worlds.
You could just see that there was a big battle between two Realms and who won perhaps, and then can expand it to see the rest of the info?
-
What if big battle reports like that could be expanded/shrank? Lots of people don't care, but some do, and that would be the best of both worlds.
That's a good point. I don't know what is possible in that area. I know that the use of things like Javascript has intentionally been held to a minimum to maintain compatibility with, for example, mobile devices and tablets. (The new "marked" message feature, for example, has some compatibility issues with mobile devices.) Maybe Anaris or Foundation could address this issue.
-
That's a good point. I don't know what is possible in that area. I know that the use of things like Javascript has intentionally been held to a minimum to maintain compatibility with, for example, mobile devices and tablets. (The new "marked" message feature, for example, has some compatibility issues with mobile devices.) Maybe Anaris or Foundation could address this issue.
We already have functionality of that nature, scribe notes. What if we put the detailed info in a "battle rumours" scribe note? Then those who are interested can see it with a single click, and those who don't can pass over it without it taking more than a line.
-
It's colourcoded and everything to give you an indication on how bad it is. If you spend some time on keeping regions in shape, you will figure it out quickly enough. The whole thing gives a lot less obsession with keeping it at exactly 100% at least.
I know it's colour-coded, but how dark is bad? For example, production. I read "slow", and thought it was awful, like around the 25% mark. Turns out its over 50%. Seemed rather dark to me...
100% is safe, without a doubt. There's a buffer under it in which it's still "safe". But then, bad stats tend to only get worse if left alone, so you want to make sure it never drops below a certain amount. What is this buffer's limit? Who knows. It's easier to play it safe than to take the risk of it dropping like crazy. It's easier to put a little maintenance work here and then to keep it at 100% than to only come when the stats dropped to critical levels.I hated the idea of that particular change. Still don't really like it, but I can live with it. In fact, it wouldn't bother me at all if the words were completely removed and replaced with a simple colored box that went from bright green to dark red. (In fact, I think I would prefer that a lot more than the words.) But that's a bit hard on the color blind people, isn't it? :(
Anyway, the point is that I have no idea what all the different descriptive words are. If you put them all in front of me I couldn't arrange them in order. The effect that they've had on region maintenance in general, though, I think has been positive. You don't see people obsessing over "Gotta get 100%" all the time.
I still don't like it. But I can deal with it. Because they have colors.
The sentiment is mostly similar here. Except that the color code often makes it feel worse than it actually is. And as such, I personally obsess over having top stats more than I used to.
-
We already have functionality of that nature, scribe notes. What if we put the detailed info in a "battle rumours" scribe note? Then those who are interested can see it with a single click, and those who don't can pass over it without it taking more than a line.
I think that would make everyone happy.
-
This game has got me so bored latly.The bigest I say would be too much focus on game mechanics and too litle focus on roleplay.Plenty of so called IC mesages sound a lot like OCC mesages.Game mechanics are not intresting at all.Am tired of hearing words like CS,settings,persantege and other stuff like that all over the place.Sometimes all you get is system mesages.
roleplaying without some specific, sensible in-game events is quite useless.
it is current game mechanics that creates boredom, together with some developed habits, which are quite odd in my opinion, but are also induced by game mechanics (like rather widely developed opinion that good players are those who hold their posts forever).
the fact that you find nothing but steward messages on turn-change is ultimate consequence of that stall.
i can understand that in rare messages you see you are somewhat annoyed be seeing only cs, and similar data, but it comes more from the fact that anything you will ever find in messages are marshal's orders and occasional notes how someone raised region stats by 4%.
there is, simply, no conflict and people have nothing to talk about.
so, that is some casual structure: no conflicts - no events - no messages - no roleplay
generally important conflicts can come only from power struggles among those with highest power. mechanics, however, allows them to sit idly forever, or have extremely easy and comfortable way to avoid any conflicts, while preserving power.
long time ago i took advice to replace boring realm with another one, and that worked, at that time.
currently, i think it will not work at all - i changed many realms in recent time and everywhere is almost absolutely the same, some realms have few players willing for continual attempts to fight apathy, but they cannot do much, as a rule.