BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => BM General Discussion => Topic started by: Foxglove on August 26, 2013, 01:50:00 AM
-
As a community, I think we should discuss what ideas we can generate to make the entire game more interesting for new players, working within the existing gameplay. This thread isn't for suggesting changes to game mechanics or new features - it's about working with what we have.
My initial thoughts are that a personal IC letter to a new player offering advice or help if they want it is good start. If possible, suggesting locations of vacant estates will help ease their start in the game.
When I have a character with some sort of authority I also try to have new players released from prison immediately if their character is captured. Allowing them to sit in a dungeon for 7 days doesn't help retention, and I have seen new players have a character captured within their first few turns and quit the game a day or two later. Any Judge can take a quick look at a prisoner's background and check they haven't just started playing.
Other ideas to improve the game experience for them in the first few weeks?
-
Capital idea, Foxglove. I'm relatively new (almost 6 months) but when I have a newer player move into my region, I try to treat them like a protegé, at least until they get comfortable. I send them a welcome message and I encourage them to contact me if they need any assistance or advice, and I check on them once or twice after that. I also give them a cut of the food sales.
-
In general, this is good—this is exactly what we need. We devs are working on making things better, but, of course, our work takes time. For the players to do more to make the game better for newbies takes only as long as it takes to come up with a good idea and resolve to follow through with it.
If possible, suggesting locations of vacant estates will help ease their start in the game.
This particular part, I wanted to note, will soon become unnecessary. Very soon, I will be replacing the current new noble creation process with one that will allow new nobles to be created already holding a (previously) vacant estate.
-
Newbs need to be given something clear, obvious and interesting to do. I don't think level of mentoring or supports matters that much beyond some minimum that makes sure they have some idea of whats going on.
I don't think moving to some region to get an estate is very interesting. Newbs have no idea of what gold per week is normal, or of what the lords and regions are like. There are no interesting decisions to make.
Recruit a unit and go to front line is much better. Recruiting a unit has a lot of interesting decisions and things to learn, like eq quality, training, range, money. Following orders gives the newb a reason to read messages, learn message types, and move every turn. Moving to an estate 4-5 turns away... is just too long with no decisions other than "next destination".
-
I think as important as teaching game mechanics is it's equally important to teach newbies the culture of their new realm.
Players should invite newbies to join their guilds and religions. They should tell them some gossip about other nobles maybe try and get them on their side for ongoing feudes. They should speak with pride about their realm's history. They should explain why they're at war and why the enemy is the most hated foe imaginable. Or conversely they should explain why they're at peace when they should instead be waging war with their hated former foe.
Seasoned political players should see new nobles as soft malleable clay they can mold into something useful. Manipulation and indoctrination should start at day one.
-
Some realms are just terrible at absorbing newbies, others have better leadership. Sometimes more fractious realms or those with fiercer internal competition are less welcoming. That's just part of life in BM. Of course, the clueless newbie suffers for it.
-
Sometimes more fractious realms or those with fiercer internal competition are less welcoming. That's just part of life in BM. Of course, the clueless newbie suffers for it.
I disagree. Realms with strong internal competition can be places where people in power have a strong incentive to welcome new characters to quickly win them to their cause and increase their numbers. Realms where everyone gets along can be pretty silent and give nothing to the knight but an endless stream of scout reports.
-
I think having more low level positions like Steward can also help newer players to be more involved. They dont even need to show up in titles. Lieges and leaders should really play their role though, I always try to pay extra attention to new players by sending them a welcome letter to the realm and sending them an personal OOC letter
-
I think having more low level positions like Steward can also help newer players to be more involved. They dont even need to show up in titles. Lieges and leaders should really play their role though, I always try to pay extra attention to new players by sending them a welcome letter to the realm and sending them an personal OOC letter
Same here. My character first ever title hold is Steward, it is ranked pretty low in lot of region lords priorities but a region can be starving in lord absence and steward is around to handle them. As a return to the game, when my characters are Region Lords, I make my knights as Stewards 8)
-
My first Lord serenaded me with promises of flowers, rose gardens and honourable service...
Roleplay makes things interesting. Without it we have this data driven text game where we push buttons on a screen.
-
Positions are not the answer. We had better player retention back when realms were full of people and getting even a simple lordship was years in the future for most new players.
But they had something to do: War.
-
One major reason for closing the war islands was that they took war out of the rest of the game. Sadly, it didn't return afterwards. Some paths are hard to reverse. But there was a time when people who wanted more war were literally told to immigrate to the war islands.
We really need to make up/down cycles more interesting then flatlines.
-
One major reason for closing the war islands was that they took war out of the rest of the game. Sadly, it didn't return afterwards. Some paths are hard to reverse. But there was a time when people who wanted more war were literally told to immigrate to the war islands.
We really need to make up/down cycles more interesting then flatlines.
Perhaps the reason it didn't return afterwards has less to do with the War Islands themselves and more to do with the subsequent loss of players from said action?
-
Perhaps the reason it didn't return afterwards has less to do with the War Islands themselves and more to do with the subsequent loss of players from said action?
Doesn't pass a fact check. We had no noticeable drop in player numbers when the war islands were closed.
-
Doesn't pass a fact check. We had no noticeable drop in player numbers when the war islands were closed.
I was not around for long before the war islands were closed, so the status quo seems relatively normal to me in terms of the number of wars going on. Was it really much more intense before?
-
Doesn't pass a fact check. We had no noticeable drop in player numbers when the war islands were closed.
Not immediately after, but it did seem that the game has been in decline since then.
-
Positions are not the answer. We had better player retention back when realms were full of people and getting even a simple lordship was years in the future for most new players.
I don't think that disproves the value of new positions for player retention. I'm sure going years without any noticeable advancement makes plenty of players leave. I highly doubt we saw a drop in players when the steward position was created.
We've talked a lot about estate customization over the years. I think that's in the same category. If you have two years of nothing before lucking out and getting a lordship things get boring. What's happens is players have left resulting in lordships being handed out like hotcakes, which is also boring because there's no sense of accomplishment. Intermediate achievements can give players a real incentive by making them feel they've earned something and that they're working their way up the ranks.
-
I think the best way to retain new players is giving them some tasks with no clear end-goal. Something like "buddy up with this guy, I have plans to ruin him and I need a guy on the inside". Subterfuge is interesting, ongoing, and the amount of involvement is at the whim of the player. It might fade with time, but at least you get a chance to 'set the hook' so to speak.
I think what also works is brief explanations of the realm. The amount of history in a realm would probably shock some casual players who just made an account. I'm not saying exceed the character limit on letters, but just a quick rundown of "this great kingdom was established x seasons ago by x event, warred with these x ruffians, and have a fondness for x cultural icon.". Don't make players scour through the wiki and forums to taste the culture of the realm, sometimes babes need to be spoonfed the good stuff.
-
The key is not to give new players something specific (like a lordship). The key is to give them SOMETHING, specifically, something to do.
Frankly, if I were to join a game where it's about sitting around and doing region maintenance, I'd leave very quickly, too.
So really, we are at the same point we've been circling around for two years now: This game needs war. Lots of war. And I'm about at the point where I'd like to point a gun to every old established character who thinks his main job is to keep the status quo and tell him: "2 weeks and your realm is in a major war, or you'll get the axe. To the head."
Seriously, these people don't get that they destroy the game.
-
I don't really see a lack of war. I see wars on all of the continents I play on. A war without context can be just as dull as peacetime.
I think what makes things boring is as much on the ducal level as the realm level. Every duke should be plotting to ascend to the level of king. That dynamic is what makes a war interesting. Instead of "everyone's bored lets start a war with realm x", I'd rather something along the lines of "well if we remain at peace with realm x duke A might secede, but then again duke B might take the war as an opportunity to secede as well, however we could keep him satisfied if we also start a war with realm Z who's allied with realm X and borders duchy B thus giving him new lands. Then again those lands might give him the opportunity to not only secede but conquer the rest of the realms so we'd better make sure duke A gets plenty of territory from realm x to balance it out seeing as duke A and B have hated each other for years."
I think it will do some good if the higher tier players get a lesson in how to roleplay.
-
I'll leave the interpretations to you:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9638874/diplstats.png)
-
I'm about at the point where I'd like to point a gun to every old established character who thinks his main job is to keep the status quo and tell him: "2 weeks and your realm is in a major war, or you'll get the axe. To the head."
Haha, now there's an interesting idea! Let's make one Island a 'Titan Island' where the gods interfere mercilessly with the goings on of us mere mortals. That should shake things up a bit! :-P
-
I'll leave the interpretations to you:
Mark Twain would have loved you, Tom.
If an island has 20 realms, and each realm is at war with one other realm, that means that of the possible 171 diplomatic relationships, there are only 40 wars, or ~23%. So despite the fact that every realm is engaged in an exciting and engaging war for their very existence, your graph would show that the island was overwhelmingly at peace.
I'm not saying that you're wrong about the game needing more war. In fact, I'm pretty sure you're correct. Just... well, you know what they say about statistics...
-
Well, this makes me glad that all three of my characters are in the "war" sections of those pies ;D
First off, Tom, it would be helpful if you'd explain just what the graphs actually represent. It seems to me that, as Indirik suggests, they are actually the proportions of diplomatic relations at each status. With this being the case, I'd say that the Far East's graph is pretty close to the ideal: the FEI is currently embroiled in a continent-wide war, with every single realm involved in one way or another. So you can look at the other graphs as they relate to that one.
For the other continents, the only ones I can speak for are BT and Dwilight, as that's where my other 2 characters are. BT just finished a major war in the north, and Dwilight is still winding down from its first continent-wide conflict. I'm not at all sure that putting a gun to rulers' heads there and saying, "Make war," is going to do what you want, mainly because they're not really opposing war, just continuing to tidy up from the last one.
Our main problem in the game is not, I don't think, akin to the time of the Long Peace on the EC.
-
Anaris, didnt you develop a way of measuring war-levels of different realms and continents?
Maybe you could post some of those statistics if it is public information?
-
Wouldn't it be easier to just show the % of realms involved in war? As Anaris said, every realm on FEI is at war, and battles often involve two or three realms on either side, yet the graph suggests only a third is at war.
So in FEI, 8 out of 8 realms, 100% are at war
On Dwilight, 9 out of 13 realms, (not including dead realms and the Zuma), 70% are at war
On BT, 6 out of 10 realms, 60% are at war, with some of the peaceful ones having wrapped up a war recently
-
I'm not saying that you're wrong about the game needing more war. In fact, I'm pretty sure you're correct. Just... well, you know what they say about statistics...
I never said 100% war is the desireable state. I could run other statistics, like the number of wars a realm is involved in, or the number of realms having no war, etc. - but if you go into too much detail, then things like "is this actually a war actively being fought?" really matter, and they don't matter as much with the big-picture view I posted.
It really is just to give you an idea. And I think it illustrates beautifully that the vast majority of diplomatic relations are not war. Everyone has more friends then enemies.
-
First off, Tom, it would be helpful if you'd explain just what the graphs actually represent.
diplomatic relations between realms, grouped up so it doesn't count federation, alliance and peace seperately, but as "peaceful". Same for hatred and war.
it really is just a 10,000 feet picture. It shows that peace is the dominating relation between realms. Heck, half of continents have more federations and alliances then wars.
-
The problem is not the amount of war but the frequency in battles and other war-related activities.
-
It really is just to give you an idea. And I think it illustrates beautifully that the vast majority of diplomatic relations are not war. Everyone has more friends then enemies.
That's almost always going to be true.
The only realms that have more enemies than friends are a) gigantic behemoths that can take on most of the continent by themselves and win (which, I would say, is an undesirable type of realm to have around, from a game-fun perspective), and b) realms that are likely to be dead soon.
So...yeah, no one's going to try to have more enemies than friends. That's just dumb. Thus, I'm not sure what point you were intending to make here.
-
Wouldn't it be easier to just show the % of realms involved in war?
Probably, but I couldn't come up with a quick one-line SQL statement to get those numbers.
-
Neutral doesn't necessarily mean friend Tom...
-
That's almost always going to be true.
[...]
So...yeah, no one's going to try to have more enemies than friends. That's just dumb. Thus, I'm not sure what point you were intending to make here.
You are missing the third option. If people had some friends, some enemies, and lots of neutrals, that would be cool.
But most realms have tons of friends, and almost no enemies. Basically, players have successfully rebuilt Europe in-game. Unfortunately, it's the European Union of the 21st century and not the feudal Europe of the dark ages.
-
Neutral doesn't necessarily mean friend Tom...
Which is exactly why I did not include it in the "peaceful" category, but kept it as a seperate state in the statistics.
-
You are missing the third option. If people had some friends, some enemies, and lots of neutrals, that would be cool.
Ah, good point.
But most realms have tons of friends, and almost no enemies. Basically, players have successfully rebuilt Europe in-game. Unfortunately, it's the European Union of the 21st century and not the feudal Europe of the dark ages.
Unfortunately, the players are 21st century, not dark age.
The only way you're going to end up with people not trying to get large chunks of the continent on their side is if, as with the scrapped Treaty System, it costs them something to maintain an alliance.
-
Well I think the graphs clearly show that we ought to sink Atamara.
I don't blame Beluaterra for being so peaceful since many of the regions are still recovering.
-
That's almost always going to be true.
The only realms that have more enemies than friends are a) gigantic behemoths that can take on most of the continent by themselves and win (which, I would say, is an undesirable type of realm to have around, from a game-fun perspective), and b) realms that are likely to be dead soon.
So...yeah, no one's going to try to have more enemies than friends. That's just dumb. Thus, I'm not sure what point you were intending to make here.
or c) Asylon. :p
-
Atamara has 14 realams, of which 7 are currently at war with at least one other realm and the remaining 7 are not currently at war.
-
You are missing the third option. If people had some friends, some enemies, and lots of neutrals, that would be cool.
But most realms have tons of friends, and almost no enemies. Basically, players have successfully rebuilt Europe in-game. Unfortunately, it's the European Union of the 21st century and not the feudal Europe of the dark ages.
What do you expect? Humans are social creatures, naturally inclined to work together. Plus, and this is a huge issue, wars in Battlemaster tend to have devastating consequences for the losing side; this strongly discourages realms from taking risks on a war where victory isn't a sure thing, with all of the negative consequences this implies - less competitive wars, and less war over all.
Think about it, when the consequences of war were comparatively limited (because armies were smaller and could not be kept in the field for long without significant economic consequences), European nations fought each other all the time. When the consequences of war eventually became devastating thanks to technological advancement, you got the European Union.
-
Interestingly, Tom and Geronus, the last post in the Fortifications/Sieges thread in the Background forums talks about exactly this.
-
Interestingly, Tom and Geronus, the last post in the Fortifications/Sieges thread in the Background forums talks about exactly this.
Indeed. I think BM lacks what it takes to force us 21st century players to think like those who lived in the dark ages. BM doesn't have as many fortifications as Europe did back in the era as well. On top of that siege battles in BM are rather short. No time for relief forces to break the siege or economic damage to take a toll on both the besieger and the besieged.
-
Indeed. I think BM lacks what it takes to force us 21st century players to think like those who lived in the dark ages. BM doesn't have as many fortifications as Europe did back in the era as well. On top of that siege battles in BM are rather short. No time for relief forces to break the siege or economic damage to take a toll on both the besieger and the besieged.
Part of it is that the game design encourages players to behave in certain ways. I'd say modern culture has somewhat less to do with the issue of not enough wars than do simple game mechanics. The mechanics make it so that wars can be devastating, and so they usually are unless the winning side chooses to exercise restraint, an option with few incentives.
-
I was not around for long before the war islands were closed, so the status quo seems relatively normal to me in terms of the number of wars going on. Was it really much more intense before?
No from what I remember before the war islands disappeared sunk or uhh [insert]. It was just more activity going around more people conversed in realms and well regions were still building the culture some of them still have today, Ibaldesh "White City", Sirion "elves", etc. You could say pre-war island [insert] it was a more creative atmosphere and well a different crowd, though many still lurk.
Dukes would converse more and such with lords knights so forth. Realms were tight knit, but the difference is they spoke and knew other nobles around the contient they were in, not just their realm mates. War islands didn't destroy that, spying did. That's why realms have so many message groups.
Back on topic, it's a new crowd that's for sure. The best way to approach this is to offer advice leave them a message make sure they get assigned to a army and within that army have the army converse.
Bm's competing with graphics/animations, it a tough battle.
-
Was spying really that bad, I know off a few situations in Atamara, though never thought that it decreased the number of messages in realm. Is that maybe why some people prefer Dwilight? People can be more open about discussions there with a lower chance of spys?
-
No from what I remember before the war islands disappeared sunk or uhh [insert]. It was just more activity going around more people conversed in realms and well regions were still building the culture some of them still have today, Ibaldesh "White City", Sirion "elves", etc. You could say pre-war island [insert] it was a more creative atmosphere and well a different crowd, though many still lurk.
Dukes would converse more and such with lords knights so forth. Realms were tight knit, but the difference is they spoke and knew other nobles around the contient they were in, not just their realm mates. War islands didn't destroy that, spying did. That's why realms have so many message groups.
Honestly, I don't see that at all.
First of all, in my experience, there was just as much spying back in the day. If anything has ruined trust in the game, it's not spying, but rather paranoia about spying.
Second of all, I was here for ~4 years before the War Islands closed, with characters on both SWI and SEI, and I don't recall seeing any significant change in the way people acted or culture was developed when they were closed.
Over time, however, the older realms—particularly on Atamara and the EC—started to lose some of the habits that were part of their culture in the early years. I don't think this means that they lost their culture, per se. Some of them, I think, suffered from having longtime players who used to develop the culture lose interest and either leave the game, or just become inactive Dukes holding onto power for its own sake. Others, however, just lost the players who used to develop culture, and had new players develop a different one.
I've definitely seen Sirionites describe themselves as Elves, and Ibladesh called the White City, and all sorts of other little cultural tidbits, in the years since the War Islands closed. I think you may be seeing the past through rose-coloured glasses, Blue Star.
-
I believe Tom mentioned something I think is critical: Giving new players something to do (that isn't region maitenance) is key. (I think it was Tom...)
Anyway, I agree with this, and ideas for this should be brainstormed.
-
Hasn't that been on the Devs to-do list for months or years already? I thought there were already plans, just not enough time to implement them along with all the other priority items.
-
Was spying really that bad, I know off a few situations in Atamara, though never thought that it decreased the number of messages in realm.
At times, yes. I remember one incident on EC quite clearly. We watched the enemy moving out of one of our regions, and all of their nobles in the regions around it heading back home to refit. So we called an attack to get the stragglers. We clearly outnumbered the invaders in the specific region, but not if you included all the enemies in the surrounding regions.
Almost immediately after we ordered the attack, the enemy began reacting. Nearly instantly. All their nobles in the region stopped traveling. All the nobles in the regions around it (Who came from two or three different invading realms) turned back from their refit, and rushed back to the region we were attacking.
It was blatantly obvious that the enemy knew exactly what we were doing, and had received copies of our orders. Not only were we crushed in the battle, but one of our popular heroes was killed in the battle.
Events like this can greatly impact the amount of information that is shared in a realm. When things like that happen, people instantly pull back and stop sharing information with the realm. Conversations go back to closed groups. Information is closely guarded. New players, who are least likely to be included in privileged groups, are the ones most likely to suffer as a result.
-
Hasn't that been on the Devs to-do list for months or years already? I thought there were already plans, just not enough time to implement them along with all the other priority items.
There are items along this line in development, but more ideas are good because you never know when that 'ah-ha' moment/idea will come.
-
Honestly, I don't see that at all.
First of all, in my experience, there was just as much spying back in the day. If anything has ruined trust in the game, it's not spying, but rather paranoia about spying.
Second of all, I was here for ~4 years before the War Islands closed, with characters on both SWI and SEI, and I don't recall seeing any significant change in the way people acted or culture was developed when they were closed.
Over time, however, the older realms—particularly on Atamara and the EC—started to lose some of the habits that were part of their culture in the early years. I don't think this means that they lost their culture, per se. Some of them, I think, suffered from having longtime players who used to develop the culture lose interest and either leave the game, or just become inactive Dukes holding onto power for its own sake. Others, however, just lost the players who used to develop culture, and had new players develop a different one.
I've definitely seen Sirionites describe themselves as Elves, and Ibladesh called the White City, and all sorts of other little cultural tidbits, in the years since the War Islands closed. I think you may be seeing the past through rose-coloured glasses, Blue Star.
I do admit I see the past as a more joyous time, my glasses grow foggy looking back that is for certain. Though it was a different atmosphere in ways cause of the larger community. Draka would march to war and the mountains would shake when we went past Eaglin and Tarassc. Now numbers have surely dropped.
Also, I agree it was the paranoia of spying that really got to people it's still around today. I even saw a noble admit to it spying/ooc confusion. That why many still are pushing for 1 noble per contient/island. As Indirik stated it is why their are so many message groups. Ah, I remember the Fontan arguments o did we argue and openly, now those are in closed chambers unless they spill out.
I think also a issue is the old guard is unwilling to accept change, and people vote blindly.
-
I will avoi to speak about the elves since I'm the last man on earth to defend the idea.
About spies and message groups: I don't have anything against spies since we do it in game with a good roleplay. I'm againt when people do it with multies or cheating in a way or another. Also, I see the message groups as a way to improve engagement. Even toay in democratic system, how many secrets we have and how many decisions are taken behind closed doors? This is natural. With a Military Channel, people interested in military subjects will find a way to be there. And they must find a way, because we don't like to step foward and implore for people to have interest... we want to work in many levels with people and their interests in different aspects of leadership. Now we have to cry for have a good Lord when is the Lord who should look for ways to convince a Duke or a majority.
While developers you must create new ways to attract people, but as characters, people must seek what they want instead receive it because we need them one way or another.
-
I believe Tom mentioned something I think is critical: Giving new players something to do (that isn't region maitenance) is key. (I think it was Tom...)
Anyway, I agree with this, and ideas for this should be brainstormed.
Anaris already mentioned a potential change that will aid in this: Characters can start with an estate. No need to find one at first. That would be awesome for new characters.
I think this could be enhanced with two pieces:
1. Do not allow regions to have lands that are not assigned to an estate. 100% of a region will belong to one estate or another. This means there will be more estates to drop new characters into
2. Find a way to either automatically or quickly put new characters into an army. Possible solution:
a. The general sets a default army for new characters. This can not be none.
b. Each has the option of setting a default army for new characters or to let the general decide.
c. When a new character joins a realm they are automatically assigned to an army.
i. If the local lord selected an army in step b, the new character is assigned to that army.
ii. Otherwise, the new character goes to the army the general set in step a.
This way the character should start with an estate and in an army. On day one he gets orders from the marshal: "Move to this region immediately, we need every man on the front!" or |Move to the capital and recruit a good unit. Here is some gold."
At the same time I would suggest that:
* Players have the OPTION to have their new character start with an estate.
* Only newly created characters can start with an estate. Changing islands and such is different.
-
Anaris already mentioned a potential change that will aid in this: Characters can start with an estate. No need to find one at first. That would be awesome for new characters.
I think this could be enhanced with two pieces:
1. Do not allow regions to have lands that are not assigned to an estate. 100% of a region will belong to one estate or another. This means there will be more estates to drop new characters into
2. Find a way to either automatically or quickly put new characters into an army. Possible solution:
a. The general sets a default army for new characters. This can not be none.
b. Each has the option of setting a default army for new characters or to let the general decide.
c. When a new character joins a realm they are automatically assigned to an army.
i. If the local lord selected an army in step b, the new character is assigned to that army.
ii. Otherwise, the new character goes to the army the general set in step a.
This way the character should start with an estate and in an army. On day one he gets orders from the marshal: "Move to this region immediately, we need every man on the front!" or |Move to the capital and recruit a good unit. Here is some gold."
At the same time I would suggest that:
* Players have the OPTION to have their new character start with an estate.
* Only newly created characters can start with an estate. Changing islands and such is different.
I appreciate that your suggestions might make it easier for newbies to hit the ground running. The issue that I take with these ideas is that they limit players' decision-making in a game that's all about decisions. Maybe instead of automating those decisions, provide newbies with helpful tips, such as "It's recommended that you take an estate. The nearest vacant estate is in Region X. Click here for a list of all estates in this realm." Another possibility would be to ask newbies if they want to be assigned a mentor. Wouldn't require much, just a Yes/No questions, and if they pick Yes then a message is sent to a more experienced player saying, "Sir Mixalot needs your wise tutelage." Newbies might be too shy to ask for help, so this would make it easier for them.
-
Or just allow lords with vacant estates to offer them to nobles without an estate regardless of their location, similar to the old oaths system.
-
Or just allow lords with vacant estates to offer them to nobles without an estate regardless of their location, similar to the old oaths system.
Ya it's actually quite a bother to run all the way to a region on the ass- end of the realm to take up a region, especially when you joined in a middle of a war. Why was it changed exactly?
-
Or just allow lords with vacant estates to offer them to nobles without an estate regardless of their location, similar to the old oaths system.
+1!!
Having to travel a long distance to pick up an estate is a problem for new players. It's a boring process, which takes time away from doing things that should be more exciting. In larger realms, or when the player starts far from their chosen estate's region, this can take many days to walk there and back.
-
It's a bore for old players too :p I've been a disenfranchised noble in Astrum for the past month or so because I can't spend the time to travel to my chosen estate.
-
Or parachute new chars into any region that has a vacant estate, then let them decide for themselves whether to take it or look for another one.