BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => BM General Discussion => Topic started by: Vivalas on May 31, 2018, 06:59:27 AM
-
This might be somewhat of a rant, as it basically started as a rant message I threw up in OOC on Dwilight and was surprised to see similar thoughts.
But, I seriously think the monsters aren't very constructive to the game or add much in terms of anything really. In both Dwilight and BT we nearly had RP and conflict starting up before the hordes came back and everyone was confined to fighting monsters again instead of actually interacting. Perhaps it's just the sudden influx of monsters because of the bugs, but even with "normal" monster attack rates, realms like Westgard on Dwilight basically are confined to fighting nothing but monsters, while more eastern realms just get to chill.
I suppose I understand the premise of monsters: to confine realms and add pressure... but it really just feels like it ends up as a grind. Players want to politick and intrigue and exert influence over other realms, not just walk around fighting monsters all the time. It's unfun and uninteresting for me as a military leader, and I don't imagine it is anymore interesting to the people just following my orders and fighting what are basic silent NPCs. Granted this is just my opinion, but I feel some others probably share my thoughts.
Anyways, I am making this thread to just have a general discussion on monsters, their role in BM, player's opinions on monsters, and the dev team's actual reason for putting them in-- since I don't want hearsay on that point.
My various suggestions are as follows:
1. Remove or seriously tone down monster hordes. On Dwilight, maybe just confine them to the west. Allow actual player-generated conflict to brew on continents and possibly think of a different, less time-intensive method of forcing conflict.
2. Seriously buff monster hordes to the point they're not just an annoying grind but an existential threat. Scale monster spawning rates to fit a sort of "imaginary radius" that expands and contracts along with the number of nobles on the island. Regions and realms inside the circle are unaffected, but regions outside are swarmed and very hard to keep defended. Basically turn monsters in to a sort of hard radius in which civilization can practically exist, so it constrains land and resources enough to cause conflict while allowing conflict to actually generate. This is my personal favorite.
3. Make monster hordes a lot more periodical like Daimon invasions so that it's not just this constant wear but sort of major event that can cause much-needed interruption during long periods of conflict.
-
I like the idea of "monster radius" nexus things.
I understand that some of the monsters are "attracted" to realms with fewer nobles and more land. I can understand this to a certain point, though I also am not certain it is the best idea either. It seems like punishing players who have done well and expanded to have them suddenly assaulted by monsters and undead to take away what they conquered. Also, not hitting realms with large number of players and smaller areas seems guaranteed to allow those realms to expand at the expense of all others until they reach the magical tipping point of becoming a target themselves.
Personally, I want to fight other players, not unthinking monster hordes running around and gobbling up everything they can find.
-
I don't have the time to write a proper reply, but this discussion has been had on discord a few times and the answers were generally as follows:
Monster spawning depends on density rates. The idea is to get more nobles in fewer regions to actually promote interaction again. On Dwilight for instance, even without the big monster invasions, we hardly saw any pvp action and war. I do like the idea of the rogue range, but it will be quite some work I'd imagine.
BT also had little pvp action other than an upcoming assault of Nothoi/Fronen/Gotland vs BK (and whoever helps them), but it was just post invasion.
-
BT is still recovering from the last Daimon invasion, and was only beginning to get close to being ready to get back into PVP action.
Well...there was the Angmar assault on Gotland.
And the Fronen/BK civil war.
But there were still enough monster action going on that nations like Thalmarkin, Obea, and the Vales were barely holding on.
Now there are so many monsters and undead hitting every nation except Obea that Obea is the only nation expanding. Every other realm is being smashed back into something akin to what the Daimon Invasion just got done doing to them.
-
I've got plans for adjusting the way several things work so that the monsters will not be the same sort of problem in future that they are now. It will be somewhat similar to your second suggestion.
-
BT is still recovering from the last Daimon invasion, and was only beginning to get close to being ready to get back into PVP action.
Well...there was the Angmar assault on Gotland.
And the Fronen/BK civil war.
But there were still enough monster action going on that nations like Thalmarkin, Obea, and the Vales were barely holding on.
Now there are so many monsters and undead hitting every nation except Obea that Obea is the only nation expanding. Every other realm is being smashed back into something akin to what the Daimon Invasion just got done doing to them.
I can assure you that Obia'Syela is hit as well. Less so because our density is far better, but we're grinding down monsters after monsters still. We do have the largest army on the continent as well though, but even we are about to lose Rueffilo again because the monsters proved to strong.
And the fronen/BK war that was about to come resembled more a gangbang than a war though :p
-
Angmar is doing well, but I saw the map yesterday out of curiosity... BT is !@#$ed.
-
Even Ar Agyr is restricted to a small coastal strip now and those who know us know we're usually up for a bit of mayhem anywhere on BT. The only upside is that Aibhlidhn's honour has sky-rocketed since we first got involved with defending The Vales :)
-
Looking at the map today...and the food statistics...
We're...a month...maybe two...from half the realms simply being starved out...
Rough times ahead if the monster swarms keep eating all the food in the countryside like they have been...
-
Looking at the map today...and the food statistics...
We're...a month...maybe two...from half the realms simply being starved out...
Rough times ahead if the monster swarms keep eating all the food in the countryside like they have been...
Good. Some realms will finally die. Maybe people will move to other realms?
-
Good. Some realms will finally die. Maybe people will move to other realms?
NEVER
-
NEVER
;D
-
I prefer realms die due to the actions of players.
It makes for far more interesting stories than "death by monster swarms."
-
OK, then. Take action.
You know what actions will make things better for your people: Either get more of them into your realm, or move them to another realm where, together with the people who were already there, they can hold off the hordes.
Or, if your own people are doing OK, and your realm is in a good position to hold out, then step up outreach. Exhort the people in small realms, in fringe realms, to come and join you. Offer them safety, riches, semi-autonomy. Whatever it takes to save humanity, right? Especially if it's done by player action?
If you take an action, you accept the consequences of that action—and the reverse. If you desire a consequence, take the action that will result in it.
-
LOL... after years playing with another Battlemasters, I can tell... you will see Beluaterra die if you (not really you) expect us to gather around the same bonfire to play happy friends. We can love each others as players (most of the time, we don't), but when you talk about realms, people will die with their loved ones before joining the enemy (everyone else).
It's like the Simpsons meme... "Damn Battlemasters, they ruined Battlemaster..."
-
People hate giving up power. They will rather see BT die than actually move to join others.
If you ask realm A to join realm B then realm A will tell you to tell realm B to join realm A. It just repeats over and over until people get sick of fighting monsters.
Maybe BT should be closed for good.
-
Let's put it this way.
I joined this game to play war against other thinking foes. AKA people. It's called BattleMaster for a reason.
Losing realms to monster swarms and droughts is not the kind of AccountingMaster I enjoy playing.
If you want BT to be an interesting game to play, let us get back to our inter-realm politicking and the wars that were just starting to build after the recovering from the last invasion.
-
There is EC for that. BT and Dwi are not for PvP. They are for PvE.
-
I mean, they're not explicitly and solely for PvE.
But when I joined this game, back in 2004, BT (even though it didn't even have that name yet) was already known as the place to go if you wanted to fight against massive, insane hordes of monsters and undead.
-
If there wasn't the human obsession with taking over every rogue region until realms have more regions than nobles, there wouldn't be a need for the rogues. Inter-realm politicking will be a lot better if humanity isn't so spread out from each other.
-
If there wasn't the human obsession with taking over every rogue region until realms have more regions than nobles, there wouldn't be a need for the rogues. Inter-realm politicking will be a lot better if humanity isn't so spread out from each other.
It is not just because of humans. Look at placements of realms and cities. They aren't helping much either.
The game was never designed to be played with so few people.
Monsters probably shouldn't attack regions where realm borders touch too.
-
That's a very true issue right there.
This game was designed back when people could run two characters on a continent, and that loss has greatly reduced the numbers of characters available.
Especially when combined with the reduction in players over the years.
Even sinking islands has only masked the dropping population.
That doesn't mean I think the right answer to the issue is what is happening now. There have been some interesting ideas that would be cool. What is happening now is not one of them. Or so it appears.
Now Dwilight had an interesting idea where the West Continent was overrrun. I didn't live through it, and have heard horror stories of what it was like, especially since the devs didn't say what they were doing until after the fact, but I think it was a very good idea. Pick an area and say "here there be monsters. don't go there." It forced the human realms to contract into a tighter area to survive.
Perhaps something like that is called for on BT.
-
I didn't live through it, and have heard horror stories of what it was like, especially since the devs didn't say what they were doing until after the fact
I do not recall that being the case.
-
And here I thought that Dwilight was supposed to be SME but people were turning it into PvE by choosing to fight rogues for unclaimed land instead of fighting each other. Maybe it has changed but the massive hordes of monster/undead are mostly in one half of the continent so going there is something people are choosing to do. If you want to face other players instead of the hordes, stay on the east side and fight other players.
And as far as I recall Beluaterra had always been advertised as a land where one must struggle against the monster/undead masses. You couldn't (can't?) even start there and had to emigrate to Beluaterra. No one forced anyone there so hearing people who chose to go there complain about the monsters/undead just leave me baffled.
Of course, maybe more has changed since I last played then I realize. :-)
-
I understand fighting monsters, whether it is on Beluaterra or Dwilight. It is just part of the game. If you don't like it, don't be on the island.
It just makes me shake my head in confusion.
-
You can actually start on BT now.
Also, BT has had its invasions. That was the fun part of BT, fighting off rogues and Daimons and have a storyline.
Now it's just down to hordes and hordes of rogues taking over a region as soon as you get it. Noble density plays a key role and I get it. People are being forced out of their realms or locations which they have fought years to achieve.
Also, some pvp action was about to happen right when this code change was introduced, making us overwhelmed with monsters. And that's all we've been doing since.
-
Should probably state that testing islands are mainly for PvE until density is back up.
Or force people to at least create 1 character on EC since that is the only functioning island at the moment.
Hoping to get the noble density up by constantly attacking realms with monsters won't achieve anything. If you want to make people move closer, then either finish realms farther away from the center to force people to move closer or give people a density notification where they can see how many nobles they need to avoid getting hammered by monsters. Maybe if people see a sign, they might think about getting more people.
-
Should probably state that testing islands are mainly for PvE until density is back up.
Or force people to at least create 1 character on EC since that is the only functioning island at the moment.
+1
-
I have had the thought of creating a warning on the start takeover page, when a realm's density is too low, like we used to have the golden anti-spam notice for sending messages to the realm encouraging messages to be sent to duchy or army instead.
-
Why not just disable region take over if density too low? That will force the hand and make it where people can't expand.
-
I...like that. Why didn't I think of something so simple before? ???
EDIT: I think I like a two-stage process, first a red text warning on start takeover page, and then blocking takeovers once at a certain lowness.
-
Why not just disable region take over if density too low? That will force the hand and make it where people can't expand.
That sounds so much better than endless monsters... What the...
-
Why not just disable region take over if density too low? That will force the hand and make it where people can't expand.
(http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/mind-blown-gif-7.gif)
...Yeah, that's a good idea. You get a cookie.
I think it probably needs to be slightly more complex than that (perhaps a mechanic to explicitly abandon a region if density is low, so that you can prioritize keeping the ones you actually care about, and potentially even move the realm bit by bit if part of the problem is your location), but yes, I think we should implement that, and soon.
-
I think it probably needs to be slightly more complex than that (perhaps a mechanic to explicitly abandon a region if density is low, so that you can prioritize keeping the ones you actually care about, and potentially even move the realm bit by bit if part of the problem is your location)
Definitely, because without some ability to control which regions your realm governs, it could easily end up with isolated realms separated/surrounded by rogue regions with the realms unable to close the gaps because their takeover option is disabled.
Also, it might be worth thinking about whether the takeover option would be disabled just when trying to take a rogue region, or whether it would apply to all regions. If takeovers were also disabled when your low density realm was in a war with a high density realm, it could be pretty frustrating. Essentially not being able to fight back in any constructive way.
-
Definitely, because without some ability to control which regions your realm governs, it could easily end up with isolated realms separated/surrounded by rogue regions with the realms unable to close the gaps because their takeover option is disabled.
Also, it might be worth thinking about whether the takeover option would be disabled just when trying to take a rogue region, or whether it would apply to all regions. If takeovers were also disabled when your low density realm was in a war with a high density realm, it could be pretty frustrating. Essentially not being able to fight back in any constructive way.
Unsure about that last. Might be worth making the takeover option in that case send the region rogue (and call that out on the low-density realm's TO pages) instead of adding it to the low-density realm.
-
I like the idea.
Though maybe instead of making it a really hard "can't TO" thing, maybe we could make some kind of "resist TO" code where nations with a low Noble to land ratio would just find it harder to TO a region. Say either the TO options don't do as much, or that there is a "TO LOSS" rating running at each turn change with a higher loss for low density realms. Would that be easy to code?
Another idea would be to have an increased loss of region control for low density realms with the loss increasing drastically the farther the region is away from the capital.
Basically between the two it would drastically increase the regions that go rogue while making it harder to TO until the noble to region density increases to the target amount you wish to promote.
That would be a code that, once implemented, would be self regulating to the level you want it to be. You would never have to change it manually, once the bugs are worked out of it of course. ;)
-
I like making it harder to TO a region. Either make the progress of TO a very long one when your density is too low or increase the number of men required by a lot might do it. Making TO long as in will require like months to TO one region unless you have enough men. As for selecting which region to give up, once a realm falls below a certain level, they should definitely get a warning message first. Once it falls below the threshold, then the ruler should be given an option to let a region go rogue.
-
I prefer the simplicity of warning message, then no takeovers. I like the concept of a ruler Abandoning a Region. I like low-density realms blocked from TOing being able to TO a higher-density realm's region into rogue status.
I'm thinking of warning message for realms below 3 nobles per region and blocked takeovers/converting-region-to-rogue takeovers for realms below 2 nobles per region.
EDIT: Upon further reflection of some realm densities on certain continents, I might be more inclined to block TOs/allow converting to rogue TOs for realms under 1.5, and raise it to 2 at a later time.
-
Let's not forget that the various maps on BM are HIGHLY unequal, with various pockets of pretty crappy regions. Poor cities are usually surrounded by poor regions. Often, for a number of reasons, those poor cities end up being capitals.
The more successful realms that start out in poor capitals try to eventually expand to take better lands nearby, sometimes they eventually migrate their capital to their better conquests.
To put a hard limit on realm expansion would force all the people in crappy regions to forever be stuck in crappy regions, because they'd never even be allowed to expand up to better lands.
Also, what motivations will be left for war, if conquest is out of the picture? Remember all those wars that realms wage to plunder their neighbors? Yea, I don't either. Regardless of what we would want realms to fight over, the one thing that ever truly motivates war is territorial conquest.
-
Let's not forget that the various maps on BM are HIGHLY unequal, with various pockets of pretty crappy regions. Poor cities are usually surrounded by poor regions. Often, for a number of reasons, those poor cities end up being capitals.
The more successful realms that start out in poor capitals try to eventually expand to take better lands nearby, sometimes they eventually migrate their capital to their better conquests.
To put a hard limit on realm expansion would force all the people in crappy regions to forever be stuck in crappy regions, because they'd never even be allowed to expand up to better lands.
Also, what motivations will be left for war, if conquest is out of the picture? Remember all those wars that realms wage to plunder their neighbors? Yea, I don't either. Regardless of what we would want realms to fight over, the one thing that ever truly motivates war is territorial conquest.
There are poor regions that are actually strategically important. Not all regions' worth are determined by stats alone.
-
Also, what motivations will be left for war, if conquest is out of the picture? Remember all those wars that realms wage to plunder their neighbors? Yea, I don't either. Regardless of what we would want realms to fight over, the one thing that ever truly motivates war is territorial conquest.
That's already effectively limiting you if you don't have enough nobles.
-
Expansion sounds good but what you really want seems to be is something to motivate you from waging wars. There are plenty of those without the need for expansion.
What you really need is a sense of progression. Once your realm can't expand anymore, you will need to find other things to keep you busy. Poor regions can be rebalanced at some point or maybe that feature where you can add additional buildings to your estate can fix that issue a bit.
-
Yea, Zakky, I'm sure that's why you are sitting in the realm with a bunch of the best regions on the continent, and didn't go to Highmarch to live off all those crap regions. Because Highmarch is "balanced" by being "strategically important", right, it has soooo much appeal?
I would like a TO alternative to instead turn a region rogue rather than taking it. But sometimes, especially small realms, need to take some buffer regions, either for strategic reasons or just in order to get contact with better regions. Because often realms start out with poor cities, and would love to migrate to a nearby bigger/better city, but the game would now tell them "no, stay forever in your !@#$ city, never expand"?
Seriously, guys. Just because we want people to fight more wars and to fight wars for other reasons than territorial expansion doesn't make this wish a reality. Removing motivations for war doesn't lead to their substitution, people won't suddenly want to go to war for other reasons just because they can't expand anymore. Instead, they'll have less reasons to go to war.
Armies can already loot regions rogue. Realms almost never do so. And certainly don't enter a war for this purpose. Adding a pseudo-TO mechanic is convenient, but adds nothing fundamentally new. It won't make people go to war.
"Get more players" is a !@#$ argument. BM's population is dwindling. Most sudden increases are done with cliques/clans, which are toxic to the game.
The game should just adapt to its dwindling player base, and I don't think that the solution is turning half of the continents rogue. Just look at Dwi: the vast rogue expanses that seperate all the realms make it hard for them to interact with each other. Or BT, same thing. Is that what we want on EC and Colonies too? A bunch of tiny realms, where every noble has 3 titles (yay, promotions!), and where cities are never sieged, and wars almost never waged, because people know it'll be pointless?
All of this glorifying tiny realms is ridiculous. When you look at the tiny realms the game has had, they have rarely been a source for war. Sometimes bigger realms have used them as pretexes, but not the small realms of themselves. On BT, wars were largely brought by the large and superlarge realms. Riombara. Enweil. And other central large realms. On Dwi, a continent that hasn't a super great history for wars, it's again a lot around the big guys. Astrum, mostly. Luria some. On EC, Sirion has been involved in a lot. FEI and AT, too, large realms got !@#$ for blocking peace, but they were also made by wars, and largely responsible for the wars that were had.
Large realms move the game. Their wars are meaningful, they can change the face of the continent. Why? Because they aren't stuck to a single city-capital, that they are forced to overstuff with militia (because losing it means dying), because they can funnel a lot of wealth from safe hinter regions that allows them to fund significant armies, armies that can attack anywhere without fear of random militias defeating them.
This game was designed around realms that have at least 20k CS mobile armies. The tiny realm obsession is deeply misguided. Density is good. Density for density's sake is not. That's like saying "poor countries don't have enough daily calories, let's send them a lot of free sugar". It doesn't solve the problem. It can even make it worse. Because what matters more than noble:region is noble:title, because we want people competing for titles for a realm to be dynamic. But there's more titles than just lordships. Ever realm has basically a fixed minimum of 7 non-lord titles: ruler, general, banker, judge, duke, marshal, vice-marshal. Some realms will have more, if they have more duchies or armies.
So if you constantly force realms to be smaller, when back in the days you could have had 30 nobles for 15 regions in a realm, instead you'd have two 15 noble realms... the title:noble ratio decreaes from 1.36:1 to 2x 1:1.03. Title density decreased by a third, and every one of these nobles has half the amount of people to interact with. But, "yay, more smaller realms!"???
Some of the old big realms were problematic. But you are all fooling yourselves by jumping to "big=bad, thus small=good". Small realms are not proportionally any better than larger realms were. A lot of big realms were bad, but so are a lot of the small realms. And the smaller your realm is, the more it has to loose, thus the more risk-averse it will tend to be. Because, once more, when your only city is your capital, and you don't own much land around it, you really can't risk doing much or going too far without putting the very survival of your realm in peril.
-
I have some plans for how to improve the situation and better adapt to the smaller playerbase; I have a major message-system-related project I've been working on for a while that I need to finish up first, but once it's debugged and live, I'll give more details about what I plan to do to address the broader issue.
-
I would reiterate, though, that I think that having continents half-rogue is a really suboptimal solution, as is forcing realms to be small. On Dwi, it's okay. Kinda. Not sure how I feel about it on BT yet, but it is justifiable. But on EC and Colonies? No way...
I would far rather let realms take regions that have a novel status ("demesne" in a previous feature request, or imperial, or however you want to call it), where it belongs to a realm, but doesn't count against any caps, with the tradeoff of not yielding much. No lord. Maybe knights, or not. Reduced production.
Denser realms would have an advantage, but the game would not place a hard cap that forces successful realms to stop what they are doing.
-
I would far rather let realms take regions that have a novel status ("demesne" in a previous feature request, or imperial, or however you want to call it), where it belongs to a realm, but doesn't count against any caps, with the tradeoff of not yielding much. No lord. Maybe knights, or not. Reduced production.
Denser realms would have an advantage, but the game would not place a hard cap that forces successful realms to stop what they are doing.
And that is the gist of what I am planning, though some details are still TBD until after I finish up the project I'm on now. (Name is one of them.)
-
My idea of making takeovers take longer and having regions lose control and go rogue easier was based on the idea that this is a game where lords and nobles are supposed to be powerful.
And visible. If there are too few nobles in a realm, compared to its size, the realm simply would not look "good" to the peasants. They would resist being part of the realm.
That might encourage players to band together to make stronger realms. Or it might not. Players are notoriously unwilling to give up their small kingdoms and kingships for the greater good. ;)
I do love Chenier's idea of the Imperial or Protectorate regions. To make that work, I would suggest that when a region is taken over it become an Imperial region rather than joining a duchy. And if a region loses its lord and is not given a new lord within...say...a week...it become an Imperial region by default. The ruler should have the right to hand those out to nobles if he wants, or to keep them as Imperial regions.
I honestly don't know how that would work with the idea of trying to concentrate nobles in a smaller number of closer realms, but I love the idea and think it would be awesome.
-
I honestly don't know how that would work with the idea of trying to concentrate nobles in a smaller number of closer realms, but I love the idea and think it would be awesome.
It goes completely against it, but with the possibility of holding land (however loosely) that you don't need to actually assign Lords and Knights to, it changes the dynamic quite a bit.
I'm hesitant to attempt to apply any particular social/gameplay pressures on top of such a change until we've seen how things start to settle out.
-
That was the feeling I had as well.
But I still really like the idea. ;)
-
Another thing I notice in Madina... people are complaining about being arrested by the monsters. I know, I know... they should just move out and join Luria or watherver... but...
Rogues have no judges. There are no agreements. There is nothing interesting about getting stuck for days (when you do not have gold to pay) and seeing your troops defecting while you lose, in addition to the CS itself, points of honor. I'm already considering pausing my chars in Dwilight/BT and staying only in EC and the Colonies (yes, there the game is better since it's still PvP... the sad part it's that just one turn per day). On top of players leaving, there are some mechanics helping them lose interest in the game.
I also know that all dev's service is voluntary and I don't know anything at all about coding to be able to help, but, well... if there is only one little magic button you can squeeze to frustrate less of those left, that would be a step to keep PvE less infuriating.
-
I don't agree with the specific request... but I wouldn't mind soldier pay taking into consideration wounds and capture. It is kinda lame, regardless of what prison you are in.
-
You're not even playing against someone... just against a code. What is the reason for being denied three days of play (at least) - in a game with a playerbase that is always decreasing - when you are playing against a code? For me, and for others I've seen in Dwilight, soon people will stay just with Colonies/EC. I can understand it in BT, where we had invasions and demons and whatever... but Dwilight was suposed to be something else.
-
For most of Dwilight's history, it was strongly "human vs monsters".
-
And like when the west was swept, the monsters are always winning. But maybe it's just my nostalgia or the fact that I have to get used that BM is no longer what I used to like. My own problem, it seems.
Moving on.
-
Dwilight was the roleplaying island.
-
Dwilight was the roleplaying island.
That was my impression as well... at least until the western invasion and during my time in Luria while the continent was still more concerned with religious wars than with monsters invading by the sea.
-
Dwilight was the roleplaying island.
That is incorrect.
The Far East was the RP-heavy island; however, that was never properly defined or consistently enforced.
Dwilight is the island of Serious Medieval Atmosphere. This has always been much more clearly defined, and is much less strict than the FEI's. It means that characters are expected to act like they are a) real people, b) nobles, c) in a medieval setting.
Nowadays, this requires much less of a change in mindset compared to the rest of the game, because much of what makes it up spread to the other continents after Dwilight was opened; however, previously, there was a lot more casual use of modernisms, silly behaviour, and other blatant violations of Serious Medieval Atmosphere.
-
Ok, but it would not be so bad to have Dwilight as another EC instead of BT.
Tried Madina... time to go back to Astrum, I think. Or any realm involved with PvP.
-
East Continent is the only one doing PVP right now that I know of.
Though I don't have anyone in the Far East. I couldn't maintain interest at only one turn per day. I'd forget to check it and just...finally walked away rather than let down the nation I was in.
BT and Dwilight are currently only doing monster fighting because of the new code, with no opportunity to fight each other.
-
East Continent is the only one doing PVP right now that I know of.
Though I don't have anyone in the Far East. I couldn't maintain interest at only one turn per day. I'd forget to check it and just...finally walked away rather than let down the nation I was in.
BT and Dwilight are currently only doing monster fighting because of the new code, with no opportunity to fight each other.
BT and Dwilight are only doing monster fighting because, despite knowing of the new code, the realms all still continue the same old behaviors that leads to monster invasions. Dwi especially.
Both continents kinda feel on their death throes now, though. It would be nice to see more PvP on at least one non-EC island... but it wouldn't just be a question of removing the monsters, because that wouldn't do any good whatsoever. You'd need to restrict the sizes of the continents... like with the ice age and blight, and we all know how well that went.
Besides, BT and Dwi are both populated by one super-dense realm that have... irregular player numbers. Even if you put Obea in Dyomoque, and all the other realms of BT all around them... they'd probably still dominate the whole island. Same kinda with Luria, minus the part where you can't really surround Luria as it's all sea, deserts and mountains. It's basically the BT and Dwi Greater Xavaxes. Except that those two continents don't have any realms, or collections of realms, that would in any way be able to match them.
I would really not see any fun in that. I'd rather fight monsters.
-
The recent monster invasion interrupted the most interesting PVP we'd had on BT since before the last Daimon invasion ended a continental civil war that matched the King of Kings of Thalmarkin and all its allied realms against...everybody else.
Very similar to the current situation in the East Continent actually.
Now we are back to monster fighting...*sighs*
-
You mean everyone ganging up on 1 small realm? Wouldn't call it that interesting tbh
-
Sometimes, it happens when small realms decides do piss off everyone else... at least that was PvP. I played in Goatland and after I deleted my acc to re-start the Serpentis, I joined Angmar... I was in the two sides of the war and I enjoyed both... much more than fighting monsters. Even losing, it's always better to lose to another players. At some point you can negotiate, you can kick off the Ruler and appoint another to negotiate or accept the terms... you cannot do that when fighting against a code.
"We will have monster until you change your mentality" isn't working. Not everyone is at the Forum following the discussions on the "new mentality". People are stubborn... instead of join the new mentality, they will fight monsters until the end and then some will just leave the continent/game. As players, many of us have personal preferences and that reflect in our chars... for example, if I love Madina and Madina lose to the monsters, I will not join my enemies or the realms/players I don't like to play with just because we need smaller realms. All that "playing with friends" is nice, but I saw people avoiding to play with me and sometimes I avoided some of them as well.
Also, you have to consider that, unhapilly, we will always have less players, not more. Sink more islands? Reduce the maps? I don't know, but the monsters aren't working either.
-
1) It wasn't everyone. Many realms were remaining neutral.
2) It wasn't a realm. It was a secessionist movement against the proper realm of the land. ;)
3) Obeah was making noises to support them, and considering how many nobles Obeah has recruited in recent months, that would have been an interesting conflict to see.
-
What I dislike about the monster situation is the randomness of it. Having constant pressure against expanding too far is fine as long as there's something meaningful realms can do to push at that limit if they're active or their armies are commanded well or they're well-served with adventurers. At least give the damn things some intelligence.
Prior to this latest influx BT was a busy continent with PvP wars in the aftermath of the last Invasion and several realms working in alliance on PvE around the Vales. Now what do we have? Widely separated realms with little contact hanging on by the skin of their teeth. IT IS NOT AN IMPROVEMENT. Just dial down the damn settings and let people get back to what they were working on beforehand.
Frankly this whole issue annoys me. I've watched a decade of devs and vocal players here on the forum trying to dictate how this game should be played and during that time player numbers have crashed. I personally think the two things are quite strongly correlated and as one of those with an atypical style of play (ie who does things which broadly annoy the vocal forces on here) I sometimes feel unwelcome myself.
Yes BM's a text-based web game, yes there are prettier alternatives out there, yes it's developed part-time by enthusiasts, and yes there are players happy to sit on their privileges and not risk them. But it's also a solid strategy game with a strong player-generated background and there are plenty of us who look on power as an excuse to make the game fun for our fellow players rather than enrich ourselves.
Players invest emotionally in their realms. They care about them. Having a realm destroyed hurts and it should do because that means there was something worthwhile about the effort that went in to creating it. The hurt is acceptable when it's caused by another player faction or a GM-controlled event like an Invasion, and it sets up interesting long-term feuds and motivations. It's possible that soon I'll get my revenge for Fontan and perhaps I'll even get payback for Minas Thalion and Alowca in time. I can think of no other game where events from seven years ago have that kind of itch factor to them.
But when a realm is destroyed purely as a result of mechanics designed to enforce a particular view of how the game should be played that frankly sucks. Solve these supposed problems in a way that encourages players, not one which punishes.
-
I have lost multiple realms to Daimons.
I don't really care. I just go on and rebuild. There's no emotional involvement there. No great foe to stand against and such. Just a disembodied foe that comes and goes in time.
But when the Elven Masters of Sirion destroyed Oligarch? Oh. THAT I remember. THAT I continue to fight on and on and ever down that road.
And I enjoy playing that dynamic. My character is the guy who professes no wish to be involved in political wrangling and will never try to take over or betray the realm he is in. Because his only goal in life is liberating Oligarch and saving humanity from the Elven Masters of Sirion. It's a fun role to play and has really taken over that character.
That's the difference in my eyes between losing realms to a generic monstery enemy and another alliance of players.
-
Recover Fontan?
Protect the world against the evil Elven Masters of Sirion?
I (we/us/Sirion) did something right, after all 8)
-
Monsters are there to force players to move closer. If you want to cling on to the land then well it will just be a big limiting factor for your expansion. If you want to expand and border another human realm, you might want to give up on the realm located in some remote corner of your continent and join a realm located closer to other human realms to form a denser realm. There are way too many realms with too few players. Either you join other realms to make it denser or stay spread and fight monsters endlessly.
-
Monsters are there to force players to move closer. If you want to cling on to the land then well it will just be a big limiting factor for your expansion. If you want to expand and border another human realm, you might want to give up on the realm located in some remote corner of your continent and join a realm located closer to other human realms to form a denser realm. There are way too many realms with too few players. Either you join other realms to make it denser or stay spread and fight monsters endlessly.
The monsters ironically haven't helped at all with forcing players closer to each other, but rather seen the map get further away from each other. For example, I remember when realms like Luria and D'Hara had borders with other realms. Because of the monster invasions, there are holes being created between realms taking up regions that once bordered another player realm. I remember when Astrum, Sol, HD, Luria and Swordfell were all interconnected. Now, those connections are separated. Yes, Luria has no borders with any one realm....
-
Monsters are there to force players to move closer.
For all I saw, they're just moving away... from the continent/game. Also, even more populated realms are facing the monsters. If the only way to avoid it is to have just two/three realms, maybe would be better to just put an announcement in the front page of BM letting everyone know it. Or, you know, smaller maps.
Even if you put such announcement, I still doubt people will just leave if you let them decide. They will decide for stay and fight till the end and then leave instead to move to another realm. After all, who will decide wich realm should be more populated? With smaller maps, the devs do the cut and you follow or you leave.
-
Recover Fontan?
Revenge is a dish best served cold, and without the inconvenience of having to do the washing up afterwards ;)
-
Here's my thought and feedbacks.
On Dwilight, I have a character in Morek Empire, maybe the word Empire does not do the realm name any justice nowadays. We have like 2 cities, 2 townsland, 3 rural regions. We even had 1 more rural region(Zhongyuan) at one time, but the rogue threat forced us to give up Zhongyuan to HD. Anyway today HD is down to its last region, Donghaiwei, its capital. Look like HD about to die due to rogue attacks. Location wise Morek Empire cannot expand, as it is surrounded by all its bigger neighbors, Arnor and Astrum. Nobody go and pick fight with someone bigger size than you without allies help, that much for sure. At one time in Morek past history when Avernus Ruler Mayhem wanted to buy Muspel and Muspelheim(1 town and 1 city) from Morek, my character rejected due to his thinking Morek had potential to grow and gain more nobles. Fast forward to present time, we do not fare any better. True we had war with HD, but that war was cut short by rogue attacks. We even ventured to Westgard and D'hara lands at one time to aid them against rogue from the west. We were planning for another war, but then rogue got in the way again. The so-called rogue stuck at sea and cannot on board the sea, then they came in massive waves. Given Morek has many lands near the sea, our realm is unlucky in that geography aspect. So rural region Mark was overrun again. Then Nimh the next rural region. We have region lord for all regions except Mark, trying to attract players through war but war cut short by rogue. We back to square one, maybe we should have sell Muspel and Muspelheim to Avernus for thousand of gold, Mayhem offered us gold, I should have accepted it even though my character ran a Referendum and all last 5 nobles of Morek old did not want accept it. Today as we taken over Nimh and Mark and Aegir Deep, rogue overwhelmed all the defense and rural regions there. Now we trying to form a link between Aegir and Muspelhelm/Muspel through Aegir Deep. But with no rural region to feed cities and townland food, my character is starting to regret that he did not sell Muspel/Muspelheim to Avernus. So in character we should not takeover back any of our lands nor even plan for another war against a human realm. We should sit tight, place 10K CS in a rural region, food is becoming scarce on market. So a few wealthy nobles among us, try invest in cities and boost its Production. If this rogue attack/reduce our rural region/starve us is the way to use up our Family Wealth, yes you have done it, congratulations!
On Beluaterra. My character is recently appointed as Duke of a city in Caelint. Normally everyone will congratulate her. but then the rogue attacks started at the time of her appointment. All the rural regions that link 2 cities in Caelint are lost to rogue. Stuck in the city, placing another 10K CS militia, is that really a long term solution to rogue attacks? Watching rogue keep spawning in rogue lands, each time our army took 1 region, we suffered enough casualties to fall back and refit in our capital, only to repeat it again. Not to mention after rogue attacks that eat up peasants, how do Population of peasants recover so slow.
Overall it appears that everyone stuck at their cities on Dwilight and Beluaterra. Perhaps it is a new way of living on Battlemaster worlds. Get out of cities, you get captured by rogue, enter prison. With every realm at their cities, it is only a matter of time to see which realm blink their eyes first and lose their whole realm it seems. It is like that Survivor show on TV. Who survive the longest, win the prize of Survivor Winner.
Last but not least, I miss Fontan on East Island.
-
Overall it appears that everyone stuck at their cities on Dwilight and Beluaterra. Perhaps it is a new way of living on Battlemaster worlds.
You gave me a good idea for a RP. Despite that, yes, Dwilight and BT are doomed. At least in Angmar we can take a region while another is taken. The circle of (un)life.
-
You gave me a good idea for a RP. Despite that, yes, Dwilight and BT are doomed. At least in Angmar we can take a region while another is taken. The circle of (un)life.
Dwilight I think may still be salvageable, though the mass invasions Luria's had of late don't seem to reflect any appreciable drop in active player count suggesting there are unintended consequences in the underlying rogue spawn mechanics. We have the noble density of Westgard and the Adventurer density of Swordfell do if Luria can't stand against the hordes I don't think there's much hope for anyone else.
Admittedly we're too physically big and our long-planned realm split may change the economics of dealing with the hordes so they become more of a nuisance than an existential threat.
Beluaterra though feels like a lost cause unless we either give up much of our history and merge realms permanently in one small area, or else do something radically different with what the Devs have gifted us. I'm happy to try the radically different and anyone who wants to know what that might look like can contact me IG :)
-
Luria has as many regions as the next two largest realms combined. It's a little early to say it's facing an existential threat.
-
Dwilight I think may still be salvageable, though the mass invasions Luria's had of late don't seem to reflect any appreciable drop in active player count suggesting there are unintended consequences in the underlying rogue spawn mechanics. We have the noble density of Westgard and the Adventurer density of Swordfell do if Luria can't stand against the hordes I don't think there's much hope for anyone else, just providing additional information.
To add a couple notes. Not saying there may not be something to be looked at and adjusted.
With Dwilight's size and distance of rogue travel, it may be that rogues striking are hitting not due to current density but due to density from a week or two ago. A target is chosen and then monsters have to traverse rogues, seas, and then more regions to reach their destination, by which density has shifted. This is partly why the pressure is cyclical.
It takes both realm and continental density into account.
-
Given the monster/Undead swarms plaguing the island, I noticed Angmar has the most (by one) regions under her command, and the fourth highest noble count (and second highest Advie number). Not bad for a realm that started as a questionable spinoff of Nothoi.
From a post in the Locals. Yes, Angmar is doing good... we have a good density, I think. Advs are working very well with the nobles. We lose a region, take another or retake the previous one. We're trying, but I must say... it's just boring. This have to end before we lose the realms or the players... or both.
-
To add a couple notes. Not saying there may not be something to be looked at and adjusted.
With Dwilight's size and distance of rogue travel, it may be that rogues striking are hitting not due to current density but due to density from a week or two ago. A target is chosen and then monsters have to traverse rogues, seas, and then more regions to reach their destination, by which density has shifted. This is partly why the pressure is cyclical.
It takes both realm and continental density into account.
Yea.
-
Nothoi is holding as well.
Very high noble count, one of the best economies on the continent, and one of the strongest militaries as well, and we are holding the food producing regions around the capital which allows us to feed the capital.
But there's only so much enjoyment you can take out of killing NPCs in job lots.
-
After reading through, it appears nobles density realms will survive the Purging by Rogue.
But reading Zaki reply somewhere on Peasants militia misuse against many armies forces attacks got me thinking. Bordering on game abuse of course.
Using Peasant Militia to fight off the rogue. Especially if you down to last few regions, I do not think any sane nobles will give up their realm for good and without going down fighting at the very least. Players can RP their characters fighting atop the wall of their capital city one last time before they abandon it and join other realms to close the Density issues.
I wonder if some realms will call Peasant Militia to fight rogue and its effectiveness.
-
Well... if the monsters are to "help with density" and to "teach players to move to dense relms", why the hell destroying these realms are helping!? It's a question of time? We wait until there is just one champion realm and the players move there to live happy together? That will be Angmar vs Nothoi? I can't understand this mentality of "destroy things to build them up" while everyone knows that BM is not attracting new players, just losing the ones we already have.
-
Luria has as many regions as the next two largest realms combined. It's a little early to say it's facing an existential threat.
You don't have to manage the food flows ;)
-
With Dwilight's size and distance of rogue travel, it may be that rogues striking are hitting not due to current density but due to density from a week or two ago. A target is chosen and then monsters have to traverse rogues, seas, and then more regions to reach their destination, by which density has shifted. This is partly why the pressure is cyclical.
It takes both realm and continental density into account.
Realm density we can work with, continental density not so much :)
-
Yeah. Continental density is just too much. It punishes everyone. Realms that can keep high enough density should be rewarded by not getting harassed by monsters to death. Maybe when the continental density is too low, monsters should try to kill off small realms with only their capital remaining.
-
Yeah. Continental density is just too much. It punishes everyone. Realms that can keep high enough density should be rewarded by not getting harassed by monsters to death. Maybe when the continental density is too low, monsters should try to kill off small realms with only their capital remaining.
Well, that's kind of it.
Continental density = low => spawn rogues
rogues then chase the low density realms.
Dense realms can get a bit of the heat if they are along the transit lines, or just due to lag between triggers and resolution, but shouldn't face existential threats.
-
rogues then chase the low density realms.
More like everyone.
-
More like everyone.
Well everyone keeps overextending.
The code was changed to make them target low-density realms. In Westgard, we've seen a huge difference since that change.
-
Well everyone keeps overextending.
Even with 5 nobles Morek just overextended in Dwilight as well. Now we have 7 nobles, Aegir city, Aegir Deep, Muspel, Muspelheim, Nimh(rural) and Mark(rural) we have all these 6 regions at one time, no wonder we are attacked by rogue :o
Morek need feed 2 cities and 2 townlands. Geography wise we are in trouble unless we give up city and townsland. History wise these are ancient Morek lands. Noble wise we going be a dead realm. 7 nobles is enough for what, 1 city and 1 rural if we consider noble density. However each of Morek city border 1 townsland instead of 1 rural region. Time to accept Westgard offer IC to move there I guess to fight monsters everyday and players slowly decreasing due to fight non-human instead of their favorite fighting human realms.
Today Muspel is overrun by rogue 24K CS. All militia dead in Muspel, yay! :P
Arnor is also having trouble with rogue it seems. Everyone is being attacked left and right and nobody can send help. Unlike last time Morek could fight alongside Westgard and D'Hara against rogue. This time realms co-operation out of window unless both realms very nearby each other cities.
If it is the intention of developers to ask us to move to other realm and consolidate the nobles number there, not every players read the Battlemaster forum. Normally I would suggest put a big Red Bold Highlighted in Dwilight saying everyone in East be ready to move to other realm if your realm is destroyed. A fair warning if testing rogue prowess in Dwilight on eastern after pushing everyone from the western is going to be implemented. Not every player will move to other realm, but this is probably the best way to sustain the players with a notice. Probably include a message saying you not going to fight human realm on Dwilight, you will fight rogue for the rest of your character life on Dwilight. Fair warning to new character creation.
-
Madina: 3 regions / 12 nobles / 4 advs (I don't know if they count).
Still suffering attacks. If you ask them if they want to leave the realm and the 3 regions, they will say NO. In truth, they are still considering where tey can expand and how to defend it.
So, yes... better put it in a big outdoor with red letters.
-
Did they pick up estates? I think the density targeting thing looks at that on a regional basis.
-
My 2 cents which is probably not amounting to much...
In Nothoi, my character is trying to hold onto Creasur. My character has spent quite a few days in a rouge prison after waves and waves of rouges knock down peasant militia and the troops they have. Try to get to capitol and it's almost always either injury or getting captured. Continent density is 2.85. In theory, this should mean the roaming hordes should be diminishing, but it doesn't seem to have happened yet. The food situation in Nothoi from what I was told by the previous banker is that we can't feed everywhere. Perhaps as players we should abandon Creasur, but it's a connection city the helps to bridge a gap between Nothoi and Vales.
In D'Hara, I hear my fellow players frustrations about always doing battle against rouges. D'Hara is one of those particular states where the primary regions of it has always been on islands. I've personally brought up proposals in character to reduce us down to a limited number of regions and/or supported moving elsewhere in an attempt to end the onslaught, but both proposals are unfavorable to players. Right now, it's mainly just trying to make sure the regions don't starve to death, wait for a horde to take it over, reclaims the region, try to rebuild it up and rinse and repeat.
I'm still a fan of a prevention system of retaking regions instead of monsters. I fear that is this continues with monsters "punishing" density issues, this will lead (if it hasn't with some already) to thinking monsters are the dev's punishment for player population going below what they want. This could in turn cause players to give up resulting in more "punishment" creating a very negative feedback cycle.
-
Why though? This system works. It keeps density high by making people lose regions. It has a bit of downside of making people quit the game but it will react to it and make people lose more regions. It will repeat it until people suck it up or the island becomes empty.
-
The truth is that Nothoi can feed all of its regions.
Just not at 100%. Basically, the cities are stuck at 50% rations until we can get more farmlands. There is no reason to starve any region in Nothoi, unless the goal is to drive regions into rebellion so they leave Nothoi.
Nothoi is well above the 3 characters per region number that the mods say should be the goal and should trigger a lessening of rogue swarms targeting them.
Not that I've seen a major drop. Reeds continues to be hit by monster and undead swarms on a daily basis in sufficient numbers to keep me from repairing the walls.
-
The truth is that Nothoi can feed all of its regions.
Just not at 100%. Basically, the cities are stuck at 50% rations until we can get more farmlands. There is no reason to starve any region in Nothoi, unless the goal is to drive regions into rebellion so they leave Nothoi.
Nothoi is well above the 3 characters per region number that the mods say should be the goal and should trigger a lessening of rogue swarms targeting them.
Not that I've seen a major drop. Reeds continues to be hit by monster and undead swarms on a daily basis in sufficient numbers to keep me from repairing the walls.
But other realms on the continent haven't reached 3 noble per realm average. So Nothoi must suffer as well. Nothoi better help other realms reach that goal by attacking them.
-
But other realms on the continent haven't reached 3 noble per realm average. So Nothoi must suffer as well. Nothoi better help other realms reach that goal by attacking them.
I seriously hope this isn't serious because it sounds a lot like terrible reasoning I think we all long ago finally agreed was terrible.
AFAIK, no realm on BT can manage to attack any other.
-
I seriously hope this isn't serious because it sounds a lot like terrible reasoning I think we all long ago finally agreed was terrible.
AFAIK, no realm on BT can manage to attack any other.
Good that new RC system is in place. No more too RNG reliant crap anymore. There isn't a single RC from the time when Tom was still around unfortunately. No more 99/99/99 RCs left. But some RCs did last for a very long time.
-
The truth is that Nothoi can feed all of its regions.
Just not at 100%. Basically, the cities are stuck at 50% rations until we can get more farmlands. There is no reason to starve any region in Nothoi, unless the goal is to drive regions into rebellion so they leave Nothoi.
I think that's part of the problem. If Nothoi gets one more region, they will be at 2.85 below the 3 mark which means the monsters will spike and we'll lose a region. 100% isn't a possibility at this current time without causing the code to work against us. Speaking on an OOC level, we'd have to give up at least one more city to be able to take 1 rural region.
But other realms on the continent haven't reached 3 noble per realm average. So Nothoi must suffer as well. Nothoi better help other realms reach that goal by attacking them.
Why should a realm that is complying with the desire of the devs be punished? That more or less is saying we have to try to control what others who we can not even interfere with due to the monster horders. Nothoi attacking a realm wouldn't help at all as if we take the region, then we fail the standard. It's a catch 22 there. That's of course assuming that we could get to another realm without being captured and injured by rouges. Nothoi only has one border with another realm.
Why though? This system works. It keeps density high by making people lose regions. It has a bit of downside of making people quit the game but it will react to it and make people lose more regions. It will repeat it until people suck it up or the island becomes empty.
Is it? Has it made any continent at 3 nobles per region? If the goal is to try to get people to think about quitting out of pure frustation, I would say that the system is aiding that. As someone quits, it decreases the density which throws it back into a vicious cycle. You are right that this pattern will continue until players get frustrated enough to just leave the game and the island becomes empty. If the goal is to empty an island, just sink whichever island you don't want. Let us know about it. We won't like it, but it's the dev's call. If you want to shut battlemaster down completely, not much we could do about it.
If the goal is to reward those who are trying to meet the requirements, it has failed. We have to try to make others comply even when there's neither a logical IC reason nor a way for us to really even contact most of them. Remember, we can't just contact a whole realm. In theory, we could demand their leader tell their people to only settle in x regions. If we struggle now getting people in our own realms to do it and we are on the same team, do you really think the "other" realms that we may or may not even have a vested interest in will comply?
-
My 2 cents which is probably not amounting to much...
In Nothoi, my character is trying to hold onto Creasur. My character has spent quite a few days in a rouge prison after waves and waves of rouges knock down peasant militia and the troops they have. Try to get to capitol and it's almost always either injury or getting captured. Continent density is 2.85. In theory, this should mean the roaming hordes should be diminishing, but it doesn't seem to have happened yet. The food situation in Nothoi from what I was told by the previous banker is that we can't feed everywhere. Perhaps as players we should abandon Creasur, but it's a connection city the helps to bridge a gap between Nothoi and Vales.
In D'Hara, I hear my fellow players frustrations about always doing battle against rouges. D'Hara is one of those particular states where the primary regions of it has always been on islands. I've personally brought up proposals in character to reduce us down to a limited number of regions and/or supported moving elsewhere in an attempt to end the onslaught, but both proposals are unfavorable to players. Right now, it's mainly just trying to make sure the regions don't starve to death, wait for a horde to take it over, reclaims the region, try to rebuild it up and rinse and repeat.
I'm still a fan of a prevention system of retaking regions instead of monsters. I fear that is this continues with monsters "punishing" density issues, this will lead (if it hasn't with some already) to thinking monsters are the dev's punishment for player population going below what they want. This could in turn cause players to give up resulting in more "punishment" creating a very negative feedback cycle.
I understand you holding on to Creasur on Belu. My character tried to do the same with Keffa, holding on. However it is a matter of time before the city defense is overwhelmed given the amount of rogue force out there :(
Also to help you with rogue force keep capturing your character as they do to my character. Try Evasive, then try unitless. I believe this will be fixed later too ::)
Also while I do not understand why rogue need gold before free our characters, not that it matters. All this while I have been led to believe rogue spawn from rogue regions, so trying to minimize the rogue regions. It is not my fault, since the rogue pops out next door region and says they will eat the food there so peasants call for help or eat peasants already.
I wonder how many realms will die before this rogue invasion ends. A city that survive without rural regions, how much food needed to feed a city that full of militia. Once rogue invasion ends, there will be no shortage of realms taking rogue rural regions back, bringing back the characters density issue again.
But other realms on the continent haven't reached 3 noble per realm average. So Nothoi must suffer as well. Nothoi better help other realms reach that goal by attacking them.
The best pretense of war ever: I will attack you if you take that city/region. I will attack you to resolve the noble density in this continent/ Your realm must die in order for my realm to live. Sound do-able?
Overall this looks like a short term solution to ever lessening characters density in game. Unless you start to reduce the number of regions. And with many peasants crying in terror from dying by rogue, I wonder how region Population will recover.
-
I wonder how many realms will die before this rogue invasion ends. A city that survive without rural regions, how much food needed to feed a city that full of militia. Once rogue invasion ends, there will be no shortage of realms taking rogue rural regions back, bringing back the characters density issue again.
I think this underscores the entire issue. It's also why the monsters/undead prob will never go away entirely (or spawn back up again bigger if density goes down again.
First off, there are two types of monsters basically. Those passing through and those trying to TO your region. Rogues apparently pick a target and move there, but some regions are simply more often in the way then others. So even if your density is lower, if you're in the way of the rogue span and their target, you can still face the stacks (although if you hadn't fought them they'd simply move on away from your lands). Lower density means your regions are less likely to be picked as a target.
Tbh I had expected the rogue forces to be less strong by now, or equal of strength but residing more in rogue regions. This way they'd help ensure realms can't easily TO new regions (or fight the rogues) but those that don't expand are then hit less hard by the rogues.
-
I understand you holding on to Creasur on Belu. My character tried to do the same with Keffa, holding on. However it is a matter of time before the city defense is overwhelmed given the amount of rogue force out there :(
Yeah, eventually, Creasur will probably end up falling out of player control. I don't see as a player a sustainable method of holding it. My character, however, will try to hold it at all costs because of the legacy.
Also to help you with rogue force keep capturing your character as they do to my character. Try Evasive, then try unitless. I believe this will be fixed later too ::)
They've captured unitless and evasive. Not sure what the percentage is of rouges being able to find an evasive character, but it's a dice throw there. Good ideas though...
Also while I do not understand why rogue need gold before free our characters
Can't speak for other realms or regions, but when your region is hit wave after wave, you have little to no gold. Add in missing tax day due to injury or capture and it really adds up. Last time, the rouges wanted 100+ gold to be released. So, it's stay in prison, lose positions, come back, and then wait for a tax day.
-
Creasur needs to be sacrificed to Mordok! ::)
Yea, in BK we've pretty much given up hope. We'll stuff Wudenkin with militia, and run it on low rations ad eternam. We'll be too poor to afford a mobile army, not that it matters because all the hordes are bigger than we could afford to defeat anyways, but hey, at least we get to enjoy that sweet, sweet density everyone's craving so hard.