Messages

I am also a bigger fan of a book that I can hold in my hands compared to a e-book. But as I am a fan of the background story I will most likely buy a copy one day.

Why not at this time? That awnser is very simple. It's januari, the month that is always accompanied by a lack of funds on my bank account. (might have something to do with the holidays and stuff like that) Next month, if it is still available by then, I will buy it for sure. Good reason to see if my smart phone works as a e-reader.

The only thing all the characters of BT could agree upon is that "roll over and die" is not an option for them. Sure, it will be sad for us as players if the continent is lost, but for our characters it will be the end of their lives. After all it's a roleplaying game.

Although I do agree that some players need to distance themself slightly more of their characters and should stop throwing threaths and demands around on the forum. Those never work, but a good discussion on the other hand has never harmed anyone.

I cast my hopes into the waters
Awaiting judgement from the sea
And someday the tide will rise
Up so high to swallow me

nice and hopefull :D.....

And I agree with Artemesia, working together....never going to happen. To much ego's among most BM players (but thats the fun part some will say :P). Just like politics, lots of talking never really getting stuff done proper. What BT needs is one big human dictator to get things done and prepared.

All those names are linked to Enweil in some way or another. Another explenation could be that it's the realm :P.

Nah, now serius, BT always had a higher number of people quiting then other continents to my experience. (My opinion, no facts available to me to back it up). The reason, I think, is that people get emitionaly attached not only to a char but more to a realm. Beluaterra is the place where most realms die.

Also, many of these people that quit could have already been on the edge of contineuing or quiting. The death of their char could have pushed them over but so could any other in game reason.

When there's something like mortality, there is a dev server, no?  Besides, the invader units were overpowered.  That is something that should have been tested out before mortality was activated as well.

Isn't Beluaterra a testing continent :P

I just want to state, for the record, that all of my characters on BT throughout my tenure in BM have taken this basic position.  The destruction of Enweil is a powerful organizing principle.

Since my first character on BT I have heared ppl talk about how to destroy Enweil......yet still Enweil excists. Seems always something else and more fun is on the road to Enweils destruction. Invasions, Sint, Invasions, Fronen, Invasions....etc. :D

 :o Beluaterra already dead?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grbSQ6O6kbs&feature=fvwrel

Starring:

Not so dead man - Beluaterra
Son of not so dead man - Several nobles
Caretaker - ..... (You fill in)


Now lets return to winning this fight :D

Which were then slaughtered.

I'm not aware of any actual numbers for medieval battles, but for the famous ancient greek Battle of Marathon, we do have a precise number of losses for one side: 192 athenian soldiers lost their lives. The persians lost over 6000 men.

I have toned down this aspect in BM, because otherwise one decisive battle would decide a war. But the fact is that the losers very often had losses far higher than the winners, exactly because routing pretty much equalled slaughter.

O.o I was under the impression BM was set in medieval times....but then again, I could be wrong. Your right on the part that most where killed, but a few deserted and escaped. One veteran can train 100 new recruits.

As to the original idea, this would give a bonus to those realms that continually fight wars, and penalize those that don't. But I hardly see it as a motivator for realms to be at war. I just can't see someone sitting there  and saying to themselves: "Hey, the training levels in our RCs are dropping, we better go fight someone so that our RCs are top notch ... in case we ever need to ... fight someone?" A good invitation to game the system, I think.

Well, you certainly win points for originality.  I can't see a single thing in the actual game that could remotely suggest such an interpretation.

It is a game after all :P, but on the other hand. There are a lot of mechanics now that can be played in a role or be played as a game. If you want to model everything perfectly you will end up with a majro crisis on most continents due to the fact of the pure annihilation of the male population, due to the fact they all go to war and end up dying.

This idea is simply "turn half the TMP functionality back on".

And my question is, where in tmp was the part that it affected RC's? This suggestion is not tmp.

if your realm is at peace.. why would you want to pay extra to recruit highly trained men? you pay ill-trained men then train them up yourself  whilst upping cohesion!

Yes, it might even be a bonus for realms at peace who have the time to train. Yet when you suddenly come to war your RC's are weaker and your first refit will notice it. It won't be drastic, but the effect would be present.

From this I would have thought to see much more of an undead presence in the Fifth Invasion.

Come on, isn't it obvius? Undead Daimons....

It's not as if anyone checked if they where alive or undead :P

Well, you certainly win points for originality.  I can't see a single thing in the actual game that could remotely suggest such an interpretation.

Well, a unit fighting to their death might be close to what we see in game, but is it realistic? It goes nicely with the knight in shining armor that most people tend to see, but in reality? I thought most battles in medieval times where not won by the number of kills but by the number of soldiers routing.

They pretty much fight till they die.

I think that most of those "deaths" are actually man that desert in the heat of battle. These deserters return home and could be recruited again. Of course, this is just my vision of the matter. But I hardly see that a noble goes out and look at all corpses to see if all his man are reallyd ead on the battlefield. When they don't apear at the end of battle at the camp then they must de dead. Especially after a defeat.

I was thinking about realms, wars and the troops. One thing struck me as odd, that is that realms that go to war all the time seem to have equal troops as realms that sit around doing nothing. So I came with a proposal. It´s still rough, but might be wearth to discuss.

1. Realms that are at war might develop over time a bonus to the training score of recruitment centres. Veterans would come back from the war and pass on their skills at the recruitment centres (or be recruited aggain). Realms that have only peace and don't see battles that often would see a drop of training over time.

Some realms might start wars to keep their recruits trained and have a better army ready for when it really counts. Also, as the weapons and armour of the recruits don't change those scores stay the same.

2. The bonus or penalty should reflect the troops. I was thinking of 10-20% of the traing the troops don't have. Let me explain this.

RC, training 20%. These are very weakly trained militia. They would benefit a lot from constant war as they could learn a few basic skills for survival. The opposite is also true, as they most likely are farmers or other low peasents during peace time they will forget even more basic skills. Their range of training would be from 2-38%. (100%-20%=80 80*0.20=18%)

RC, training 90. These are highly trained troops. Profesionals that gain a long training before they are ready for recruitment. Or they are from a regions with a long military tradition. (something like that) These troops won't learn much from a war. Also, in peace time these man keep training and stay sharp. They won't return to their other jobs, as being a soldier is their job. Their range from training would be from 88%-92% (100%-90%=10  10*0.20=2%)


Part 1 is the basic idea of my suggestion and part 2 is how it could possible work out. I am very curius about the ideas of other people on this matter? (and please, focus on this matter and let's not end up with a discussion about to much peace, as I know there are people out there that love to whine about thats subject :P)

To be clear: he's talking about D&D 4th edition, not Legend there.

True, (and WoW :P).

I might have had a closer look at legend if I hadn't just started a new campaign with my friends :(. Ah well, I think we will have a look at it next round.

4.0 is an attempt by WotC to add game mechanics for all the things that creative players did anyway, compete with World of Warcraft for the RPG combat feel

wait wait, press 1 to win combat? Now I am totally sure it's not my game :P

I propose the Iron Law of the Beluaterra Forum.

As a thread increases in length, the odds a realm being accused of siding with the invaders approaches one.

I thought the law was that the odds of the discussion being hijacked by the Rio VS Enweil war was also aproaching one.