Messages

There seem to be no technical reasons other than sanity that would prevent an attempt to retake lands to the West.

Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

Yes, so have I, and this is the intended behavior as far as I can tell. But in this case, it's not my duke that changed my allegiance, it's my ruler. Whatever code supercedes the restriction for the former does not seem functionnal for the latter.

If this could be fixed this turn, it'd be much appreciated.

I've seen a region be given by the ruler to a realm the region lord was banned in, and he switched it back the same turn.

On the list. Not at the top.

Awesome, good to hear. :)

Right now when you are sent a personal message, there is a "reply" button, and when a message is sent to a message group there is a "reply to list" button as well. But when you send a message to "some members of X group" (your realm, your army, your duchy, your religion, your guild, etc.), there is only the "reply" button to reply to the original sender, but not a "reply to list" or "reply to group" button to reply to everyone who the original message was sent to (assuming it was not sent with secret recipients).

This request is for adding that button to the message when a message is sent to multiple recipients who are members of the same group, but who do not represent the whole group.

Benefit: player convenience; to reply to the conversation group a player has to open the message interface, select "send to some members of X", then select (and probably double-check in another tab) the characters that were tagged in the original message. With this feature, the player would simply click the "reply to group" button and the recipients list would be appropriately populated.

Possible exploits: none that I can identify.

How is it built programmatically now? Does each region have a % chance on each turn change to get an increase in monster or undead level and then when that level hits a threshold a group spawns?

It might be interesting for Dwilight, but would not be appropriate anywhere else.

I would contend that it would be appropriate for Beluaterra as well, but I do see your point. It's probably a lot of work for something that wouldn't see the light of day in the main game.

This thread is really making me want to write up a cohesive feature request for dynamic monsters; in fact, I think I may. I don't know when it would ever be implemented if approved, but I do think it'd make for a really constructive thread and someday benefit more than just Dwilight.

If you aren't aware, this is the same person who played Gustav Kuriga and was Gustav Kuriga in the forums.

Ah! No wonder I didn't recognize you. I assumed you had joined the game more recently since I didn't recognize the user name.

However, having those low monster spawns allowed us to have realms like Barca, Asylon, Terran, Kabrinskia, Niselur, etc. that were highly active and fun to be in. If someone has the historical record of the Dwilight map for the last 2-3 years, I can bet you that the map of the west was far more volatile than that in the east. It constantly was in flux, with first one realm then another gaining the upper hand. Barca was just the latest of those realms.

Actually, in the east there were Raivan Empire, Libero Empire, Summerdale, Morek, Xinhai, Averoth and Thulsoma all in the northeast (from Valkyrja down to Donghaiwei). There were 3 or 4 different Lurian realms after Pian en Luries fractured, that was cool. There was also Corsanctum (which I miss :() and its short-lived colony Aurora; there was also Aquilegia over in Flowrestown. In the west was Astrum, Niselur (fell to rebellion & monsters, got re-founded, I stopped playing, rebellion happened which lead to the Niselur you remember), Caerwyn (backstabbed Astrum, got wiped out) and Asylon (colony of Caerwyn). And that's just the northern half of the west; I never played in the south with Terran, Barca, Madina, etc. Probably a plus because I never really had to deal with the daemons, either.

So actually, before the spawns got lowered the game was still extremely vibrant in both the east and the west; low monster spawns didn't have anything to do with it. And like Constantine said, based on experience playing in high-spawn rate Dwilight and normal-spawn rate Atamara, I feel like Dwilight had more action against monsters and otherwise.

And everything BarticaBoat just said, except Everguard predates me. Niselur only fell the first time because of bad banking, and a rebellion. Were they really dialed down after Everguard? Because if so, they got dialed down *again* some time after the first Niselur.

Whether the request was IC or OOC, it remains legitimate for surviving members of the religion to see it as a hostile act. Again, and I repeat myself, it doesn't matter whether that characterization is fair. It makes IC sense, that's all that counts.

Which would be applicable if Glaumring was himself a member of this fictional religion whose priest was executed. Just something people should remember.

Also: holy crap Glaumring, you need to seriously chill out. Also also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayahuasca

Every forum thread should have at least one Star Wars reference!

Dustin old buddy, you don't let me down.

Happened to me, too (I think the e-mail got spam-filtered); would be nice if the timer on auto-deletion was a year instead of 3 months but I dunno what sort of resources that would take. I'm sure it is how it is for a reason.

At present, estate tax settings can be set such that every knight can only ever add wealth without taking any from the lord; wild lands and empty estates are taxed at 50% and the maximum tax setting for estates is 50%. If your tax rate is at 50% then any knight who takes an empty estate is creating his entire income simply by being in the estate. This is generally not feasible in rural regions with low income but in lower-density realms (for example on Dwilight) where you might only have knights in your cities then it can work quite well.

And this is assuming the lord wants to maximize his own income, for a building project for example. But if he's trying to fund the army he can lower the tax he levies from his knights to increase their income; it's a very flexible system, though I've asserted that simply having several knights is its own reward.

That was something I didn't think about as corsanctum was pretty hostile to Niselur before and also when we came close to their regions. And I was looking for a place to settle down without too much effort as RL was taking most of my energy.

You must have talked to Wassiley; I had quite a nice conversation with your General about that time and sent someone an offer to settle (to Astroists, mind, but that could have been negotiable). It was also scary on our end since relations didn't get upgraded to neutral and peace until you were at sea, IIRC.

Well no, to be honest Luria was one of the last places where I wanted to bring Niselur.

Could have settled peacefully in Corsanctum; would have landed you a duchy easily in exchange for a token supplication. I don't recall Cathan ever being reached out to, though.