Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Anaris

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 362
1
Development / Re: A Legacy of Descriptions?
« on: Yesterday at 05:24:40 PM »
Just off the top of my head, Tom's decision to split the database into separate schemas for the overall game/OOC administration level and one for each world would make things significantly more complex to implement.

That said, I have no particular objection to having the game remember descriptions for everything.

2
Feature Requests / Re: Different levels of imprisonment
« on: December 08, 2017, 09:47:00 PM »
I hope when the dev team opens a new war island, they would actually allow infiltrators to be able to actually kill characters. Allow characters to die in battle too.

Since the reopening of the War Island a few years ago, it has always included full mortality.

Quote
And add mutilation. See how brutal it gets.

This would be far too much work for far too little reward. One of the primary RP rules of BattleMaster is that you don't get to violate the integrity of someone else's character.

Take away their freedom of movement (imprison)? Sure.

Kill them? Under certain circumstances.

But cut off their hand, put out an eye, or rape them? No. Never, without their explicit permission.

That is why all these sorts of things will stay entirely in RP.

3
BM General Discussion / Re: Random adventurer question
« on: December 08, 2017, 04:37:44 PM »
So there's an actual use then? I've only ever seen some sages require rope and other stuff for upgrades and item creations. What about the ancient documents? Do those have a use yet?

Nah, I don't think there's a use coded for rope yet. But as Sam Gamgee would tell you, if you're off on an adventure, you know you'll be wanting rope.

Ancient documents were implemented recently.

4
BM General Discussion / Re: Random adventurer question
« on: December 08, 2017, 04:31:20 PM »
You know you'll be wanting it if you haven't got it.

5
Development / Re: Rethinking the rules
« on: December 07, 2017, 09:14:14 PM »
Well, you mentioned that having the recruitment fair anywhere else than the capital would be very costly in upkeep, so the incentive to move the capital to the front would remain the same.

Eh, details. That sort of thing can easily be adjusted to achieve the desired effect, once the basic mechanic is in place.

As to the rest...I dunno, I'd like to see colony TOs return, but I think they might need some reworking to make a bit more sense. And if you're suggesting that we shouldn't allow secessions when the realm is below a certain nobles:regions ratio...well, I might well be persuadable that that should be a thing.  ;)

6
Development / Re: Rethinking the rules
« on: December 07, 2017, 08:43:23 PM »
As for the recruitment fair idea, I don't really see it tied to the cited capital issues. Those are interesting mechanics idea, but it's on the whole mostly a tweak on the current system, where a capital on the border helps reduce the refit cycle but intentionally placing it there is against the rules.

The point is that only being able to recruit in the capital is a gameplay balance decision, and as such, circumventing it by moving your capital (or seceding) specifically for that reason has no IC justification. It is purely an attempt to circumvent a deliberate balance decision.

If we change the decision on balance, then there's no longer a reason to restrict secessions and capital moves, because there's no longer a recruitment benefit to doing them.

7
Development / Re: Rethinking the rules
« on: December 07, 2017, 08:26:56 PM »
  • What's the big deal with strategic secessions? Most realms don't have enough nobles to split. And in most cases, splitting only makes the sum of the parts lesser than the original whole. Yes, the realms get numerical buffs. But the only cases where this is not offset by the human logistical aspects are when the realms were ripe to split anyways, and that this rule therefore only really regulates the context (ok to do so when there's no war, not ok during war). This rule doesn't contribute to anything anymore, we don't have the player counts for it to matter.
  • Why have OOC rules against strategic capital moves? For starters, moving capitals is very costly. Secondly, the distance from capital allowance was greatly reduced over the years. A realm that moves its capital to the front will have an advantage in terms of refit cycle, but a HUGE disadvantage to its economy, as region stats and tax tolerance will drop. Furthermore, many current capitals barely allow for any wars, if they don't make it outright suicide, so why not give people a bit more flexibility if it means that, as a whole, BM gets more war?

The reason for both of these is the OOC restriction on recruitment in capitals.

Frankly, I'm interested in ways to remove that that will work well and not cause a raft of negative unintended consequences.

The most interesting simulationist approach I've come up with so far would be sort of a two-part thing:

  • First, have the recruits in recruitment centers actually be in those centers. That is, you can only recruit them if you're physically in the region. But...
  • Second, those recruits will be sent, over time, to a place that is designated as your realm's "Recruitment Fair" or something (yes, I think that's a dumb name, but I just came up with it ;D ). The default place for this would be in the capital, but it could be designated as any region in your realm. Any region but the capital would cost a significant upkeep, and the recruits would have to travel, from region to region, toward this Fair, during which time they would be vulnerable to disruption.

This would be able to piggyback on some other code I've got simmering on the back burner for nearly-fully-automated (but still manually manipulable, for perfectionists) trade.

It would also require getting an OK from Tom. Changes to any of these rules and policies would, actually.

Quote
  • Why not just make realm mergers legal? This has caused so many scandals in the past, for no gain. What's equal footing? What's friendly? What's hostile? Why does it all even matter? And what's the logic in banning strategic secession if the opposite is also banned? Are small realms the threat or are big realms? Or are any at all? Mergers mean less titles to share around, lower tax tolerance, a lot of people being moved away from their traditional area. There are a LOT of costs to it. And we don't have a ruler who can OOC ban the whole realm to make it happen anymore, either. Players will not willingly give up their realm unless they have strong reasons to do so, why not respect these reasons without threatening sanctions over them?

I dunno, I'm still a bit ambivalent about this. I do have a hard time with the idea of a King just cheerfully giving up his crown to make his entire Kingdom just a province of someone else's.

However, I also have a hard time with the fact that a realm that's got 2 regions and 3 nobles, and wants to join the realm with 10 regions and 30 nobles, has to pretend to go to war with them so they can "surrender"...and then still has to have the larger realm run takeovers on all their regions.

I think we can find a balance, but I'm not sure we'll ever do away entirely with the rule against the former type of merger.

8
East Island / Re: Greater Xavax Imperium
« on: December 07, 2017, 05:06:08 PM »
I have officially given my ruling, upon private consultation by interested parties, that a secession from Nivemus centered in Kazakh appears to be a legitimate secession to me, not an illegal strategic secession.

9
Helpline / Re: Capturement
« on: December 07, 2017, 03:23:49 PM »
That makes sense.

When you land, you first have to pass the landing check to see if your boat is intercepted and you're just smashed or grabbed right then and there.

Then you have to see if you can hang around in the region, just like anyone who's there unwelcome.

You passed the first check, but not the second.

10
Helpline / Re: Capturement
« on: December 07, 2017, 02:27:36 PM »
Are there multipe checks for getting caught while landing? As the letter which I got said that I landed safely.

Back on Dry Land   (14 minutes ago)
personal message
Your ship has arrived at the coast of Heen and is putting you ashore.
Evading several patrols, you manage to leave the shore unnoticed.
Getting ashore takes most of your time, even though much of it is wasted in waiting.

I think we will need more information than this to understand your issue.

I presume you were captured? Do you have other messages indicating when that happened?

If your character is a priest in a foreign realm, then he can be captured by a noble who chooses to arrest him, at any time during the turn.

11
Helpline / Re: Unique item bonus question - Swordfighting
« on: December 06, 2017, 08:44:14 PM »

Just re-reading this thread, not sure if I got it right or not. Adventurers are limited to 100% by gear and can go no further by normal means. Does this mean unique items will not be beneficial for an adventurer at 100% skill level already? or can the bonus still apply to adventurers at this level?

No matter what, adventurers cannot increase their skill past the level their gear allows. Thus, bonuses from unique items cannot improve adventurers' skill past 100%.

12
BM General Discussion / Re: Annual Check-In
« on: December 06, 2017, 03:12:39 AM »
Not on Dwilight, please. It’s hard enough maintaining SMA.

13
Helpline / Re: Unique item bonus question - Swordfighting
« on: December 05, 2017, 03:26:41 PM »
Does this restriction apply to all gameplay (hunting, duels, infiltrator attacks, etc.), or just hunting?

It applies to every use of the Adventuring and Swordfighting skills for adventurers.

14
Helpline / Re: Unique item bonus question - Swordfighting
« on: December 04, 2017, 11:26:22 PM »
A unique item can indeed increase a character's effective skill beyond 100%.

However, adventurers will always be limited by their gear, and that can't (AFAIK) go over 100%.

15
Because over the years, I have seen the Titans arbitrarily do many things, that ruin at least my fun of the game. And I tend to play in the spirit of the game.

The Titans never act arbitrarily. If you think it's arbitrary, it's because you don't have all the information.

If you want more information, you should ask.

We won't always give it (sometimes there's confidential information involved), but that's pretty rare these days.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 362