1
BM General Discussion / Re: Crazy Merger Idea
« on: September 25, 2015, 09:24:42 PM »
Crap doublepost...
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.
Pages: [1]
2
BM General Discussion / Re: Crazy Merger Idea
« on: September 25, 2015, 09:22:07 PM »
One of Might and Fealty's weaknesses is that there really isn't a whole lot for a landless noble to do and there's not a lot for someone to accomplish in the game if they're not thinking about building armies and going on the warpath.
One of Battlemaster's strongest qualities is how much stuff someone can do without being a lord. You can take part in Tourney's, you can Duel, you can use your subclass's benefits, etc. If there's anything you should import from Battlemaster, it's that. Now in Battlemaster, a lot of that other stuff loses its appeal after a bit and I'd say a weakness of Battlemaster is how super slow, structured, and... in my opinion, boring, it is if you haven't been at it for a while to where you can recruit larger armies, explore sub-classes, or hold important positions in power. Otherwise, you're very limited in what you can do, are not that useful for a while, and are often just kinda another body in someone else's army that can hold a small unit of men, get a stipend every month, and do little else.
Might and Fealty has the strength of allowing even a new person unrestrained possibility. Within a month's time, you can go from a landless knight to a Duke, if you're active and good at what you do. You can go from nothing to founding a faction if the cards are in your favor. Can go from holding no army to leading as a Marshall on a battlefield with thousand of men at your command, if you so choose. And this allows you to get right into the dirty politics and play a useful role. I really love that aspect of the game and hope you don't change it. The progression in Battlemaster feels like just such a grind, and if there's anything I hate in MMOs, it's grinding and trudging through mediocrity in the hope of getting to the 'good' part. Not to mention that in Battlemaster, I've never felt truly useful. And yes, I'm willing to acknowledge that's not ALL the game's fault, but it's structure is more limiting by comparison.
What else I'd like to see.... Well, I'd like to see tourney's, duels, and such in Might and Fealty. I'd love to see infiltrators act as assassins, saboteurs, and spies. I'd like to see less stress in the turn setup of Might and Fealty (the whole turn every hour thing is stressful; Battlemaster really did this better). I don't want to see Battlemaster's rigid social or governmental structure. The ability to play commoners is cool. I'd like to see whatever hybrid game you create allow cities and big towns to build up organically like they do in M&F rather than be predetermined. Account control and discouraging multi-accounting would be necessary, should the game ever get a bigger player-base, though in the beginning, it's not a must. Basically take Might and Fealty, add some more depth to the mechanics, reduce the turns, advertise the bloody thing so people actually show up, and I'd say you're golden with me.
Course that's for my wishlist. This is a hell of a task you're thinking of undertaking Tom, especially considering the differences in framework. You're practically going to have to rebuild this from the ground up.... You okay with that?
One of Battlemaster's strongest qualities is how much stuff someone can do without being a lord. You can take part in Tourney's, you can Duel, you can use your subclass's benefits, etc. If there's anything you should import from Battlemaster, it's that. Now in Battlemaster, a lot of that other stuff loses its appeal after a bit and I'd say a weakness of Battlemaster is how super slow, structured, and... in my opinion, boring, it is if you haven't been at it for a while to where you can recruit larger armies, explore sub-classes, or hold important positions in power. Otherwise, you're very limited in what you can do, are not that useful for a while, and are often just kinda another body in someone else's army that can hold a small unit of men, get a stipend every month, and do little else.
Might and Fealty has the strength of allowing even a new person unrestrained possibility. Within a month's time, you can go from a landless knight to a Duke, if you're active and good at what you do. You can go from nothing to founding a faction if the cards are in your favor. Can go from holding no army to leading as a Marshall on a battlefield with thousand of men at your command, if you so choose. And this allows you to get right into the dirty politics and play a useful role. I really love that aspect of the game and hope you don't change it. The progression in Battlemaster feels like just such a grind, and if there's anything I hate in MMOs, it's grinding and trudging through mediocrity in the hope of getting to the 'good' part. Not to mention that in Battlemaster, I've never felt truly useful. And yes, I'm willing to acknowledge that's not ALL the game's fault, but it's structure is more limiting by comparison.
What else I'd like to see.... Well, I'd like to see tourney's, duels, and such in Might and Fealty. I'd love to see infiltrators act as assassins, saboteurs, and spies. I'd like to see less stress in the turn setup of Might and Fealty (the whole turn every hour thing is stressful; Battlemaster really did this better). I don't want to see Battlemaster's rigid social or governmental structure. The ability to play commoners is cool. I'd like to see whatever hybrid game you create allow cities and big towns to build up organically like they do in M&F rather than be predetermined. Account control and discouraging multi-accounting would be necessary, should the game ever get a bigger player-base, though in the beginning, it's not a must. Basically take Might and Fealty, add some more depth to the mechanics, reduce the turns, advertise the bloody thing so people actually show up, and I'd say you're golden with me.
Course that's for my wishlist. This is a hell of a task you're thinking of undertaking Tom, especially considering the differences in framework. You're practically going to have to rebuild this from the ground up.... You okay with that?
3
Helpline / Re: stuck at sea
« on: June 16, 2015, 02:28:21 PM »
Great! My men be starving. First and worst long-term sea expedition for them. I'm sure they'll be traumatized once we can land. 
Pages: [1]