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 - Zakky

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40

Yssrgard not helping Caligus is entirely their choice. Why do you expect them to do so?

Nivemus is allied to Sirion. Sirion decided to help. That is fine. Nobody is criticizing that.

Perdan is attacking Eponllyn to get to Nivemus. That is also fine. Since Perdan is the aggressor, Nivemus and Eponllyn are fighting together.

I don't quite understand what you mean by "show someone how to steal from my home now".

Perdan could have taken a different route but why do that when there is an easier road?

Delvin Anaris already made it clear.

You can still destroy a realm.

You can still help your allies.

You can still bully another realm.

But you can't dog pile unless there is a really good justification like the realm getting dog piled provoking every realm that is attacking them.

Also you can't try to circumvent the diplomatic limit through a guild. If you are not allied to a certain realm then you are not allied. Yssrgard can't come help Nivemus since Yssrgard isn't Nivemus or Eponllyn's friend.


What Anaris means by "unbreakable alliance" is what North had or something like what CE formed on AT. He doesn't want a large mega alliance that goes on forever. You can still have an unbreakable alliance but only under your alliance limit. He doesn't want you to circumvent that by establishing a guild like Alliance of Free Nations on Dwilight. If you want a certain realm to be your ally, then ally them. All realms that are not allied to you are not your allies. It is as simple as that.

If realm A + B are fight realm C + D, instead of jumping in to attack either AB or CD, you should go for realm E or F or others.

If you introduce number sand tangible in game consequences, people will just find a way to circumvent them. It doesn't matter how well things are coded. You cannot block every hole. That is why things are kept somewhat vague.

If you really want to correct an unbalanced war as you say.

Why the most nobles realm can declare war on the most lesser nobles realm? Should lesser nobles realm get help from another realm to balance the scale of war?

Because Nivemus has a lot of cities but not enough people. Perdan has a lot of nobles and want to carve out a colony. Why not war Nivemus? Nivemus also has friends. They can help Nivemus if they wish.

Even when you limit it by alliance. Even when you limit the war on one realm in this Caligus, Yssgard the supposedly ally of Caligus showed up nowhere in Eponllyn and Nivemus lands and got beaten and send back home.

Why would Yssgard, friend of Caligus, show up in Eponllyn and Nivemus side to help them when Caligus is burning? Also, allies don't have to help each other if they feel helping them will cause more damage.

Right now you say you include another "dont want old conflict". Yet Perdan want to travel to Nivemus lands via Eponllyn lands. After that long staring contest at Kalmar city with scouts sent here and there without any breakthrough. Eponllyn being ally of Caligus want to help Caligus, but then Perdan declared war on them. Yes, for passage right. Shadowdale is already beating Caligus to Fontan city. Then Perleone joins against Caligus. Yssgard wasted their golden chance to make thing right to balance the war by Yssgard attacking Eponllyn and Nivemus lands instead.

You want Perdan to go through a choke point. Perdan doesn't want to. It is as simple as that. Perdan's war has nothing to do with SD and Caligus. I don't know why you are keep bringing them up.

Why not you limit the war as well? Say "you can't fight that realm A because you at your limit density for war." Since we already doing nobles density for region and realm alliance density limit, why not nobles density for war?

What? Why do you want the noble density to affect wars? If your realm is dense, then you usually get people who want to form their own realm. Who do you war? One with low density and lots of regions. Nivemus has 4 cities and 13 nobles. Nivemus will be fine with 2 cities and 3 less regions.

I think people are overlooking the fact that what unlimited freedom has brought to the game.

Continental wars that last way too long. Constant dogpiling that seem to never end. Every war trying to end with another realm's destruction. And players straight up leaving after seeing their realms die.

It doesn't matter if it was a feature of the game before. It was badly implemented. The current system despite its imperfectness, is a way to train ruler players on what kind of wars are justified.

The biggest problem is the dogpiling issue where rulers who have nothing better to do get involved in their ally's wars so they get something to do. If you are a ruler, you have the responsibility to create something to do for your realm. If you can only do so by joining your ally realm which is already winning, then you have a problem.

Wars are fun when both sides are evenly matched and at least as close to it as possible. As you all know, they are often not despite having the same # of nobles or gold since there isn't really an indicator telling you how many active people are in the realm.

Also, let's not lie about how long this has been a thing. The new war declaration is a relatively new feature. Some are calling it a form of censorship but it is more of oversight. Once people get used to the new system, you will most likely see less of admin/titan involvements.

What they want is quite simple. Make wars enjoyable for both sides which people have failed to do so for many years. We've been seeing cases of people antagonizing other players oocly due to IC grudges. Hopefully this new direction will reduce that and make the game more healthy.

But yes, it would be better if we get more stuff to war over and more stuff seem to be coming to the game in maybe 2~3 years.

BM General Discussion / Re: Prophet Fame Points
« on: July 13, 2020, 09:50:57 PM »
Maybe 75%?

BM General Discussion / Re: Prophet Fame Points
« on: July 12, 2020, 11:11:46 PM »
I wonder if it is something to do with where your religion was found.

Feature Requests / Re: Unit Payment Warning in Red after 5 days.
« on: June 23, 2020, 12:24:33 AM »
Approved. I have some other ideas for how to make this kind of information more easily visible, too, but I don't want to let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and this one seems pretty simple.

I think you can perfect it overtime but since this way is simple, I'd suggest implementing this way(or a simpler version if you have one) first then come back to it if you want to perfect it later.

Feature Requests / Unit Payment Warning in Red after 5 days.
« on: June 22, 2020, 09:52:46 PM »
Summary: At the moment, you get your unit payment warning in black which is same as your normal letters. Also, you get them too often. Instead, make it more meaningful by emphasizing it by changing its background color to read once it does become quite worrying.

Details:  I believe your unit payment color changes to red on your unit status page after not paying them for 5 days so why not do the same for the report as well? Maybe if possible, you can make it something interesting by intensifying the background red color as you get near 10~11 days when your men really start to desert you. Starting at pink around day 5 to red by day 10 or so.

Benefits: Provides more meaning to the unit payment report. Also you can visually notice it better.

Possible Downsides/Exploits: Another red letter.

From battlemaster to banditmaster!

Sounds like the game lacks incentives for people to strive for personal gains.

There is not much to gain by being evil or selfish in this game unfortunately. After the game doesn't really support the feudal hierarchy. It is pretty centralized.

I think you should add a bit more for realms staying under the 1/3 total noble limit.

You can probably combine this with the hinterland idea. Giving those staying under the limit ability to travel faster within the allied territory.

Giving incentives to stay under the limit can probably be called 'highly cohesive' state of alliance.

Alliances can specify a variety of levels of support: for instance, whether members will aid each other in combat only in defense within member realms, defending in neutral territory, defending in enemy territory, or even joining in to attack together.

We can probably apply the same concept here as well.

defending in member realms - low cohesion (Realms with >30% of total noble count)
defending in neutral territory + defending in enemy territory - high cohesion (Realms with <30%)

If people even under the new system choose to form a mega alliance, it might be a good idea to add some extreme stuff like allowing realms staying in the highly cohesive state to cash bonds in any city within the alliance.

Let's be clear here. This game was never designed to be what it is today. That is the first failure of the game. It had no goal in mind. Although it is called 'battlemaster', battle and war are this game's weakest points. Not to mention this game built around the idea of never letting anyone win by conquest. So if you want to conquer the whole continent, you are looking at a wrong game. This is a light-weight war game with more focus on roleplaying.

I don't see risk aversion as a bad thing. If you lack that you will see wars constantly. Wars are very tiring in this game because only a handful of people do all the work due to how it is designed.

The biggest issue with this game is the fact that there isn't much to fight over. Most wars in this game starts with one realm going nuts(for the sake of making the game more interesting in many cases), others ally up to fight the realm that started the war. Why would any sane player want to start one if the player knows that others will just gang up on the player's realm? The reward simply doesn't outweigh the risk. It takes months or even years to become a ruler and some people want you to throw all that way just to make the game 'interesting'. Those who did it ended up expressing their frustrations at the end. It might have been fun at the beginning but once the gangbang starts it isn't so fun anymore.


As for limits on the realm size, well back around 2010ish, there was no limit on how large you could get. You could see realms with 36 or so regions. To be honest, I really don't see the problem with this. I don't even know why we are limiting realm size by density. Just limiting new realm creation with 15 nobles in a duchy would have been good enough along with the lowered base tax limit. Why? Because you can only move 1 region per turn in this game at most. Meaning if your realm gets too large and you are bordering multiple realms, you can't defend all your border regions. In some cases, it might take you 4~5 days just to reach the outer edge of your vast realm. While you are defending one side, enemies could hit you from the opposing end. Big realms back then quickly lost their border regions when a war started because those regions were quickly looted to the ground. You simply did not have the time to sit and TO those regions back. Sooner or later you will reach the natural maximum size due to distance even without all the limits we have. That is probably why the hinterland idea is being worked on. That should probably change how we conduct war in this game.

I think at one point there was an idea going around about limiting how many units can be in a row depending on which region you were in. With mountain regions limiting the most. Not sure what happened to that idea. I think the simplest approach would be to add damage modifiers to all the region types. Maybe in mountain regions, cavalry and ranged will only do 30% damage. In rural regions, cavalry will do 200% etc.

For years we've been told to encourage others to do something rather than forcing them. I hope we get the same thing from all the coming features. I hope we get incentives rather than limits.

Feature Requests / Re: Distance Penalties
« on: May 18, 2020, 07:24:06 PM »
Gotta make alliances temporary. It should only last 3 months at most. If they still want to stay allied, then re-ally. If they want a realm to be a permanent buddy of theirs, form a federation.

Feature Requests / Re: Additional Vote Counting Systems
« on: May 11, 2020, 05:29:39 PM »
Quite interesting. I actually really like this idea. In some aspect, it reminds me of those weighted vote systems.

BM General Discussion / Re: OOC power-gaming???
« on: May 10, 2020, 12:37:45 AM »
The new rules are to prevent realms that are not allied from acting together.

If one alliance is going after Thalmarkin that is fine. But when that alliance + realms that are at peace or neutral with are joining forces to bash on one realm, then no.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 40