Messages

16

Helpline / Re: Distance from the capital and anarchists

« on: May 23, 2017, 11:46:57 AM »

While it is true that some do have no cities and others have two, I think there's another possible solution.  If I'm not mistaken, most Dukes in this stage of the game are also a region lord in that Duchy.  You could then make that region be considered a Ducal Seat.  Any regions too far away from that Seat would not want to listen to the Duke anyway.

Another possibility is that the Ducal Seat has to be "declared" like a capitol.  When you create a duchy, you do so with one region typically and then have the regions join.  That first region would be the de facto Ducal Seat.  They could move it to another region by going there and have a "cost" similar to moving the capitol.  Could even throw in some sort of bonus to loyalty or what not if the Duke visits the Ducal Seat.

Just random musings...

17

BM General Discussion / Re: Heraldry Charges

« on: May 23, 2017, 11:36:23 AM »

I don't say this often (Tim, you might want to write it down ) but I agree with Tim.  The banners were often considered vibrant and bright.  We are used to "color" sensitivity.  Back then, if you didn't like it, well... *sharpens the ax*

I am thankful that a squirrel was included.  That amused me enough to add it to my coat.  Maybe I'm just nuts. LOL

18

Feature Requests / Re: Army Sponsorship Details

« on: May 23, 2017, 11:33:33 AM »

Patience... but I want it NOOOOOOOW     Just kidding.  I appreciate you guys working hard on this kind of stuff.  Devs are often the most abused, hard working lot of a game.  I'm not sure I say thank you enough.

19

Feature Requests / Re: Statistics on nobles and density

« on: May 23, 2017, 11:31:42 AM »

I must admit I am a bit confused as to your initial question because you seem to answer it with the next statement.  I'll try to reword it though just in case it's not clear.  All the data would be synced up until the current cut-off, then the data would desyncronize requiring the graph or data to only have one realm instead of all.  I don't even know if the code behind the graphing system can do that.  Typically graphs aren't meant for this.  Data is supposed to be syncronized between all points to give the comparison even if it's just a projection of what it might be.

Honestly, you should have a good clue about how many CS you lost in a battle.  The battle reports are very descriptive.  It'll tell you how many attackers/defenders as well as the CS.  You can compare that with what you have now and figure out how much you lost and recovered directly from that if you are on top of things.  When I'm not in charge of an army, I can use two battle points to figure out the CS drop and recovery.  It's something I like to do for fun because well, I love figuring these sort of things out   It's pretty easy math too.

One additional note I'd like to point out is when you take a new region, it's supply that it may provide is also determined by the production level.  Often when there have been battles (or if it's been ownerless), the production will be quite low.  There is a wiki about all the calculations of how much good you may have, but I would never use any new region as a guarantee for food production as there are so many factors including the fact that it can be retaken or revolt before you really see much of that food.

While I understand some may want to see all the possible data that you could on a realm, I also understand that the point of the game isn't to see everything all at an instant glance.  I've always gotten the impression that was on purpose.  This is a game of trying to figure out the balance, developing a strategy, and putting things together.  Sometimes it blows up in your face, sometimes it doesn't.

In the end, I don't really see this suggestion as something that improves the game in the long run when there are other items that would warrant more of the limited time that the developer's have.  That is my 2 silver on the subject and I respect that we may not agree on it.

20

Development / Re: Banker Return to Regional Food Status

« on: May 23, 2017, 11:10:25 AM »

Thank you.  I haven't yet seen it live, but that's because my character is out of market places.  LOL

21

Helpline / Re: Distance from the capital and anarchists

« on: May 20, 2017, 07:18:07 PM »

I can confirm for you that in D'Hara has that problem with it's far flung areas.

Desert of Silhouettes

        The large distance to the capital causes anarchists to prosper greatly, and the people feel as if the realm does not care about them.

Mattan Dews

        The large distance to the capital causes anarchists to prosper greatly, and the people feel as if the realm does not care about them.

---

One thing I always wondered.  Would it be better to have it calculate for the Ducal Seat?  After all, the Ducal seat should represent the Realm?  Just a random thought

22

Feature Requests / Re: Army Sponsorship Details

« on: May 20, 2017, 07:05:25 PM »

I agree that this could be beneficial.  Not required, but helpful.

23

Feature Requests / Re: Statistics on nobles and density

« on: May 20, 2017, 06:59:22 PM »

This is where I'll be the voice of dissension.  I like to see what every realm's stats were at the same time.  This gives me an ideal of how the realm I am part of compares with them then, not now.  After all, maybe my realm has boosted up or theirs have fallen to disrepair.  I want to compare numbers from the same time.  I think this was the original reasoning why everything is synced.  Desyncing this data will not give any advantage.  I'm not against seeing a spot somewhere other than stats that sums up what we can already do, but it's not something that I would personally use either.  After all, the army pages are used for what I need in figuring out what CS I have going where. 

24

Development / Banker Return to Regional Food Status

« on: May 13, 2017, 04:22:51 PM »

When Banker, select Command > Regional Food Status...

On that page, a banker can look at a market.  If player does a transaction on the market (or several), it's a bit of a hassle to go back to the Regional Food Status to go to another market.

My suggestion is to add a Return to Regional Food Status button on http://www.battlemaster.org/stable/Marketplace.php which would help players out.  It would take about 2 seconds to code and help alleviate a lot of repetitive clicks.

25

BM General Discussion / Re: Log in page (new heraldry page) :(

« on: May 13, 2017, 04:16:32 PM »

I've noticed a few little things that pop up with this new system. 

1) The character list keeps changing as I go through my characters.  Instead of having a static list where I know where to click again, the character order reorders itself.  I'm not sure what that order is though.  That's a bit annoying up front.  The default seems to be by island, but then why is it changing?  Perhaps a bug?

ETA: On my desktop, the current order of characters are: Row 1) Rosalia (Hero/BT), 2) Amber (Adv/BT), 3) Cymore (Hero/DWI) Row 2) Jim (Priest, EC), Syndee (War/WI), Antonio (War/Col)

However, on my tablet, they are ordered: Row 1) Jim (Priest/EC), Cymore (Hero/DWI), Row 2) Syndee (WI), Roslia (BT) Row 3: Amber (BT), Antonia (Col)

Not sure why the order of the two are different.

2) My Adventurer is wounded, but it says that they are okay.  Filed it as a bug http://bugs.battlemaster.org/view.php?id=9069

3) Is there a reason why the new messages are shown in the status as well as on the parchment?  Maybe one or the either?  If going with one location, I would prefer just the parchment.

There are some things I like about the new system.  It is obviously designed for Desktop systems.  When you start going to tablets/mobile phones, it means there is a more scrolling required.  This isn't my favorite thing when I'm on my phone especially traveling.

26

Development / Re: Sneak Peek

« on: May 08, 2017, 07:02:00 AM »

What does the parchment with a number in it mean?

27

BM General Discussion / Re: Did the site go dead this morning for anyone else?

« on: May 08, 2017, 06:56:01 AM »

Is it just me, or has BM been really flaky these past few weeks? It went down again Saturday night (US time).

It's not just you.  Been a rash of flakiness with the server recently.  Hopefully, Tom can fix it.  We hate missing out on our BM

With this said, if you can't access Battlemaster, go to IRC to irc.quakenet.org and go to the channel #battlemaster.  You can probably found out information about if it's down or it's just you.

28

Feature Requests / Re: Building of Temples

« on: October 08, 2016, 01:29:57 AM »

Priests, in the general case, have no connection to the land they would be building a temple. Imagine it like a priest today just coming into your back yard with a work crew and starting to build a church there.

I'll run with your scenario.  If a priest did that today, the owner would have them arrested.  I believe that BM code has an arrest a priest option last time I checked.  So...  Imagine the same could happen in BM?  The code already exists and it would give a reason other than preaching to use it.  Doesn't that make sense?

There is no way in hell we're going to give priests the ability to build temples in regions that aren't theirs without at least requiring Lordly approval.

If that's the attitude that you have, then don't even bother coding that in.  It'll be a waste of your time.  Part of the whole reason why I am trying to get this problem solved is because Lords are too lazy to bother with something that has no benefit to them.

Thank you for reminding me why I don't put in feature requests.  There's no chance in "hell" of you doing anything other than reinforcing the problems that we try to suggest fixing.  After all, there are NO negative reasons given YET why adding this would be adverse to the game or even social interaction.  I won't make this mistake again.  Have a pleasant day

29

Feature Requests / Re: Building of Temples

« on: October 06, 2016, 11:56:54 PM »

More likely, it would be similar to the invite a priest mechanic. A "seek lord's landgrant" button for the lord to approve of a new temple being built or not.

Perhaps I'm just not getting why Lords would need an approve button.  Do Knights need to get approval for their statues before they can build them?  If we applied the Lord logic being applied in this thread, then logically the actual ruler of a realm should have a lot of approval required options since all lands belong to them?  After all, Lords "king of region"....  Ruler "king of realm"?

I'm sure you can probably check into this stat, but how often is invite a priest actually used?  I've had more inquiries outside of this tool.

I really think that if this is the route taken we'll be missing out on opportunities.  Is there some real negative to my proposal that makes the developers go... no so quickly?  What is the downside of not having a Lord have approval for everything?  If this is the way it's added, then why not change the code to require them to approve upgrades to the temple?  Maybe even require approval for guards?

I don't really see any negatives to the positives I gave forth.  Can this be explained?

30

Feature Requests / Re: Building of Temples

« on: October 06, 2016, 10:30:37 PM »

My proposal actually uses the apathy of lazy lords against them.  It means that if they don't want that temple there then they can raze it, arrest the priest, or more.  It would encourage them to either care more about their region or let perhaps a religion that is more poisonous to them spread.  It gives them choices instead of knowing that no matter what nothing can happen without their approval.

As I understand current BM code, Lords can not erect statues in estates they don't own.  Perhaps this is going to be changed, but as it is it gives one example of how things can be built within a region without the Lord's direct approval.

I do understand how to be a pest to Lords, but with the limited player population it also means that resources tend to be focused more on state matters (which is logical for Lords) and not with something that doesn't give them a benefit or honors them or their direct chain of command.  Since the building of a temple requires the Priest to go there, it means that there's also a risk you could be arrested for building the temple.

Also, current BM code has many things where the original builders have to maintain the things they build.  For example, the fortifications are maintained and built by the same person.  The current Priest code is the only example that I can think of in BM code where this isn't the case.  Essentially, the Priest is responsible for maintaining something that someone else builds.

Then, consider this point as well.  If I can preach in a lordless religion to expand the faith, why shouldn't I be able to build a temple to expand the faith.  If anything a Lordless region means there is no "king of the region" to stop it.  This will either force realms to deal with the issue by sending a force to tear it down, assigning a lord to go there and tear it down or letting it be.

---

In summary, my proposal's benefits are that:

1) It expands the Priest role slightly in a logical way.
2) It helps the Priest use any money earned towards the faith.  (Can't recruit troops)
3) It allows more RP opportunities (i.e. Grand Temple openings, fights between religions trying to build temples, Disgust by region lords, etc)
4) Relieves the Lord from having to deal with cross realm trips to build something quick and then leave again
5) Motivates Lords to care more about what's in their regions if they don't want something