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.


Topics - Dante Silverfire

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Atamara / Kingdom of Coria
« on: February 19, 2013, 06:50:55 AM »

17
Title: Allow Rulers to change Government Type at Will

Summary: Give rulers the option to change the government type of their realm between Democracy, Republic, Monarchy, and Tyranny at the click of a button.

Details: Currently rulers can customize all aspects of their governments. They can change between elections for all 4 council positions and appointments for them. They can decide whether they as ruler have to run in elections and how often. They can determine the titles of all 4 council members of their realm including themselves. They can even choose whether a position is "strong or weak" in power. Rulers can create a Monarchy in everything but name and still have the government type of their realm state "Democracy." This not only doesn't make any sense, it is prohibitively counter-productive towards ease of understanding of game mechanics.

Benefits: Improve simplicity of game mechanics. It allows the visual response given to players to reflect in-game truth and maintain a proper situation. In addition, this prevents situations where new players create a character in a "Republic" but it turns out to actually be a Monarchy. This will prevent these new players from simply leaving the game and being frustrated because they wanted to play in a Republic but ended up in a Monarchy where the ruler names himself "King" and doesn't hold elections. Everything is appointed and nothing of the realm reflects an actual republic. This change also prevents the need to abuse game mechanics in order to change government systems as they currently are. Right now, if I want to change my government system while ruler I have to commit at least 3-step set to abuse game mechanics. 1. Step down as rightful sovereign (objection to realm mergers). 2. Put a "placeholder" ruler into power. 3. Lead a rebellion against this newly appointed ruler and then get rid of their ban after they are kicked out of the realm. Only then can I change the government system.

Possible Exploits: You can trick players in the opposite manner. You could make your realm a Monarchy to attract monarchy players but then run the realm as a Republic. Or any other combination of mismatches. But this is less of a fault of my proposal and more the current system.

18
Title: Make any "Serious Wound" cause loss of all positions.

Summary: Currently a player must remain wounded for 5-7 days to lose their positions. This is highly unlikely to occur from infiltrator wounding from my experience. One of the main reasons a player may be inclined to call an assassination on another character is in the hope of removing their positions. This change would reflect this tendency.

Details: This proposal is in connection with a change to the bounty board proposal which can be found here: http://forum.battlemaster.org/index.php/topic,3860.0.html Right now, infiltrator actions are not effective in causing loss of positions, yet assassination attempts are often cited by devs and others as to one primary method of removing unsavor types from their posts. I propose that the game mechanics reinforce actual in-game tendencies and allow the game to make some sense with regards to the use of infiltrators. One important note: An alternative method which I am against is increasing the length of time that infiltrator attacks remove a character from the game. This is counter productive as it causes loss of game time. Instead, the emphasis should be to allow the wounding to still last a shorter and more reasonable time frame, while still making assassinations to remove positions effective.

Benefits: Make the infiltrator class useful and meaningful without inhibiting player action and causing further debilitation through increased wound lengths. Also, make the bounty board actually a meaningful feature in the game. Right now, all gold spent on the bounty board is better used elsewhere, and is wasted as a bounty. In addition, this will increase position turnover which is positive for player retention and game fun.

Exploits: None.

19
Title: Revise Bounty Board Fulfillment Requirements
Summary: Currently, any serious wound provides the gold off of a bounty board to the person who wounded them. I suggest revising this practice to not pay out bounties unless the wounding lasts long enough to remove someone from their positions.

Details: Don't give out bounties to infiltrators or warriors in battle unless the wounding lasts the 5 days(it is 5 days right?) necessary to remove someone from their positions in a realm.

Benefits: Actually makes the bounty board relevant. Right now the bounty board is irrelevant. The point was you could hurt someone by removing them from their positions. Placing a bounty on their head would make it more likely for infiltrators to attack them, which made their demise more likely. Right now, you can wound someone, pick up a bounty, without actually doing what one of the points of placing the bounty was.

Possible Exploits: None.
---------

Side thoughts: I have yet to see or hear of ANY instance in which a wounding by an infiltrator has actually caused someone to lose their positions within the past 2 years. Is this even possible any more? If it isn't, then perhaps the ability to wound longer times should be made possible. Or more likely on a successful serious wounding. OR reduce the amount of time in which you have to be wounded to lose your positions.

However, those are additional side feature requests to go along with this central one.

20
Other Games / Crusader Kings 2: Grandparent Inheritance Mod (help?)
« on: February 16, 2013, 05:08:00 AM »
Hey everyone.

I'm currently working with some folks to create a mod for CK2 that allows genetic traits relating to body type, attractiveness, and intelligence to all be passed down not just from your parents but also your grandparents contributing genetic material. This makes the "family" aspect of the game much more engaging because marriages will become important decisions not just for what you want politically. In addition, the way the mod works, is that certain dynasties will develop "dynastic traits" over the course of the game simply because it is easier to retain traits once it has become embedded in your family line. This applies to both good and bad traits.

Each trait type such as intelligence now has 7 possibly attributes. For instance you can be any of the following: Genius, Quick, Smart, Average Intellect, Dumb, Slow, or Imbecile.

However, I need someone to help me finish the mod. The back-end inheritances have already been worked out. The 2-generation stuff all works. What I need are images for all of the new traits so that they visually show up in game.

Also, anyone with any modding expertise on CK2, if they have made mods for it before I'd love to get a PM on it. I have specific questions which I want to ask as well about adjusting things I have already done.

Let me know if you'd like to help me finish this up.

21
BM General Discussion / Vulgar?
« on: February 08, 2013, 11:07:17 PM »
I'd like some opinions of GD, because apparently a recent message of mine was judged vulgar and people agreed. I can't even think of what could possibly be deemed vulgar in this message.

-----
Quote
Etiquette Issue   (just in)
One of your recent messages, reproduced below, has caused many raised eyebrows among your peers and fellow nobles agree that this way of talking is unbefitting of a noble. Your respect among the nobility falls, resulting in a loss of a point of honour.

The Message:

Quite the gathering of nobility we have here. I've never seen so many soldiers gathered together.

Perhaps some of the Darkans here can help me and my friends end a little dispute we've been having. We're trying to decide why Darkans are so good at and so ravenous about fighting battles. We've come up with a few ideas:

1. Darka's women are so ugly, that your soldiers have to fight their way to foreign lands in order to find a lay that they can be with while sober.

2. Darka's women are so viscous, that Darkans have to rape their own women in order to reproduce and so they don't know how to do anything else while abroad.

3. Darka doesn't actually have any women, and this volcano which you speak of is really just a boy hug fest, so your entire realm joins the army so that hopefully they can rather die than return home to that misery.

Any chance I'm close?

Eragon Silverfire
Knight of Barad Falas

22
Questions & Answers / Forced Realm Splits and Voluntary Realm Mergers
« on: February 05, 2013, 09:46:55 PM »
So, interesting situation which has arisen on Atamara.

CE is forcing the realm of Eston to split into two realms by duchies. The terms dictate that they must stay this way for a period of 6 months or so. Now, the interesting part is that my current understanding of the rules is that it is against the rules for two realms to merge. What this treaty then effectively does is it uses a meta-game OOC rule to forcibly prevent players who already peacefully play together from ever peacefully playing together in the future in the same realm. (in this geographic spot)

Should it be against the rules for the two realms: Hawthorne (the new realm to be) and Eston to rejoin peacefully after 6 months have passed? They never wanted to be split in the first place and all of the characters are originally from the same realm.

Alternatively, if it is deemed that it is still against the rules for Hawthorne and Eston to rejoin, then should it not also be against the rules to forcibly enact realm splits by treaty, if realm mergers are prohibited? This creates a situation where a realm has to invent a farsicle "war" against their other half in order to rejoin themselves and let the other side surrender before rejoining. Obviously this is an exploit of game mechanics, but this situation is far from having two realms simply join together to make themselves stronger, or for any of the other reasons I've seen argued thus far.

I am interested in hearing from the Magistrates and/or Tom on what they feel these circumstances entail with this ruling.

23
Helpline / Rulers and New Estate System
« on: February 01, 2013, 06:47:39 AM »
So, under the old estate system, if someone was elected as Ruler they sometimes lost their other titles such as Lord, duke, etc... depending upon the circumstances.

My question is does a Duke that becomes Ruler lose their ducal position upon becoming Ruler under the new system?

24
Far East Island / New character help (Looking for a realm)
« on: January 25, 2013, 09:09:33 AM »
Hello everyone.

I'm looking to possibly make a new character either on East Island or the Far East. I once played a character in both Ohnar West and Arcaea in the past.

So, I'd like to hear reasons why I should make a character on the Far East and what realm I should join. Any realm interested in having a Silverfire come aboard? (Feel free to pitch your own realms and let the in game biases show through)

25
East Island / New Character Help (looking for realm)
« on: January 25, 2013, 09:08:31 AM »
Hello everyone.

I'm looking to possibly make a new character either on East Island or the Far East. My very first character on this account was made in Perdan ages ago, and in 06 on a previous account I had a character in either Itorunt or Ibladesh, I can't really remember.

So, I'd like to hear reasons why I should make a character on East Island, and what realm I should join. Any realm interested in having a Silverfire come aboard? (Feel free to pitch your own realms and let the in game biases show through)

26
Development / Remove Royal "unbannable" perk
« on: January 25, 2013, 03:29:17 AM »
Title: Remove Royal "un-bannable" perk

Summary: I believe current usage of the royal mechanic has created an atmosphere of gameplay which is toxic to sustained growth and play of battlemaster. The ability for a past ruler to not be banned from their realm incentives rulers to "retire" into duchy/city lordship positions and essentially permanently lock out any other player from gaining that position ever again. If the un-bannable perk was removed from the royal rank it would promote position turnover and encourage more responsible gameplay.

Details: Keep the Royal rank to identify past rulers, but remove the provision that makes this rank unbannable from a realm.

Benefits: Currently and in the past lack of position turnover has been a big problem in the game. Stagnant holders of positions cause new players to be discouraged about what they can achieve in the game, and also makes the game very linearized. Under the current system, one can create a guaranteed safety net for themselves by seeking a lordship, and retiring into a Duchy/Margrave seat as fast as they can. This causes dukes to not have any responsibility to the rest of their realm or any incentive to really encourage good gameplay with their vassals and fellow realm leaders. They can't be removed from their positions and can't be banned from the realm, so they can simply zone out and ruin the fun for many other players once they reach this position. By removing their protection from being banned, players in the realm are given additional recourse against those characters which have stopped realm fun and engagement and simply want to sit on a gold mine.

Exploits: None.

27
Roleplaying / The Queen and the Serpent
« on: January 22, 2013, 02:06:31 AM »
Quote
Request from Brom Silverfire
Message sent to: Alice Arundel
Your Majesty, Queen of Luria Nova, One and True Ruler of Luria,

With the utmost humility I would like to request permission to briefly visit the cities of Luria that hold a temple of Sanguis Astroism.

As a Consul of Sanguis Astroism, I am on a holy pilgrimage to each city that our faith has spread to in order to better ascertain the way that the stars affect nobles throughout Dwilight. Only through such study and meditation do I feel I can gain a greater understanding of the Bloodstars in the lives of men and women.

I bring with me only a small bodyguard of troops and come in peace. I vow to harm no one within the cities that I visit, or plot any harm against you, your realm, any of your holdings, or your subjects.

Under Their Light,

Brom Silverfire
Knight of Nimh

-

Quote
Letter from Alice Arundel
Traitor, Murdered, Coward, Puppeteer of the Wicked,

I would be more than eager to welcome you with open arms, so that I may grab a hold of your face, with my own bare hands, and peel away the cold skin from the rest of your face. I would keep you alive, however, and set you upon the breaking wheel for continued entertainment. I would then proceed to club your limbs to shards between the spokes, and chant feverishly while I did so. After that, I would leave you to the crows, so they could nip away at your exposed flesh, perhaps even your eyes, while all of Luria watched in glee and celebration. Then, and only then, would I drive a rusted dagger slowly into your ice cold heart. We'd create spoons and knives from whatever bones of yours remained, gather wine distilled from your blood, and feast gloriously for days on end.

So my answer is yes, you may come to Luria if you so desire. However, a temporary stay would be out of the question. Permanent residency, as it were, would be your only option.

Eagerly yours,

Alice Arundel
Queen of Luria Nova

-

Quote
Letter from Brom Silverfire
(Personal message to Alice Arundel)
Ahh Your Majesty you flatter me. I would like to note that perhaps its more appropriate to start with dinner first or maybe a kiss before such treatment as such that you propose.

At least that's what I'm used to doing before the lovemaking begins. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you share Katerina's joy of roleplaying things but I've just had such bad experiences with it in the past. The last time we tried it she took it way too seriously and tied her ropes too tight. Well we both know how that ended. At any rate, its been a while since I've...had...an Arundel. Your cousin certainly was beautiful. Granted, the fun will be a bit different because I hear you're blind. I guess we can make that work. Certainly prevents you from watching your husband's death, although I guess that's too predictable. Katerina relished watching that sort of thing, so she got her wish. That way we were able to be together. I know, your husband still has eyes, we could just make him...watch. And don't worry, I'm very experienced, so you need not be shy. I can show you a thing or two.

Yours,

Brom Silverfire
Knight of Nimh
-

Quote
Letter from Alice Arundel
Traitor, Murderer, Coward, Puppeteer of the Wicked,

My lady-in-waiting suggested I have a jester read your letter, and so I listened to her and let the jester try. He proceeded to make sounds of ghastly nature that my son perpetuates when he excretes. Now, for all intents and purposes, I believe my jester can read, so I am quite surprised that you could write to such an extraordinary standard. Surely, you are translating the majority of your thoughts to parchment, in an effort to convey a message. I wish I had that kind of ability, but alas, I am blind and unable to write properly.

Well done, surely. I hope you will continue with this beautifully enlightening discourse.

Yours in admiration,

Alice Arundel
Queen of Luria Nova
-

Quote
Letter from Brom Silverfire
(Personal message to Alice Arundel)
Dear Her Royal Majesty's lady-in-waiting,

You would be doing your Queen, and yourself might I add, a great favor to help her understand the many assets that I bring to the bedroom. Since it appears that she is unable to read a letter, perhaps using her ears to listen into the enjoyment which she is missing out on would aid her in her quest to be 'conquered' by the Serpent of Luria. I'm sure you're probably already being treated to a side-show with the Prince Consort, so its not like you'd be new to the ways. After we've given her a demonstration, I'd be happy to help her use this wheel of hers and work on stabbing her with my rusty dagger. By the end of the night, I'd be sure to have hit her heart.

His Highness, Prince Consort of Pian en Luries,

Brom Silverfire
Knight of Nimh

-

More to come or will Brom die first?

P.S. Comments are welcome.

28
Atamara / The Future of Atamara (Post-Great Atamaran War)
« on: January 21, 2013, 10:57:11 PM »
Okay, so I'm wondering what people's thoughts are for what the future of Atamara will be like. For all intents and purposes, the Great Atamaran War is coming to an end soon. Eston has surrendered unconditionally, CE and co are looking north to possibly attack Darka and/or BoM, Abington II (Suville) is twiddling their thumbs, CE and Tara Federation sits astride the center of the map continuing to split Atamara into thirds, and many new smaller and medium sized realms are in the north and one in the south.

What's next?

29
Title: Allow Dukes to Secede a multiple city duchy that includes capital

Summary: The new Duke/Margrave separation mechanic has created a new situation of judging secession mechanics. Under this mechanic dukes can be liege over multiple cities making the restriction on duchy secession an outdated mechanic. Just because one of the multiple cities a Duke controls is the capital shouldn't stop him from seceding if he meets all other requirements.

Details:

First let me list the complete set of current restrictions upon a seceding duchy.

Quote
You must be Duke.
Your Duchy must contain at least one city.
Your Duchy cannot contain all the cities in the realm.
Your Duchy cannot contain the realm's capital.
You must be in the city (within your Duchy) that you wish to become the new capital of your realm.
This city must not have high independence/low control.
You must have been in both your duchy and realm for at least 2 weeks.
You must have at least 6 hours available.
You cannot already be the ruler of your realm.
You cannot be in an NPC realm (pretty much moot nowadays, save for bugs).
You cannot have a family member who is already a ruler on the continent.

There is also a difference between a Duchy containing the capital being able to secede and change allegiance:

Quote
Duchies containing the capital of the realm cannot secede. They can, however, switch allegiances. To even begin considering either of these two options there must be another duchy containing a city.

I propose making the simple change of allowing Duchies that hold multiple cities to be able to secede their duchy even if one of their cities is the current capital of their realm and ALL other current requirements are made.

Benefits: This change will eliminate the current dichotomy in addressing duchies that contain a capital of a realm. Why does it make sense that one can change allegiance while Duke over the capital region, but they can't secede if they are duke over the capital region?

Two arguments I presented in the helpline thread:
1. It makes sense to me that a Duke can't secede if his ONLY city is the capital of the realm. However, if he chooses to secede and create a new realm while having more than one city, and he makes the capital of the new realm a different capital than the old one you have a completely different set of circumstances than ever seen before.

2. I guess I'm confused what is trying to be restricted here. Every single other restriction I can think of a reason for it to be in place, but this one baffles me. What is different about a Duke seceding a three city duchy(in a 4 city or more realm) and a duke transferring the allegiance of his three city duchy to another realm, (perhaps a one city realm).

Exploits: None that I can think of. Most exploits are taken care of in the other requirements.

30
Helpline / Seceding: Dukes vs Margraves
« on: January 20, 2013, 02:34:53 AM »
So, under the new estate system, who is able to secede?

Can only Dukes secede from a realm to create a new one? (Assuming they have a city or stronghold within their duchy?)

Or can Margraves of Cities/Strongholds secede to create a new realm as well.

Some other restrictions perhaps?

Pages: 1 [2] 3