Messages

46

Atamara / Re: Dear Atamara...

« on: October 27, 2015, 05:55:43 PM »

Well, whether it should happen or not, I think it does. At least somewhat.

It's at least one of the reasons why I am playing a completely different family now. So no one associates my characters now with what they did before. I didnt like the implied behavior attached to my family name.

47

Atamara / Re: Dear Atamara...

« on: October 27, 2015, 12:41:13 PM »

If KK (prolly any of my chars at Atamara ) ever gets ruler again, that realm will propably beaten to death at any cost by CE & Co.

Heh, I could say the same for Merlin. Which I think is part of the problem. But I lost. So, clearly enough people like things the way they are to keep them that way.

48

Development / Re: Can we unnerf RTO's?

« on: October 21, 2015, 02:48:00 AM »

And say hello to all government types changing theocracies.

Do you seriously think that players in this game focus that much on trying to optimize game mechanics that they will change the government type of their realm? Players won't even start wars if it means it breaks the RP of their characters and alliances. They'd rather sit and be bored most of the time.

Also, there is so much religion diversity in the game, there would be huge pushback to becoming a theocracy in most realms. Force a theocracy to have a single state religion, and you certainly won't be seeing mass changes to theocracy.

49

Atamara / Re: Dear Atamara...

« on: October 21, 2015, 12:32:43 AM »

I'm assuming you didn't just realize that the League had won Atamara. That has been true for a long time.

50

Development / Re: Can we unnerf RTO's?

« on: October 21, 2015, 12:31:21 AM »

I've never really been happy with that criteria for rto's. It really seems like there should be a way for realms to officially sanction this. Maybe just by setting an official realm religion, rto's by that religion are sanctioned or something. Or maybe just for theocracies. But it feels like there should be some mechanism like that.

I think this is a great idea. Although, I would support it primarily for theocracies. I think it would be quite reasonable for a theocracy with a supermajority of religious followers in the region to convert it with a religious takeover, assuming there are no enemy troops in the region.  And the theocracy has battlefield control. (But allow friendly troops of course. )

51

BM General Discussion / Re: Famous Old Characters

« on: October 20, 2015, 12:04:53 AM »

I think we are almost done with important olddies.

I wonder what was his name? Enri? from CE counts as a famous old character. Think his family name was Kinsey.

Enri should definitely be on the list. Led CE through many wars, which has had an outsized influence on the continent.

52

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 19, 2015, 01:08:42 AM »

My question is this: Is this whole thread just talk or is there actually a will to do something from the dev team? This conversation has gone on for years and nothing has happened. If there is serious consideration for ideas on how to do this properly, then it's a good discussion to have. Otherwise, I feel like we're almost wasting our time.

I'm happen to spend some time coming up with different ideas as solutions but I want to know that time is useful.

53

BM General Discussion / Re: Famous Old Characters

« on: October 18, 2015, 03:02:20 AM »

While it is a bit self serving I do think two of my old former characters had quite a measure of infamy on their continents.

Merlin Silverfire on Atamara
Brom Silverfire on Dwilight (more regional in Luria, though did marry and then had a falling out with Allison)

54

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 16, 2015, 08:44:02 PM »

Rather than open Dwilight to second characters, we should make all islands single character per family. Get rid of all of the iron clad alliances and two character bad behavior.

That might work if you combine it by eliminating 2 or 3 islands then leave the remaining with one character per island. That way players are more likely to be invested in the characters they do have. You'll have less copycat characters.

I think the ideal solution would be to sink all islands but Dwilight and one other. The reason to keep Dwilight is that it's the most well designed of the current maps. The ability to actually siege cities due to circle regions around them is a great design choice. Especially if it's ever combined with changes to food system.

55

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 16, 2015, 03:57:53 AM »

I think the best solution for solving BM's fundamental problem is applying character death through battles and age to everyone.

That would certainly help. At least it'd be one valuable aspect of a solution.

56

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 16, 2015, 03:37:14 AM »

I do think one of the central problems is that there seems to be some sort of denial that if we just adjust some things or create mechanics that influence denser realms that the game will magically fix itself.

It's been on a slow decline for a long time. The game as currently designed is suited for a noble base 3-5x as large on each continent. There is no easy fix to that. Closing continents or freezing all continents and starting a new continent based on a current map are solutions which need to be on the table.

It might not be the ideal solution or what we like, but things just keep getting worse as time goes on (in terms of active characters)

57

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 15, 2015, 08:45:36 PM »

Well....

We devs have been in discussion and as I've mentioned to some players already, some bigger changes are coming between now and the end of the year. However, not everything is quite able to be announced as limited volunteer time means being careful about what we commit to.

But I can share that we do intend to adjust Dwilight's monsters to be more based upon noble to region density. And for character limits to be changed. And for large realm penalties to be improved and additional ones added. Relevant announcements in more detail for these and others will be forthcoming at the appropriate times, but this should whet your appetite for now. There are still some server move issues we must handle first.

We'd love to have a more dynamic region count like you describe, but a) it would essentially require closing or reworking all current continents, and b) everyone on the frontier of that sole continent would have to bear in mind that they would be in constant danger of being overwhelmed if the density drops, while those in the core would be insulated, creating a potentially serious balance issue with only one continent available to the player. Not the best player experience, especially for the additional work input.

Two things:

1. Why is just Dwilights monsters the only one being reworked? Shouldn't all continents have a similar change if it promotes value on at least one of the continents?
2. I don't think that the frontier issue is necessarily a bad thing. Everyone starts on the frontier, and then secured their borders as core regions. The incentive for pushing the frontier would simply be that new nobles come along and might want to forge a new destiny. Starting new realms along the frontier promote opportunity with difficulty. Also, I wouldn't propose that it only effects the frontier regions. The idea would be to balance it out by making sure that core regions have chances for instability. If a region has no lord for more than a week, chances of rogues showing up and the region going rogue would rise significantly. So you couldn't have non-dense central realms holding more regions than they should. It would definitely be a different style of game than we currently are used to,but it might be necessary to adapt. Finally, it doesn't have to be restricted as the only continent. It was just one idea amongst many. I do think all continents could benefit from such dynamic region count controls though. If applied to current continents, you'd naturally have size reduction as so many realms hold way more regions than they even properly have staffed with lords.

58

BM General Discussion / Re: Closing Continents

« on: October 15, 2015, 02:34:59 PM »

I feel like the game is stuck in the awkward position of certain realms on different continents being the only reason some players stay around. That allows the other continents to have more characters than they otherwise would have. If you get rid of all but one continent you might make the problem worse. So much of the game involves history. Get rid of the history and you lose so much.

The ideal solution to me is to have some sort of system which naturally has an emergent wild lands. Either as a single continent or on every continent, have the size of the playing area naturally grow or contract based upon player density. This could be implemented with larger rogue spawns or some such along the edges of the map forcing everyone towards the middle until an equilibrium of player density is able to both defend the monsters and still have functional realms. As player strength grows they can reclaim lands. As player strength wanes, the lands are reclaimed by rogues.

The biggest issue is that the current continents aren't designed for this sort of system. In fact, it's not even necessarily a system which is best implemented with continents but more of a Pangaea type environment. Where the total possible land area might be the size of All of the current continents but the starting area only 1/4th the size of a current continent.

For reference: I'm referring to something similar to early stage Dwilight but instead of having realms separated by geography, everyone would start clumped together.

59

Newbie Board / Re: Prestige and Honor requirements for lordships and Gov positions

« on: October 15, 2015, 04:53:21 AM »

Thank you very much

60

Newbie Board / Re: Prestige and Honor requirements for lordships and Gov positions

« on: October 14, 2015, 11:59:10 PM »

Wasn't it something like 5 prestige for all positions except ruler? Thought ruler required 10.

I have no idea. Can anyone confirm this?