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 - Abstract

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
BM General Discussion / Re: I'm back after 4 year (Need suggestions)
« on: January 03, 2021, 01:30:55 PM »
I'm not really active right now so I can't really suggest a realm. I do suggest trying out the BattleMaster discord though. Most of the Out-of-Character social interaction happens there now and the forum doesn't see much use.

Invite link to the discord:

Development / Re: flexible density
« on: November 14, 2020, 08:13:46 PM »
The competition for lordships is pretty simple. If you have a realm with as many regions as nobles, a density of 1, then there is no competition as everyone gets a lordship. If you have a realm with half as many regions as nobles, a density of 2, then only half the realm can have a lordship. The higher the density limit, the scarcer the lordships. The scarcer the lordships, the more likely there is competition for vacant lordships.

Dwilight was the main island I was thinking of as well.

Development / Re: flexible density
« on: November 11, 2020, 07:14:56 PM »
That would be a step backwards and, depending on the island, potentially defeat the purpose of density. Density prevents realms from expanding so much that they struggle to maintain regions and density provides the benefit of increased competition for lordships.

Feature Requests / Re: Option to Auto-Add 'Dear John'
« on: September 18, 2020, 04:33:48 PM »
This reminds me of another feature idea which was a customizable conclusion to letters that would be automatically placed at the end. For example: "For the Kingdom," in place of a "sincerely,". Though I don't remember if it was ever officially requested/rejected, I do remember one of the arguments against it was the less personalized feel. Essentially it creates/incentivizes a boiler plate which feels lifeless.

I suspect this idea would share a similar concern. I'm assuming this is what you had in mind when you added the "downside" of blandness.

Other Games / Re: Assassin's Creed: Valhalla
« on: September 17, 2020, 01:03:52 PM »
I haven't really paid attention to the game. I've really been out of the loop when it comes to new games for the past ~8 years.  :P

That said there is a YouTube channel I watch occasionally that is ran by a guy who did some advisory for this new game. Jackson Crawford is the channel/guy's name. His videos are very informative and would recommend.

This said, I would recommend looking into joining the discord if you want more responses to this question. Unfortunately the forum isn't as active as it once was. Now the forum is really only used for the occasional long form discussion about BattleMaster.

Feature Requests / Online Status
« on: September 13, 2020, 05:13:17 AM »
Title: Online Status


Allow users to list when they are online or not and to see who else in their realm is listed online. The goal is to encourage in-game messaging and activity.


Currently players have to guess whether or not anyone is online. Couple different online status listings that the user can choose from: online, away, busy, invisible (offline). Some menu bar so that players can see who in their realm(s) are online and to set their own status. No mention of last login time, this would be open to abuse and is unnecessary.


When you know someone else is online in your realm you will be more likely to attempt dialogue in-game. This is something that most communication mediums, such as discord, have.

Possible Downsides/Exploits:

Activity police, those desiring last minute movements and such. This would mean that an inalienable right, or some general rule, for setting your online status would be needed. With such a rule this downside goes away.

The unfortunate potential for a player, notably a new player, to fall into the mistaken impression that no one online right now means the realm/game is dead.

Feature Requests / Re: Jousting Duels, Ignore Character Confirmation
« on: August 16, 2020, 03:22:37 AM »
Doesn't have to be a duel, could always be a training match.

BM General Discussion / Re: OOC power-gaming???
« on: May 17, 2020, 09:03:16 PM »
OK, Thal was accepting of anyone regardless of their previous history, I will give you that point.  But, at that time, anyone who asked on DISCORD about advice for joining a realm on BT, Obeah realm(s) and Thalmarkin were the "goto" advice that was given.  I have not seen this so much in recent times, but it was the case then.

Just to clarify, other realms were recommended on discord. I know this because I personally recommended Gotland and Caelint as realms to join during that war. Seeing as I have been a pretty active member on discord, I'd say most new comers that looked for recommendations would get a message from me with recommendations.

The reasoning for recommending Gotland and Caelint was quite simple: they were at war and neighbors. Having short travel times helps make war more interesting because you don't have to spend a week or two travelling to get to the front. Though the message counts were lacking I was perfectly happy to recommend a realm that could be interesting for the war focused players.

Quote from: Zatirri
In addition, SV was there during that conflict, they declared war on Thalmarkin quite early on.

SV against Thalmarkin at the time was a separate conflict. SV declared war in response to Thalmarkin declaring war on OS. Thalmarkin declared war on OS because OS was sending infiltrators up to Thalmarkin and attacking nobles. So, it isn't really like Thalmarkin started that war or anything. The war between Thalmarkin & the southern realms (OS & SV at the time) was going to come regardless of what Thalmarmin did.

Now the reason for war was because of Mordok (surprise, it is still the reason.) As the ruler of OS at the time my thoughts of the war were as follows: we try to kill Mordok even though we almost certainly can't. Though the distance between realms are large the reason for war is interesting. When the forces met there would be the chance for interesting interaction (RP & messages). After a couple trips hopefully the birth of the Jidington realm (Lux Nova as it would be called) would have happened. Then a potential war in the south could be conceived. The war with Thal was never meant to be effective. (Edit: to clarify, at the beginning it was never meant to be effective. Later there was a desire to be effective because it was decided that it was possible to move OS, and maybe even Nova, to the north. That is a different story though.)

As far as I remember, other than infiltrators, OS and SV never acted against Thalmarkin during that time. (My character also went up to Thalmarkin with scrolls but this was just before the OS-Nova war started.) Thalmarkin also never really acted against OS. One Thal noble made a trip down there with a unit and a couple minor skirmishes happened but nothing actually important. Another went down with scrolls but the impact of that is debatable.

I bring up the points in that last paragraph in part because it seems that Thalmarkin getting "involved" in southern affairs was used to prove that Thalmarkin were "bullies". If the references to scrolls in the past parts of this thread are the scroll events I am thinking of then the interpretation is completely wrong. OS and Nova were not at war at the time and just negotiating. More importantly, it will be blaming Thalmarkin for a war that was essentially declared upon them.

BM General Discussion / Re: OOC power-gaming???
« on: May 12, 2020, 06:39:10 PM »
If you sign a Mutual Defense Pact with a realm, but you are just a peace with them, you won't be able to do much to defend them anyway. Only one of you would participate in battles anyway, the other would just observe.

Just to clarify the game mechanics: non-allies can participate on the same side in battle if they are attacking someone they are both at war with. They won't fight together if they would be the defender in the battle.

You can see more information on how sides are determined on the wiki:

If something like this is done then it should probably be wrapped into an expansion of the "forage the battlefield" option that exists.

Feature Requests / Courtier-trader Unit Designation
« on: April 16, 2020, 12:59:47 AM »

Allow Courtier-Traders to have police units.


Traders are restricted to only having mercenaries. This FR is to make it so the Warrior-Trader stuck with mercenaries but the courtier-trader can have police and/or mercenaries.


Courtier-traders will not have to drop the trader subclass in order to have a useful unit that can do police work.

Possible Downsides/Exploits:

None. Traders have access to long distance trading without needing to travel long distances now. There is little to no reason for them to have a unit let alone a unit that can travel long distances.

Feature Requests / Re: Priest Perform Miracle
« on: April 14, 2020, 01:33:29 PM »
Shame on you Gildre, you should know better!  :P

Granted, I'm pretty sure there are still mentions on the wiki that say: "there will never be a forum."  ;D

General Talk / Re: I've got a book out!
« on: April 14, 2020, 01:30:04 PM »
Congratulations indeed! I can't promise to buy and read it but I did give you a shout out on the BM Twitter:

Feature Requests / Re: Relics for Temples
« on: April 11, 2020, 05:48:41 PM »
What requirements would there be for something to be a relic? Would it be just any item?

Dwilight / Re: Hi
« on: April 07, 2020, 10:50:43 PM »
Glad you are well Glaum.  ;D

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5