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 - Anaris

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 376
Feature Requests / Re: Colonial Master!
« on: November 17, 2018, 02:07:20 PM »
Tom made a lot of decisions over the years that were more driven by dogmatic vision than by what would actually be better for the game.

And attempting to claim that us not intervening in unprecedented ways to stop the trainwreck that was CE's takeover of Atamara from happening means that it must have been OK is patently absurd.

It's a very big step to go from hoping that the people actually doing things will stop and say,

Huh. Y'know, lots and lots of people, including prominent people in the community, are telling me the things I'm doing are wrong and are going to lead to serious problems down the road. Thinking about it logically, I can see how conquering the entire continent would both drive people away because they've lost everything they built in the game, and create an environment where it's harder for new people to get engaged because there's not much going on. Maybe I should stop doing what I'm doing, despite how much fun power-trip fantasies are, and try to make things more dynamic, instead. saying, ourselves,

Well, we've told these people again and again to stop, because it'll cause problems, but they're really not listening. Despite the fact that the strongest intervention there's ever been on this island—nearly the strongest ever outside Beluaterra—is lightning storms killing individual characters, it's painfully clear that won't be enough, because the people that would succeed them are of exactly the same type. Let's upend years of reasonable restrictions on our own powers, and reshape a stable-branch continent according to admin fiat, rather than the players' collective will.

And yeah, hindsight is 20/20, and yeah, we should've intervened.

But no, we shouldn't have had to. Because first, you and your brethren in CE and Tara should have recognized the harm your fun was doing to everyone else's—like so many people were telling you—and done something to change that.

BM General Discussion / Re: Whats Going on with Portal Stones
« on: November 16, 2018, 10:43:46 PM »
Portal stones were never intended to be a major part of the noble or adventurer game. They have had a vastly outsized effect on the game (especially stable islands) for far too long, and we've had a lot of complaints about it—complaints that were, in our view, quite justified.

We took steps to rein in their influence and ensure that they are not something that anyone thinks of as a go-to method for helping their realm in wars anymore.

I am sorry you lost a character to it, but there were clear warnings that this was a danger.

Feature Requests / Re: Colonial Master!
« on: November 15, 2018, 04:54:47 PM »
...even if the players did everything right and went out of their way to fix things it wasn't normally in their job description to do.

Well, the only reason there was such a big problem to fix was because those exact same players ignored many years—RL years—of nearly everyone else telling them, over and over again, "This is bad! This is a problem! You are killing the game! You are making people stop caring about Atamara!"

But no, you were having fun because you were in charge. So you didn't listen until everything we warned you about came to pass.

The fact that, once everything was stagnant and broken, those players were able to turn around and come up with ways to make them dynamic again is not, as you seem to think, a laudable thing that proves they were Right After All.

What it proves is that they could have made that choice any time, and instead they chose to make things awful for years while they got their jollies.

So there is one thing I agree with you on. We, the devs, should not have sunk Atamara in 2015.

We should have deleted or broken up the Cagilan Empire in 2010.

BM General Discussion / Re: Whats Going on with Portal Stones
« on: November 15, 2018, 02:11:03 PM »
Not sure what island you're on, but there was a recent event mainly on Beluaterra that changed how portal stones work.

In-character, the aether between worlds has been destabilized by so many portal stones being activated over the past few years, and now doing so is dangerous.

Out-of-character, as Chénier says, portal stones were never intended to be such a common thing (except during a couple of invasions).

The inventory page gives a pretty clear warning about the difficulties and dangers of using portal stones now.

Helpline / Re: Special Forces
« on: November 15, 2018, 02:46:52 AM »
No...MI are MI. Infantry are Infantry. Archers are Archers. SF are SF.

Why do they have to be "buffed" versions of something else...?

Announcements / November 2018 Recent Changes
« on: November 14, 2018, 05:35:21 PM »
Minor Changes
  • Removed Chat link from left navbar (redundant now that Discord is our primary chat mechanism)
  • Several minor graphical and quality-of-life improvements on account page (mainly mobile)
  • Streamlining and minor quality-of-life improvements to adventurer action pages
  • Improvements to realm government details page
  • Sort list of army members on "send message to some members of army" page alphabetically
  • Add realm density to statistics charts
  • Increased minimum density level to 1.7

  • Restored battle report highlighting for your unit
  • Fixed a bug causing crashes when hunting undead
  • Fixed a bug that would prevent a secession from completing
  • Fixed a bug that would prevent removing bans
  • Fixed some post-tournament travel issues
  • Restored ability to link to regions in army standing orders
  • Fixed a bug with display of Duchy bulletins
  • No longer allow a login to time out as long as you're actually doing things with at least one character

Helpline / Re: Unknown Fame Points
« on: November 14, 2018, 02:14:34 PM »

Feature Requests / Re: Colonial Master!
« on: November 13, 2018, 05:18:13 PM »
But, see, what would have been good for BattleMaster...

is if you had not spent several RL years pursuing and consolidating it in the first place, destroying the fun on the continent (and leading very, very directly to its sinking) just so you could put a little feather in your Internet cap and say "I won!"

Feature Requests / Re: Rejected: In game IC chat
« on: November 12, 2018, 02:13:21 PM »
Make an IC channel in a discord server for roleplaying purposes, where people can chat IC in a setting previously agreed on, then paste the whole thing in an RP message and post in game? It doesn't address any of the issues I would want to fix with IC chat, but, still seems slightly borderline so I thought I'd ask.

I encourage this sort of thing. It makes roleplays with multiple people much smoother than the slow and disjointed way they happen in-game, while still having the whole thing entirely in-character and entirely accessible to everyone in the realm (once it's posted in an in-game message). I've done this many times over IRC (many years ago, sadly).

As for the rest, I am still very firm on the in-game message system remaining the only form of in-character communication.

Feature Requests / Re: Colonial Master!
« on: November 07, 2018, 12:23:37 AM »
Do you not understand that perception of a threat can be just as effective at shutting down action as a real threat?

At this late date I can't remember the details, but I remember quite clearly that when I, as ruler of Riombara, talked to other rulers on BT about doing things during the period before the wars against Enweil, at least two of them straight-out said that they didn't want to do anything that might risk the wrath of Enweil.

It's the same principle as the Inalienable Rights. It doesn't matter if you don't include an explicit threat of a ban when you talk about how much you hate people who don't log in at least twice a day within 15 minutes of the turn changes: if you're in a position of power, the fact that you can inflict negative consequences on people who just want to play at their own pace is enough.

Similarly, it doesn't matter if Enweil explicitly said anything threatening to the realms in question. The fact that a) Enweil was a monstrous powerhouse of a realm, and b) we had all seen Enweil go to war fairly recently to force other realms to change their government type told us all that Enweil was a realm that would happily throw around its weight to make the entire continent behave exactly the way it wanted them to.

To be clear, I don't think that "large realms are inherently evil." Nor do I think that we need to have code in place that prevents realms from ever getting large.

What I do think is that the type of restrictions we have, and have had, on large realms are good in principle, and where they prove to be counterproductive in practice, we should change them to be better balanced and achieve the overall goal of the most fun for all.

Helpline / Re: Hits, CS, and equipment
« on: November 06, 2018, 05:36:57 PM »
This used to be true. I believe I have now eradicated all instances of this from the combat code.

I don't recall exactly when it happened, so I don't know if you would have been around, but Weapons and Armor used to be a single Equipment Quality value. They were split out into separate stats, but not everything was updated to account for this.

Feature Requests / Re: Colonial Master!
« on: November 02, 2018, 02:44:34 PM »
This is actually an excellent example of the problem with large realms. It's not just that they're stifling—it's that they create huge inequalities.

Chénier, you may have felt like everything was dynamic and awesome around the time of the Third Invasion, but being in Riombara at that time, you know what we felt like?

We felt like Enweil was strangling everything, and whenever we talked to anyone else about doing pretty much anything, there was always fear about what Enweil would do or think. And this wasn't even during the time when Rio was actively at war with Enweil, or being cut in half and nearly destroyed by Luz de Bia with Enweil's cheerful backing.

The freedom and dynamism you experienced during that time came at a cost, and that cost was the freedom of the rest of the continent to do what they wanted.

That's why I stand by the principle of restricting the ability of realms to grow that large, even as I recognize that some of the specific measures we've taken in the past (and even some we have in place now) to enforce that restriction are far from ideal.

Feature Requests / Re: "Troops" adjustment on Dynamic Map
« on: October 29, 2018, 02:03:15 PM »
Details: I have no idea how hard it would be to code, but it would be nice to have this feature represent fairly accurately army positions. Would make it so much more user friendly for marshals and generals. Maybe the frames are already supposed to indicate how much CS there is... but that's not explained, and that's not very intuitive. Having a greater number of flags (1 per 2500 cs?) display or, even better, a number next to it would be so very nice. For example, if region A has 1337 CS of army B, then there could be the army flag followed by 1.3 (base 1000 CS, 1 decimal).

The major problem is space. There are many places in the game where regions are close enough together that trying to cram any useful amount of information in is just going to overlap and become illegible. That's why I built this feature that way in the first place.

There'd also need to display the non-army troops. Perhaps the general should get to pick a flag for the realm's unassigned troops. Then give it a frame for the militia version.

Hm. I think there's already a display of those, but I don't remember what it uses for a banner.

Potentially adding all foreign troops as well from all of the realm's shared scout reports?

This is a dream of mine (specifically using all the scout reports you yourself possess, whether you or someone else took them originally), but it's currently quite impossible. Scout reports contain no information the game can readily access—they're purely HTML copies of the RegionDetails page at the time the scout report was taken, stored in the DB verbatim.

One of my medium-term projects is to have the game actually store the troop information you see in scout reports in a separate table, so it understands what it's remembering for you and can aggregate it in precisely this form.

With the potency of this info, though, it should be reserved to marshals, vice-marshals, and generals. Perhaps marshals should only see their own army, militia, and their own army's scout report results, and only the general should get the whole picture. Way too easy, otherwise, for a spy to just grab a print screen, and send it to his buddies on their private discord.

As with most such features, the intent is that anyone who has access to the information in other forms can see it here, too. So if you can see the locations and CS of your armies in table form, you'll be able to see them on the dynamic map. (I don't remember offhand who has what level of that information currently.)

Feature Requests / Re: Resources and Trade
« on: October 24, 2018, 01:44:41 PM »
There's no way in hell I'm implementing such a complex expanded system of trade if it's not going to be strategically important. The trader class just doesn't matter nearly enough to implement something like this just to justify its existence.

Feature Requests / Re: Resources and Trade
« on: October 23, 2018, 07:46:42 PM »
Not any time soon.

Once I have had the chance to implement my vaguely-planned overhaul of trade, which should (if I get it right) ensure that players don't have to worry too much about the day-to-day management of these resources if they don't want to, I will be more interested in this sort of expansion.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 376