Closing Continents

[Tom]

Really?

We've been having this discussion for YEARS now.

Just close two continents and be done with it. It will help the game survive another five years, but of course it won't last forever. No game does. That we've made it so far is a miracle already, and very few games have such a history.

Maybe it's just time to revive SpellMaster and turn the game back into what it was supposed to be at the start?

[Zakilevo]

Really?

We've been having this discussion for YEARS now.

Just close two continents and be done with it. It will help the game survive another five years, but of course it won't last forever. No game does. That we've made it so far is a miracle already, and very few games have such a history.

Maybe it's just time to revive SpellMaster and turn the game back into what it was supposed to be at the start?

Spell master we had last time was pretty fun. What happened to that anyway?

[Anaris]

It required too much constant input from Tom to keep going once he was distracted by other things (IIRC, at that time, it was RL creeping in).

[Gabanus family]

I actually agree with the 'death' thing as well. Personally I would go further and make the infiltrator game more dangerous. Make it possible for infils to kill another noble (and preferably give them an option to be invisible also, but then limiting their hours and making a % chance that they're spotted anyway). As a trade-off, any infil caught attempting to assasinate someone can be executed on the spot (without ban). This would allow for more flow through and intrique also.

The continent closing is a thing which was debated years ago also. At this point I think it would be a good idea to close 1 or 2. IMHO FEI should be the first and either Atamara or Belu second. Will we then also allow a second char on DWI though or not?

[Tom]

Spell master we had last time was pretty fun. What happened to that anyway?

It didn't scale. By its nature, it was dependent 100% on the GM (me), and any absence would mean a stop in gameplay. BM prospered because as a game run by a computer, it simply continued when I wasn't there, just development stopped but not the game itself.

[Indirik]

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.

[Dante Silverfire]

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.

[Antonine]

There are various mechanics changes which could be made, don't get me wrong. But reducing the game to one stable and one testing continent would be a good start at getting it off life support to buy time for the changes to be made which might enable it to attract new players. Mortality would be a great change to make but it, like so many other things, would be part of a long term fix.

Right now the game doesn't need tinkering with, it needs electric shock therapy. Cutting losses and closing continents will improve density and make it much more fun on the remaining one or two continents. That's the kind of treatment the game needs. Working on a long term recovery is pointless if the game dies before then anyway.

[Zakilevo]

How about this?

1) All characters can be killed (Could be for a short period after closing of the continents)
2) After closing the continents, allow characters from other continents to move to remaining continents.
3) New character limit to 1 per continent - Applies right after the end of immigration from closed continents.
- If you have more than 1, you can still play them up to 2 characters but if you lose or pause your characters, you cannot create or unpause them until you meet the limit.

[Indirik]

If you implement a limit, everyone has to follow it. No grandfathering. That just gives the grandfathered players an unfair advantage.

[Zakilevo]

So just straight up 1 character per continent?

[Gabanus family]

That would mean nobody can play more than 2 chars. That's quite a big change from the 5 chars people have now (although I guess the war island will remain a separate thing, so you can have 3 chars).

[Lorgan]

The only really good map there is is unfrozen/uncut AT.

Also you people with all your limits and ceilings. As Jenko poignantly put it:

[Sacha]

The only really good map there is is unfrozen/uncut AT.

Also you people with all your limits and ceilings. As Jenko poignantly put it:

Unfrozen AT was a borefest, that's why they froze it in the first place Ironically however, they ended up destroying two realms which were at the very least somewhat entertaining compared to the rest.

Destroy FEI and possibly AT, and then do what Indirik says and limit players to one character per island.

[Chamberlain]

I like having 2 characters on a continent. I feel it adds depth to the roleplay side of the game... ie. family ties etc. I guess that is kinda a personal thing though and not everyones bag.

As to continents. I have been on all but FEI,

I find BT the most active if infuriating of the continents I lived on, that said I guess it could be realm specific. AT made my eyes bleed with boredom.