Tops and Flops

[De-Legro]

The way it is right now, most chars won't see a single scroll. And when they DO get one, odds are it wont work on account of a low magic stat. As it stands, there is almost no point in even having them.

Then it will be a REAL achievement when someone does successfully use on, don't you think?

[Jeckyl]

BT chars were able to use a few, I know I did. But aside from that instance, that char will likely never get a decent chance at using them effectively.

[songqu88@gmail.com]

Well too bad, I guess. What's the big deal about that anyway? We could just erase scrolls from the game completely, since they don't actually contribute much...Of course, that would just bring on complaints about how scrolls were taken out.

But now the complaint is that scrolls are too rare so casting them is often unsuccessful. Then if we make it more common, inevitably some people will start complaining that they are overpowered and throw accusations of people making slave advies just for getting scrolls, or some other complaints.

In the end, there's just no making everyone happy, so the question becomes, would altering the current system make significantly more people happy than they are now?

[De-Legro]

Well too bad, I guess. What's the big deal about that anyway? We could just erase scrolls from the game completely, since they don't actually contribute much...Of course, that would just bring on complaints about how scrolls were taken out. But now the complaint is that scrolls are too rare so casting them is often unsuccessful. Then if we make it more common, inevitably some people will start complaining that they are overpowered and throw accusations of people making slave advies just for getting scrolls, or some other complaints. In the end, there's just no making people happy, so the question becomes, would altering the current system make significantly more people happy than they are now?

Nail on the head Artemesia. The other option is to make scroll effects so insignificant that nobody bothers with them. There is a reason unique items don't grant extra CS, or allow you to throw fireballs at your enemy or something.

The other thing is that magic isn't supposed to be common place, especially among nobility. I have always thought this was one of the reasons nobles can't directly interact with Sages and Wizards. A noble that has practised magic enough to be proficient, should in my opinion be considered suspect in most cases by his peers.

[Mercer]

Tops:
* I can play when I want and as much as I want.
* Complex negotiation and compromise.
* Continuous development.

Flops:
* Cliques that bar new players (to the game or realm) from having characters advance much.
* It is too difficult for an army to travel far (equipment/morale/gold).
* The election system should use score or approval voting.  The current elections result in too many cases of vote splitting.

And Bankers got totally nerfed!

[Zakilevo]

I am pretty sure the game is designed so your army cannot travel too far. If it was possible, we wouldn't need colonies and a super power can conquer entire continent

[Cadfan]

I am pretty sure the game is designed so your army cannot travel too far. If it was possible, we wouldn't need colonies and a super power can conquer entire continent

Yes, it is designed so that wars over great distances are not easy. It is a bit odd to see so many flops be listed that aren't really game design problems, but are rather problems with the community itself.

[songqu88@gmail.com]

Well no matter what you do there'll be people complaining. Some people might not like how things are now, but change it to satisfy them, and others complain about other things, or those same people might find out that the changes turned out actually worse than the originals. End all is you can't make everyone happy, but at least you can find out what makes people very unhappy and make less people very unhappy.

[Cadfan]

Well no matter what you do there'll be people complaining. Some people might not like how things are now, but change it to satisfy them, and others complain about other things, or those same people might find out that the changes turned out actually worse than the originals. End all is you can't make everyone happy, but at least you can find out what makes people very unhappy and make less people very unhappy.

The point of the thread was to provide feedback to be used to enhance the game. In most cases attempting to regulate community behavior via game mechanics is destined to fail, unless we massive restrict the scope of activities available to players.

[songqu88@gmail.com]

I have no set opinion either way on this, so I hope no one here thinks I take any position in regards to this thread. However, the observation stands true for a lot of things, in that indeed not everyone can be made happy, and this thread is just a small reminder that this game has varying aspects that affect different players differently. This is a very safe observation, possibly even "obvious". But since we did open up the questions about the community with the "It is a bit odd to see so many flops be listed that aren't really game design problems, but are rather problems with the community itself.", a summary wouldn't hurt.

[Dobromir]

Tops

- Heirarchy system
- Most people are actually fun and good natured
- Variety in play - You can be however you want - Cunning, Evil, Tyrannic

Downs

-Estate system - Its just very aggravating and getting new players to set them is also hard just adds unneeded complexity to the game.
-Hard to break into some realms - I've been in alot of realms.  Some tolerate new people in posts some dont.  I've held ruler a long time but pretty much everyone on the council changed within the past couple of years.
-Combat system - Needs a serious upgrade.  I would suggest allowing marshals to select where infantry/archers/cav/SF are deployed specifically instead of archer opening, infantry wall and that stuff.  Also special forces need serious tweaking.

[Bael]

...  Also special forces need serious tweaking.

In what way?

[Dobromir]

In what way?

In simple terms they arent worth their cost at best (consider same equipment on infantry and SF) SF make up to 75-80% of what a infantry unit can do with same gold spent on them.  Those results are actually from the better half of SF the worse have are more like 55-60%

[Zakilevo]

...(maybe the dev team should add a tiny comment on their special abilities? hehe)

Maybe instead of columns we should have 8x3 squares?

[Silverfire]

In simple terms they arent worth their cost at best (consider same equipment on infantry and SF) SF make up to 75-80% of what a infantry unit can do with same gold spent on them.  Those results are actually from the better half of SF the worse have are more like 55-60%

Show me an infantry unit that has 95/95 equipment like my SF do, and I'll concede that point. Until that can be done, I beg to differ.

Smaller units are vastly more efficient than larger units. Thus, a medium size SF force of 40 men can easily rival a 100+ man infantry force. SF also cost less to sustain them over time than an infantry unit. They are very valuable indeed.

Now, if only I had some range 5 SF....that would be sick. (yes I know they exist)