Feedback / Comments

[Choso]

I dont think it does from my personal strategy.

I rolled a 134 and hit with admin 2 and admin 3.

134 * 1.5 = 201 which was what I got.

Had my base rolls been higher my production woulda been bonkers.

The 1.5 multiplier put most of my stuff to what I expected

[BJR]

Not necessarily my ideas. Resulting from a convo: Ideas.... Food for thought

1. serious mechanics for betrayals and such
2. need to 'build' IC reasoning for attacks?
a. Can'T attack someone out of the blue without some IC/mechanics consequences
b. random events that create animosity / friendships or something
c. have to get caught doing spy ops to create tension?
3. how can we limit impacts of OOC players coming in? Maybe after X turns, reroll and new players have to join without building armies? Just join a player?
a. Open up NPC generation more
b. Players join as officers with no army or Civil turns. Let as many become rulers that want.
c. Adjust a map for the number of players that want to play as a ruler.
d. develop the roles model
4. Bigger map overall.
5. Limit the benefits gained by other players joining each other or boost what NPCs can do to more match players.
a. institute pay grades and such so that a player with too many ooc peeps gets bogged down
6. ranks or something for end game in next version so people with armies that are defeated can play for something more. Like one ruler winner, one officer winner? Maybe a winner in each role? Warlord (conquers), Merchant (richest?), Crafter (highest item?), Duelist (no idea a fame thing?), General (best stats / skills)
7. Everyone starts with a village, no more camps. Once you are defeated or if you join after turn 1, you have to go one of the other routes as an officer?

[Titania]

There have been several times where I've wondered what repercussions were going to be for certain things - and there been none. It was rather disheartening to see some new faces join, just to turn around and have them both helping a single person immediately, for no IC reason. One of them has had no RP at all, just got on, created a character and joined a player, and I haven't seen him since. Another joined and immediately attacked the same persons enemy (even though numerous times it was stated that there was no alliance, but then it was stated after it had been done that it was a planned attack all along????) for seemingly no reason. That one has put up RP and has since branched off and started to do his own thing, but it doesn't change the damage that was done not only in game but to player morale. I know I was very disappointed at seeing that happen, and the blatant skirting around the rules and nothing happen - not even a "hey, don't do that again, that's bad".

I also think Spy actions should be reworked a little. There always being at least a 25% chance of success seems really high to me - there's only been what, 2-3 captures? Compared to how many attempts? Especially with them dealing a percentage of the total number (including garrisons) that means often times a larger army can get decimated by a couple of guys teaming up and performing spy ops against him, while being unable to do anything in return or to help boost his chances of succeeding. I think the bare minimum/maximum chance to succeed or fail should be 15%/85%, or at least something a little more balanced than what it is currently. The amount of damage done compared to success rate needs adjusted in my opinion.

[Yuki-Onna]

Maybe ban joining somebody unless you're defeated. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't really care and kinda like the ffa shit.

[Titania]

I don't know if this is something that is being considered, and I know that the garrison was put into place to help prevent things such as this, but what if there was a one turn waiting period before you could invade another territory, no matter what it is - village, town, or city? That would help prevent the steamrolling through areas with people putting other players ahead of them. I know there's not a way to go back and change it now, but maybe it's something that can be considered for next version, along with the garrison present always fighting - even if it's just led by the Sub-Commander NPC? Or if there is no garrison or a less than full garrison, making it a full garrison at minimum? Perhaps quantity of full garrison +100->150 random extras? (A version of this has already been put into effect )
Exception being if the battle has gone extended with the same person - for example, with Xubu Kai withdrawing against me, have the remaining garrison fight but nothing extra - and if there's no garrison then you get the territory. That way what happened to me doesn't happen to others, where I was in an extended battle for three turns and still had to fight a larger army than anticipated because it was abandoned. However, if the battle goes extended and the original attacker does not continue the attack but someone else does and the defender retreats, have the new opponent still fight the NPC army/garrison to prevent the handing over kind of situation.

[Choso]

So is phailak testing a new battle system with the quest?

I find it interesting. Complicated but opens up new ideas.

[Yuki-Onna]

Too much work. I'm going to be out for at least a few weeks. Maybe a month.

[Choso]

but its just getting exciting.

[Titania]

So if I haven't missed anything, the skills that are useless to NPCs currently are the following.
Acumen
Attentive
Crafty
Perception
Perfectionist
Polymath
Studious
Trader

[Titania]

Color Coding the reference tables for skills. For example, Civil skills are blue, Battle skills red, Crafting skills orange, Personal skills green, etc.