Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Mark of fear.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedMark of fear.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Strategos View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Operations

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 214
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 15:54
Some very interesting ideas Shrapnel, definately worth looking into.
Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis
Back to Top
Zangi View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 15 Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 295
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:41
Originally posted by Strategos Strategos wrote:

My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player?


Well the thing is, those smaller groups of players will still keep their soldiers, to fight another day.  The commander might die though if he is immune, perhaps they can be effected by it too?  Or at least be smart enough to turn around if everyone else wet their pants...

But yea, I like Shrap's idea of it not holding under 'coordinated and constant barrage'. 
Charges could instead recharge over time, like 1 charge every 5 or 10 minutes till it reaches max?


Back to Top
Dervious Jhyris View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 25 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 19
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:41
Or it could be that dealing with smaller players for a while is exactly what its for?

Since the units survive, it just means you need to be dedicated and build up a larger enough force till you break it.

And yes, SC, I think it should ALSO send back that many units and split the force, giving it a little more oomph, as right now despite the higher charge count a destructo ward is more useful since you can effectively handle more units with a bit of diplo defense.

If you DON'T have it split up forces, my proposal for "infinite charges until broken" should probably be accompanied by a significant increase in size.

Essentially, wards of destruction become the basic tool of war and fear wards become the easy low maintainence way to deal with harriers and random thieves, since only a dedicated attack can overcome it (but it isn't likely to do much to hurt a dedicated attack).

Edited by Dervious Jhyris - 30 Sep 2010 at 16:41
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 16:56
Originally posted by Shrapnel Shrapnel wrote:

Originally posted by Strategos Strategos wrote:

It's an interesting idea, the first thought that comes to mind is that this might be fair, given the rune doesn't kill any units.

My second thought however is, wouldn't this make it very difficult for a group of smaller players to band up against one larger player?
What if the breaking point is based on how many units attack within a certain time period?  For example, say a rune has 100 "charges" before it breaks and army A attacks with 50 troops, 5 minutes later army B attacks with 40 trroops, then another 5 minutes later army C attacks with 50 troops.  The rune then breaks because more than 100 "charges" were used within 10 minutes, but say army C didn't attack until 10 hours later, then the rune doesn't break.  Maybe the fear runes will still have charges, but the charges regenerate over time?


Heart says yes, head says no.

Far too complicated - we're trying to "declutter" things.  Players need to be able to see what's what at a particualr point in time, and things should really only shift through *direct* player activity, rather than time-based things (as much as possible).


Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:00
Originally posted by Dervious Jhyris Dervious Jhyris wrote:


And yes, SC, I think it should ALSO send back that many units and split the force, giving it a little more oomph, as right now despite the higher charge count a destructo ward is more useful since you can effectively handle more units with a bit of diplo defense.


That was slightly what I was afraid of, but thought was actually the most sensible option too...

Much more coding involved in this (ie handling "non-participatory units who have been feared, but still part of the main force of units who haven't been"). 

The alternative is to simply send back the other units and let the remainder go on - but that's probably as much code (as you need to explain to the sending player why he sent out one diplo group but now has two coming back).

Will think on it.

Best,

SC
Back to Top
Ethelion View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 34
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:18
I think that spells with charges should regenerate at a rate of max charges/cool-off period.
Back to Top
GM Stormcrow View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 17:57
Originally posted by Ethelion Ethelion wrote:

I think that spells with charges should regenerate at a rate of max charges/cool-off period.


Again, the "confuse" factor is possible here.

We have ideas in mind for a school of "Scrying". This might tell you the number of charges remaining.  But generally, once a number has been reported, we're against changing it.

Players need to know what they're fighting against.

For example, if your scouts hit an NPC camp and you get a report back, if you send an army out then and there - regardless of the time or distance to that NPC - it doesn't suddenly transform from a Handful of Wolves to a Legion of Arakvar (as that would be unfair).  ie, if there's an army inbound, the system doesn't change that fact.

I'm all for *players* changing facts (by reinforcement, or by dropping and recasting spells, or whatever), but I'm generally against game facts that the system changes itself (ie regenerating spells).

They only lead to player confusion which manifests itself (from our perspective) as Petitions called "My report said X and the reality was Y", which we'd prefer not to have!

Best,

SC
Back to Top
Zangi View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 15 Jul 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 295
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:04
Ok, what about a player recharge spell?  To recharge runes?  More cows and less cooldown?

Like...
Level 1 Recharges 10 charges.
Level 2 Recharges 50 charges.
Level 3 Recharges 150 charges.

Limited by 'Max' charge of the original spell.


Though, this is not in my interest if implemented alone... considering my suggest for longer cooldowns to the kill ward spells, specifically Ward of Destruction...


And instead of just 'scrying', why not allow advanced Spies to find this information out also?
Back to Top
Ethelion View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 34
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:15
Stormcrow,
 
I understand what you are saying.  What about a line of magic research that would allow you to manually recharge partially dimished spells?  Puts the player back into the mix, but allows for getting spells back to full power without have to cancel it, wait the cool off time, and then recast.
 
I'm thinking it could work something like this:
 
1) Have three levels of recharge spells that could apply to any spell that has a charge.
 
i.e.    Gift of Mana: recharges up to 25% of charges, cool-off time 8 hours
         Minor Mana Flare: recharge up to 50% of charges, cool-off time 16 hours
         Major Mana Flare: recharge up to 100% of charges, cool-off time 32 hours
 
2) (Possible addition, but adds complexity)  Cool-off time applies to both the recharging line and the target magic school 
Back to Top
Shrapnel View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Sep 2010 at 18:53
Zangi and Ethelion,
 
Excellent ideas, but it gets away from the main topic of this thread, making fear runes useful.  If your ideas are implemented, I still would never want to use the fear runes, because I'd always want to charge my killing runes.  In fact, I think that'd make seeking runes useless too. 
 
So we need something that makes fear runes useful, but doesn't let the system change the status.  How about changing the effect of the rune?  Right now the rune just makes the attacking army return.  How about if it not only makes the attacking army return, but basically paralyzes the army for a period of time?  That army returns, but then you cannot send it out or make any changes to that army for a period of a couple hours or so?  Or maybe the army doesn't return, but camps outside making it vulnerable to attack from other parties?  Maybe a fear rune gives a combat penalty to an attacking army?  Fear runes would have the benefit of affecting whole armies instead of having charges, but still wouldn't kill the troops.  Would this create a strategical enough choice that some people may opt for fear instead of killing?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.