More races in this game!!!!
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=1621
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 13:08
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: More races in this game!!!!
Posted By: Lionz Heartz
Subject: More races in this game!!!!
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 21:50
|
I am so bored of the current race options. I think a game like this can benefit from having more race options. Prestige wise, race changes would make this game more money!!!
I am sure I am not the only person in this game that is tired of the current race options. I know faction wise, with the makeup of the game currently, a race change or added races will not happen till late this year or the next year. That is because of the current work load the devs have right now, barring any setbacks. This is not an original idea by no means, but from playing many games, I have always liked the option of having more than one race. More races: Goblin Werewolf Vampire Gnomes Witches Trolls Dragon Humanoids Centaurs Giants |
Replies:
Posted By: Blops
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 22:15
|
"is AtH"
Interesting idea, i do believe its on the devs list somewhere.
|
Posted By: Jerec Cross
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 22:20
| Yes, that would be an interesting addition to the game. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 23:07
|
Killer Bunny Cavalry strikes again! ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: Gemley
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 23:43
| I would to be goblins |
Posted By: Gemley
Date Posted: 09 Mar 2011 at 23:43
| sorry about my typing, meant would like to be a goblin |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 02:38
|
I would like to see some new races with fundamental differences from other races. For example, a dragonkin race that is much more powerful than others but can't join an alliance or use normal equipment. Lone rangers would have an overpowered account but be unable to compete against players who can work together on military campaigns and economic support. Or how about a purely nomadic tent-dwelling race of Nords that has decent offensive firepower and is excellent at dodging attacks but extremely weak on defense? Such mobility would make the game world more dynamic. Or when naval stuff and pathfinding comes out, a pirate race whose cities are actually their ships? And all the obvious details apply.  |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 02:52
|
I want chicken people. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: GM ThunderCat
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 07:42
Hot oil would do double damage and battering rams would make them more tasty, increasing the food they drop?
|
Mr. Ubiquitous Feral wrote:Posted By: Lionz Heartz
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 13:49
I love these ideas so much. To be honest I was thinking of the same things kinda, but was holding off on details of it till I had those hammered down. I agree that each race should be defined more than just the numbers they are now. Maybe have each race be able to make something no other race can make... Perhaps a unique siege weapon or a new unique troop or an all-in-one diplomat unit... The pirate idea is so great... How would a player be able to siege that player if they are moving all over the place? I also agree that solo players need more power granted to them in this game. That is very much needed indeed. I also hope this game gives the underdog player that is outnumbered a better chance to defend against overwhelming odds. Something like 300 Spartans able to fight off a much bigger force due to strategy. This game needs more strategy options. I think this game should force players to pick a certain strategy when they attack. The same for the player defending. More or less a que of 5 strategies to use. This dynamic will make the game more exciting and less predictable. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_strategies http://www.molossia.org/milacademy/strategy.html http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-thry.htm#grand Those links above are great resources to come up with sound strategy options for offensive and defensive military operations. Just taking concepts from other sources that these strategies once selected can very well make the outcome of a game better. Intelligent minds like myself needs more stimulation than the current boring strategy in the game. Which is having more troops than your enemy, very boring. For every offensive strategy selected, their will be a defensive strategy to counter it. I mean that is one of the things I liked so much about Age of Empires, I was able to pick a strategy to attack or defend. I miss this so much, that is why I feel this game needs it. I do understand that the devs do not like the rock, paper, scissors model... However I want the strategy to be more dynamic than that. There will be luck involved sure, but more or less the outcome would based on who is the smarter opponent. I will be coming up with a very sound and detailed way of doing this in this game very soon. As a player that has played this game for a year, I know what needs improvements and what does not. For those that do not think the strategy in this game needs improvement than look at the current battles in game currently... Everyone is partaking in ZERG warfare (outnumbering your opponent to a point that there will be no losses building wise from their end). To win in this game you only need to have more troops than the other opponent. So the only strategy in this game is too have more troops than your opponent. Basically that battle is already decided before the battle starts because each party knows what the outcome will be. This is why this game needs a face lift on strategy. |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 15:20
| I always wanted cows to be a race. Each unit would take a certain number of actual cows, rather than cow related products. Though, that's mostly because I always feel bad when I have to turn my cows into said products... |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 16:50
The Chicken People would just stand around and look at each other. They would be used as diversion as the real armies snuck up and began sapping the wall. Their presence would also decrease the gold cost of the army, since they would be supplying food as part of their war effort. And yes, after having their heads cut off, they would still run around in circles causing much confusion. Chicken people are a necessity to any serious armed endeavor. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 17:17
|
LH, race variety isn't going to fix the problems you perceive. It's a fact of life (and a rather intelligent one at that) that when people have to work this hard at building their account, they are heavily invested into the game. And because of that investment, people are going to play smart and cautiously. That means no one is going to start/fight a war they don't strongly believe they'll win and do so profitably. From that perspective, outnumbering your opponent is a very good thing. What would address this perceived stalemate is increasing the ability to fight over wealth in a way that doesn't make warfare personal and burn so many bridges. Pathfinding will be the true savior in that regard. As for pirates, they wouldn't be sieged. Pirates would simply be vulnerable to fleet reduction or even wholesale destruction from attacks by regular naval units. Pirates that let themselves get caught would be as vulnerable to total obliteration as any other fleet at sea. But on the flip side, they can get back on their feet by capturing new ships--either in battles where they heavily outnumber the enemy, or with "diplo missions" to other players' naval ports. There's no building, only plundering, capturing, and stealing ships at port. Running out of diplos and ships would be like losing your last city, so you'd get a reset with a fresh small fleet and your technology retained. Technology research would be the one form of traditional account development you'd still have to do, albeit with a radically different tech tree. Also to keep the "fun" and high-seas adventure down to a reasonable level, pirate accounts would only ever be allowed to have/be one fleet. I expect a lot of players would choose pirate for their second account. In theory, this coupled with the vulnerability of having no place to call home should keep the seas from becoming overrun with pirates. Also also, pirates would have limited carrying capacity, but be able to bury treasure on uninhabited squares for a rainy day. They would also be able to use trade hubs, so the quest for plunder wouldn't be completely pointless. |
Posted By: Lionz Heartz
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 17:32
Race variety will give players more options and less boredom. That alone will make the game more interesting. So, it will help fix the boredom factor I perceive in the game. Stop assuming. The whole facts of life argument is a stupid way of stating to just deal with the flawed part of the game. However, you may be fine with the lack of strategy in the game and are fine with the most powerful controlling the game. This is the only reason alone that you would want to keep the status quo right now. The strategy in the game currently benefits the most powerful and since you sit in that position, everything is fine in your boredom world of domination. You will have to expand on the increase chance to fight over wealth idea. Pretty broad statement that makes it hard for me to understand the concept you are trying to make a point of. I understand your fear of any strategy or new concept in the game that will level the playing field. However, I do not always agree with your ideas, but you do once in awhile come up with something good. Keeping the current stalemate strategy in the game is a bad idea. It is very flawed and needs a face lift. I do not expect every person to agree with me on an idea. In fact I do not need anyone to. It is pretty obvious what is lacking in the game and this fact alone is reason enough it does not take a genius to figure out what is lacking in the game. |
Posted By: KillerPoodle
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 17:32
| I want the sharks with lazor beams that Stormcrow promised me in Global Chat. |
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 17:54
|
What is obvious is that the good players who know how to work any system are on top and successful, and the players who lack insight and strategic wisdom want to blame the system for their failures. You can change the system, but you can't make the players stupid. That playing field will never be level. |
Posted By: Lionz Heartz
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 18:05
So basically what you are saying is; no matter how broken and flawed a system is, it is a good system. Your motto is no matter how broke a system is, blame the player. So, okay keep on giving yourself a big pat on the back for being on top of the game due to your genius alone. But at this point I will have to agree to disagree with your views. No point debating much further with you on this matter or any other matter to be honest. My strategy idea comes down to politics really. My idea will more or less level the playing field and make strategy a true factor in the game. This will appeal to the masses more so than the players in power. Just like real life, the rich people want more control and want to keep the competitive edge over the less rich folk. HM, you only want to keep the current status quo to keep the competitive edge and advantage over the less rich folk. Either you are for the masses or are for the 1% population to control everything. HM, you are for the 1% option, I am more for the masses leveling out the playing field and not making everything such a ZERG fest. Masses as in giving more players the option to defend and attack in this game with less redundancy of ZERGs in a game like this. Only a simple unintelligent mind would be in favor of only one strategy in a game. I want more than one strategy. |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 18:36
|
Illyria is the sandbox. I am the strategist. Both of me. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: Mr Andersson
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 18:41
Are you kidding? That is not what he is saying. Where in his post does he rate the "state" of the system?
Strategy already is a true factory of the game, though I'm guessing you and I don't share the same definition of what strategy is. ------------- MrA |
Posted By: Lord Loss
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 19:30
|
I agree  Great Idea ------------- Have a nice day :) |
Posted By: Strategos
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 19:45
|
When we can dedicate development time to it, we will most likely expand on the current strategic options (and more races is something we often discuss). These will probably in future, as in the past be based on historic strategies. When we were designing siege strategies for example, the Athenian sicillian expedition was used as inspiration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Expedition - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicilian_Expedition Of course this isn't real life and as such, real life historic strategies cannot simple be forced on the game, they have to be adapted and used as inspiration. At the moment we can't say when we'll be working more on races and strategies (though trade elements upcoming in UI2 are in our opinion potent tools of warfare for the strategically minded). I think I can assure you though, that the evolution of Illyriad won't stagnate any time soon, we'll be developing new and exciting features for years to come under the current plan. ------------- Postatem obscuri lateris nescitis |
Posted By: GM ThunderCat
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 20:06
Beware! The Chicken People!
  |
Posted By: G0DsDestroyer
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 21:17
HOLY  THEY'RE REAL!!!!!!!!!!!! AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!*G0DsDestroyer wonders if there's a chicken NPC..... ------------- http://live.xbox.com/en-US/MyXbox/Profile?gamertag=G0DsDestroyer" rel="nofollow - Tia mi aven Moridin isainde vadin |
Posted By: Llyorn Of Jaensch
Date Posted: 10 Mar 2011 at 22:56
You forgot to say 'fricken'. |
Posted By: STAR
Date Posted: 11 Mar 2011 at 03:47
|
It will be awesome to see new races introduced to the game, and its nice to see its something thats already been discussed by the devs. I think there is alot of strategy in the game but i feel it is more focused towards alliances rather then individuals so it would be nice to offer more defensive options to ones who choose to play solely, especially when defending against multiple opponents. Defending yourself 24/7 is impossible for a single player, havent quite figured out how to even up the odds in this department yet (even if it is only by a smidgen) but im working on it :D |
Posted By: Mr. Ubiquitous Feral
Date Posted: 11 Mar 2011 at 04:03
|
Find other cities near you who are also independent. Ask them to start an alliance. Now you got answers, advice, back-up, resources, maybe even some cash. You could be 'The Ruby Tuesdays'.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUKz2fvb6jY&feature=related - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUKz2fvb6jY&feature=related
That one's free. ------------- I am a Machine. |
Posted By: STAR
Date Posted: 11 Mar 2011 at 04:26
|
ok i think i have a few ideas, tho i do realise that there may be some flaws in them, im still ironing the ideas out... - cool down period for defensive spells for an individual playing player to be shortened to around 2hrs - option to recast a different defensive spell immediately but it can not be the same rune spell eg. if the individual player has used ward of destruction then the player can not use mark of slaying, death rune or killing glyph until the cool down period has reset. Instead the individual will have to choose from the remaining defensive spell options - blight casting from an attacking player, if it fails will suffer its effects, meaning the attacking player will have to put a little more thought before casting - sov sq's that has been claimed by the individual will have a def & attk % option for their armies (this will be all depending on what sov lvl the individual has on the sq), meaning if a player is under seige, will have a fair chance of defending themselves against an attack or defending against an attack on the outside of their cities (strategically speaking the attacking player will not know what option the individual has gone with) edit: - an attacking player can not use the same sq to seige from if they have failed but will have to choose from another .. (if the defending individual has defended themselves successfully against a seige from all surrounding sq's the attacking player can no longer use those sq for seizing the player) for a 72hr period |
Posted By: Blops
Date Posted: 11 Mar 2011 at 16:49
I saw age of empires somewhere in there. love that game
|