Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 09Aug11 - Diplomatic Visibility Changes
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed09Aug11 - Diplomatic Visibility Changes
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Hora View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 839 		Direct Link To This Post Topic: 09Aug11 - Diplomatic Visibility Changes
    Posted: 05 Sep 2011 at 01:48
@Nesse:  I dare say, perhaps there might be cheaper far-away-Sov-squares in the future, maybe even as a start for (already mentioned) spy networks...? In this times of changing, who knows...?  Wink
(with a slight nudge to some GM's who indeed might know... LOL)


Edited by Hora - 05 Sep 2011 at 01:50
Back to Top
Nesse View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 406 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Aug 2011 at 21:07
Originally posted by GM ThunderCat GM ThunderCat wrote:


Sovereignty Visibility 

To this visibility range, we have added a visibility radius around all the sovereignty squares you own of:
(Sovereignty Level + Sovereignty Building Level)/2 squares
Again this is applied at the player level rather than that of the current town.
 


So, with a level 5 sov with building, you get 5 squares visibility from that square?
Will this be further than the town range for anybody, I wonder. A level 10 consulate gives 10 squares even without discovery. And you would NOT have a level 5 sov more than 5 squares away, as far as I understand the costs of that.
Can just as well remove that part of visibility, I say.
Back to Top
Nesse View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 03 Oct 2010
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 406 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Aug 2011 at 20:59
Originally posted by Brids17 Brids17 wrote:

Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Maff are gud.  1 and 1 are 2.


It could also be 11.


Or 10.
There are only 10 kinds of people and only half of those understand this.
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Aug 2011 at 15:16
Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Maff are gud.  1 and 1 are 2.


It could also be 11.
Back to Top
JohnnyBravo View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 13 Mar 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 15 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Aug 2011 at 15:13
I would love to see these ideas implemented.

I would like to have confederations or at least alliances share the visibility. (i.e. a spy goes past my town and all alliance or confed buddies can see it.)
Back to Top
Meagh View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 224 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Aug 2011 at 10:18

Originally posted by The_Dude The_Dude wrote:

Originally posted by threefoothree threefoothree wrote:

do you think we will be able to occupy a space for dips in the future so to set up a network of visibility?
That would be interesting - posting scouts and spies throughout the kingdom.  But I think the diplos would have to vulnerable to attack, too.  Otherwise, the map would be cluttered a zillion diplos on watch duty permanently.

just make sure they are vulnerable to assassination or even vulnerable to be attacked by other scouts (no two scouting parties could occupy the same square).
Back to Top
The_Dude View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 2396 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Aug 2011 at 05:54
Maff are gud.  1 and 1 are 2.
Back to Top
Rill View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar
Player Council - Geographer

Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 6903 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Aug 2011 at 02:06
arrrgh! would you people stop it with the math already? The GRE is OVER!!!

Wink
Back to Top
Erik Dirk View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 158 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Aug 2011 at 01:58
On the surface it's a good idea, however i agree with scar, this would make it really hard  to get away with thieving a large player and really easy to get away with thieving a new player. Could we have a more realistic game mechanic for thieves where the more you send the less likely you are to succeed? Ie success chance = (Thief attack strength) * (target pop) / (no. thieves sent)^2 / (total thief defence) / (no. attacks in 24 hr period)
Back to Top
GM ThunderCat View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
GM

Joined: 11 Dec 2009
Location: Everywhere
Status: Offline
Points: 2157 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2011 at 23:29
Originally posted by Dakota Strider Dakota Strider wrote:

My suggestion would be, that for every 10 thieves in a group, they become visible 1 square further away than normal.   There is room for compromise on this, but game balance should be the most important aspect.
I'm not sure if its the high performance mathematical madness of this; or the sensible realism that intrigues me more... Wink
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

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