Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Maelstrom
#51
Ditto, my idea
Reply
#52
(08-19-2017, 01:17 PM)Drogo Wrote: I think 2 is a safe bet but if pressed I'll take the over.

(08-30-2017, 03:48 PM)JonDoe Wrote: along the lines of giving information about denigrate and enamor. What about something like a global news section of the turn. Where you randomly get information of battles and conquests. I would think based on group size or PC size.

Examples could be the 1GN army group defeated the 3AM army in plains of QD. Suffering minor losses and dealing devestating losses to the Amazon force. This would give some basic information and in this case likely the GN is not even there anymore by the time the report comes out.

PCs could also generate report when conquored or successfully repelling an enemy.

A very low percentage per battle should generate a bit of new most every turn. It could be possible the same report is made from both sides of the fight. Something like.
Div 0.5%, army 1%, army group 2%, 100% destruct x2 chance
Village 0.5%, town 1%, City 2%, capital 5%

What if there were a chance that each bit of information might change along the way? Higher chance the further it goes. The way rumors work... So maybe the real battle was a rout by the 1GN over the 3AM but the rumor that reaches the East Coast might talk about a tight battle or even get one of the combatants wrong... or the region wrong...
Reply
#53
(08-30-2017, 03:48 PM)JonDoe Wrote: along the lines of giving information about denigrate and enamor.   What about something like a global news section of the turn.   Where you randomly get information of battles and conquests.   I would think based on group size or PC size.

Examples could be the 1GN army group defeated the 3AM army in plains of QD.  Suffering minor losses and dealing devestating losses to the Amazon force.   This would give some basic information and in this case likely the GN is not even there anymore by the time the report comes out.

PCs could also generate report when conquored or successfully repelling an enemy.

A very low percentage per battle should generate a bit of new most every turn.   It could be possible the same report is made from both sides of the fight.  Something like.
Div 0.5%, army 1%, army group 2%,  100% destruct x2 chance
Village 0.5%, town 1%, City 2%, capital 5%

In the idea of expanding universal results, which now is like the High Council and gaining or losing a region, we have talked about major battles being universal results.

This may seem like a small matter to some, but to me it makes the world a bigger place, than just knowing how your neighbor / enemy is doing.
Reply
#54
Again, I apologize for being slow.  I am used to an iterative and incremental approach, but Mike has requested the whole thing be complete and signed off on, so along with my ensuing dotage, I am kind of dragging my feet. 

I wanted to comment on trying to design the Giant Ants.  Its quite a task.  One of the main points I tried to address back to Alamaze 1st Cycle and more so in 2nd Cycle is given all there is to be done, doing dozens of special orders for a single kingdom is not a good use of time.   Unusual Encounters especially gave me headaches:  one event that might never be discovered by most players.   I haven't given up on The Ants and consider it a challenge, but it would play completely differently than any other kingdom.  There's no magic, no emissaries usurping control, no agents assassinating, no building castles or other PC Improvements, I could go on.
Reply
#55
(08-29-2017, 07:28 PM)Tomag Ironfist Wrote: A big concern I have had for Maelstrom is all of the additions to a kingdom's infrastructure. I truthfully believe that many of these design features will go virtually unused. I believe that this is a design flaw because if you choose to invest in developing PCs, and then lose them, you are losing twice as much; you are losing the PC itself, plus all of the investment you put into it.

Along side my previous argument, I feel that there will be no room for these infrastructure enhancements if we must choose between these new enhancements and the orders that we typically see in a game of 3rd cycle. Would you rather spend two orders to upgrade a PC, or two orders to 350 move an emmy and then 330 to usurp a new PC?  There are so many more orders that are much more beneficial than enhancing a PC that you already own.

With that said, I believe that these are mechanics that need to be implemented into the game in some way. It adds so much dynamic, and augments the preexisting strategy of the game. All of the ideas are SO FREAKING COOL! I would LOVE to build castles, hire engineers, and add secretive defenses to my PCs, but I am afraid that I would miss out on these features because I would need to expend all 20 of my rulership orders to move 12 emmies, recon 4 PCs, and move 4 military groups to work toward the goal of winning the game - acquiring more regions!

I have a proposition that I believe is inarguably the best solution to the inevitable ignorance of these new features to Maelstrom. We are already separating RULERSHIP (the number of orders that you can issue) and INFLUENCE (the potency of emmies)... I would like to suggest the addition of a new distinctive 'order set' called "craftsmanship." Craftsmanship is separated from rulership entirely, and would be the amount of orders that you issue on infrastructural features, such as new buildings, new PC characters, and various PC enhancements.

So now, you have 20 rulership order to move your 12 emmies, 4 recons, and 4 military groups AND your kingdom has 10 "craftsmanship" that can only be expended by making PC enhancements. This distinction gives players incentive to use and strategize the new features, in a way forcing their use and implementation into the meta of the game.

I really want these features to be in the meta of the game because I want to be able to play with them AND be competitive with the kingdom that I am playing. I believe that without this distinction that they will be benevolently ignored because there will be more 'pressing' orders to attend to each turn. By distinguishing the infrastructure orders (craftsmanship) and rulership, players are forced to take advantage of the new features, making for a more engaging gameplay experience Smile

Obviously, I am open to the name (craftsmanship) being changed as well as the numbers being toyed with for the sake of balance. But I would like to urge you to consider the concept!

As always, thanks for readingSmile Even if it just churns some creative juices!
Giving this idea another look.  While I initially liked the idea, it seemed increasing craftmanship would be like Rulership increases.  But maybe separate with a starting (i think Engineering) of 4 saves those four Rulership orders and gets this major concept going, and perhaps Engineering increases could be ordered by a Prince instead of solely a king order.

An Engineering trait might increase the starting level and reduce the cost of increase. Of course, no one is starting with princes, so it doesn't initially accelerate things unless with a human division at the city at the beginning of the game, you raise your Duke to Prince.  Also the cost of Increasing Engineering might be fairly high, like 10,000 early but reduced with an improvement and/or trait. 

On the subject, I'm making progress on Maelstrom.  No promise on completion, and I'm sure the new kingdoms (presently Ants, Lycans and Night King and some "good" kingdom TBD) will about kill me, and I'll be surprised if Mike isn't a bit confounded by the interactions with the new Maelstrom design. Nothing against Mike, just about all the new moving parts.

Also the intended maximum Influence and Rulership are intended to be 30 each, while political takeovers with the regional reaction changes will be more difficult while Influence is 11 or instead of later at 20-30. So 30 orders, and 30 political power max. In general, the wizard advocates have had nothing to complain about in 3rd Cycle, in Maelstrom, obviously I am excited about the new map and the infinite (almost) possibilities of where kingdoms start and that any 12 could be in a game, and the regional and city personalities, along with this huge economic model change. But also to level the playing field for which looks like 28 kingdoms I think the PC improvements suit a style of player that has felt somewhat underserved, and with the human divisions and the related PC improvements, they will see a jump.

This will seem brand new except you know the major mechanics.
Reply
#56
(02-26-2017, 06:13 PM)Jumpingfist Wrote: With what has been mentioned possibly 25+ building and new characters.  Perhaps some kind of format that has kingdom stay in there home region the first 8-10 turns, building there kingdom how they would like before everyone starts a war.   The Ready button would likely accelerate these turn so they do not drag on.   It could be taken further to be you can not cross a regional boarder until the turn after you or they declare you enemy.

The concept I had close to that was the requirement for causa belli (cause for war), so if you didn't announce the cause, you would be penalized in Influence and Rulership for an attack and it would be universally reported.  That would be a king order: "Causa Belli".  I'm not sure how much players want that.  It seems it would slow the early attacks and also make those still determined to do them even more audacious. I kind of like the idea myself in what is intended to be a more developing game, but I don't know what the player base thinks. So hopefully, to be more clear, you could still surprise attack, but at a penalty.
Reply
#57
What if you tied Causa Belli to the High Council?
Reply
#58
So much to read about in the threads on Maelstrom, but I have a question that may have already been addressed. In the new version, if you're playing a Pagan game (assuming it's an option), will the system prevent you from building a Temple? Unlike 3rd Cycle....or will the temple have other uses like an extra point of healing if your group is resting at the pc where the temple is built? It just irks me that in 3rd Cycle you and build the temple, although the game is Pagan....but it will prevent you from hiring a noble maiden....you'd think you couldn't build the temple either.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)