Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Changes Coming for Classic
#31
I will be maintaining the list of changes as well as their anticpated implementation dates in the KNOWN ISSUES thread, please review that information when new post notifications arise.
Continue to post any questions about the changes here.
Reply
#32
(08-29-2013, 03:05 PM)Ry Vor Wrote: When a player recovers a Key, as part of the encounter he receives the short name of the Major (e.g., The Ring of Power).

When a player Investigates (#140) a Major without the appropriate key, he gets a message that the appropriate key is required, but also gets the short name of the key, by discovering clues at the site and sages discussing the meaning. No encounter battle results. If the player already has the correct key, as now, the battle ensues.

The purpose is to make the recovery of quest (multiple step) artifacts more practical and enjoyable.

When will this particular change be implemented?
Lord Brogan

156 - GN

Reply
#33
Since I just resigned up, I just came across this thread, so i'm sorry if I'm bringing back up a dead horse but I have a few though and concerns.

First up Sea power: I like all the changes suggested.

In reference to the HP order I feel this is a good change.

In reference to eliminating Spell #848 Invisible army group and making Chaos useless against a Warlord, I would have to say someone once had an awesome ass kicking group with a great military and and invisible army group surprised them and cast chaos. Most of these changes seem to help kingdoms with a strong military. Chaos is easily defeated with smart use of dispel magic and as someone stated all ready why would you want to cripple the magic kingdoms in the late stages, they are all ready crippled in the early game. This is an important tool and should not be eliminated. There are also in game mechanics to use to counter invisibility.

A warlord should have no effect on Chaos, I agree it should and could be a higher lever spell for it's strength, but the argument that a Warlord is in the group do to his expertise would never fall victim to chaos, remember it's magic, and magic is well, magic.

As for Wall of Fire once again the bias in most of these changes across the board are in favor of strong military kingdoms.

Transfers: And again heavy favoring Military kingdoms. This sounds like one would like to free up orders while changing group ID's to prevent, trailing, thefts, assassinations, and the like, so one can do all the things one would want in a turn. I think the current system is working. Now you have to plan and sacrifice and make priorities to your orders, Making the tough call on what orders to cut so you can protect a group is part of the games core strategy. Watering that down (transfers) so strong military Kingdoms can have another advantage at end game is again bias.

Dragons Investigating sightings: Unless the original designers felt the Dragon Kingdoms were to powerful and restricted the use of artifact and being able to enter a sighting, as a way of over all balance, I find the restrictions silly. Just Say Dragons are magical creature, no stretch there. So why can't they morph into human form, many fantasy books have done this in the past, even D&D gave Dragon spells and poly morph self was available.

Counter Espionage and Guard: Love this Smile

When a player recovers a Key: great suggestion

Redo of status points: Once again the magic kingdoms in the suggestion is Nerfed ( i'm seeing a pattern) Taking away status points for casting certain spells.

Then we have this quote: "To those that have asked, "is this a poll?", no. This is notification. As I have said many times, these changes are required to allow new players to enjoy the Alamaze experience as our more experienced players do, and their implementation also provides a better game for our veteran players. These changes improve Alamaze and allow new players a chance to absorb and acclimate in a much better way than they could before."

I don't feel these changes are required for new players at all, I think most of these proposed changes are for the expert player and bias toward military Kingdoms. To make it much easier for those kingdoms almost exclusively. More orders, by reducing, transfer orders so you can have your cake and eat it to. Making sure you can never be surprised by a army group that's invisible, and making sure the one spell (chaos) that can cause a military fits, just won't work against a warlord, how convenient.

I offer caution when changing core rules for a particular play style over another, because that is all these suggestions do. Heavily favor the player who likes big huge military groups and doesn't want something like expert covert strategy to ruin the day.

EDIT: OMG I just found out Ry Vor is the Rick! So maybe ignore most things i said Smile As the Creator, he does know something about balance. I'll be over in the corner hiding my head in shame Smile
I did learn one thing from my "mentor".
Reply
#34
Thanks for granting me some latitude. Saved me probably an hour plus to explain again!

Since I have some credibility on these counts established, please all know, all my changes, and coming 2nd Cycle and 3rd Cycle changes are oriented toward:

1. Keeping established players;
2. Attracting new players;
3. Making results and play fun, rather than punitive;
4. Keeping things fresh.

Personally, my enjoyment is from #4. I look forward to focusing now on 3rd Cycle. I think Cipher does as well, and I can't do it without him.
Reply
#35
I for one am very excited about the 3rd Cycle stuff!

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)