-------------------------------------------------
Yes, a new thread is neccisary. We need to pool together all concepts of balancing and strategy harmonizing into one thread. This thread is a list as much as it is a discussion... let us try to throw down all the concepts we already have first, then discuss them after they are listed, so the list is at the top, ready for Req. to just glance at.

I ask that all discussion wait until 1 week has passed, so that everybody who has a concept for balancing of the game be at the top in the "list" section of this thread. afterwards, we can discuss the pro's and cons of each individual item on the list, as well as any new items that come up durring that time. After everything has been thourally discussed, we can submit to Req. a Grand Final List of ideas that we think would actually improve balance, incorperating multiple equal strategies rather than a single winning strategy.

Now, a few more ground rules before we get started.
-The list can be improvements for the current game or the next edition, as long as you specify which.
-The change has to be something to do with balance. Don't discuss your every want and need in here!
-Try to use as close to good grammer and spelling as you can get. Everybody makes mistakes, just try to make as few as you possibly can. We don't want this thread to be full of confusion, so also try to organize your thoughts as well as possible.
-It can be something we discussed before. Infact, it should... this is a list thread, too. We want to get everything on the board, then discuss in 1 week.

For reference I will put down here everything we know about the new version:
-it will have a "zone" system economy.
- 1 to 10 pop armies at the largest.
- possible that stronger armies have lower max pops.: realistic size justification
- will have 1 vs 1 camps
- will have more races (again, eventually)

It would help matters if we established before hand what the problem with our current balance is:

the issue is that there are not enough strategies. now, when creating your entry to the list, please put below the entry the reason the entry is there. this way, we can establish what is UN-balanced about our current system even as we are suggesting solutions for it.

AGAIN: please just make a list for one week. NO discussing yet! thank you.
Begin!

(note: message me if you think something should be added/taken out/ changed from this introduction)

~^ector

-------------------------------------------------

Last Edited : Saturday, 16 October 2004 - 04:52

The new version has a "subordinate goal" of capturing and holding territory where there is the means to produce resources, income and I think manpower so that we can in turn produce troops to accomplish the "primary goal" of conquering the other "players/kingdoms".

Are there any goals a part of the suborninate goal that could be added like industries, trade routes and town establishment?

Can a means of gaining a large bonus army as a friendly reinforcement be provided by capturing certain key locations on the map other than the other player's castles?

Is there any way that combat can be resolved without having to be the quickest to make our moves?

PS:
I guess as some of us add ideas we will think of ideas but is someone going to outline and sort all of this? That's part of the reason no one is responding (i.e. because it seems a monumental task that will be nearly incomprehensible).

TR

ok, I have lots of things to add to this thread, I just want to give others a chance to start it off, so it doesn't feel like I'm talking to myself. if I wanted to do that, I'd have labled it "Vector's Balancing Thread"

EDIT:

seriously though, I think this first part won't really look so much like a list as I had hoped,so don't let that stop you from posting. we can paste together a list from it later if we see fit to. brain storm... ideas...

Last Edited : Saturday, 16 October 2004 - 05:18

Can we implement "time-outs" (i.e. give a player e.g. 3 occassions during a full game when he can cause a "stop action" for even as long as 6 hours between himself and at least 2 other players)?

Can we do the "time zone thing" I mentoined once before about queing an agreed upon 8 hour rest period where the players can agree to cause the game to stop during an 8 hour period that can even be changed or rotated?

What are all things that one day might be "queable" into a game?

TR

PS:
What is the possiblity of everytime there is a confrontation within a campaign game the players having an option to agree upon a computer control option which would allow them to choose a certain formation for designated units, select their targets and then allow the computer to play out the battle until one of them stops action to do a reset of targets or retreat and then starts it up again to allow the computer to continue or go to finish?

TR

For this current version, deactivate eliminated player's castles. Same for future versions.

Can units some day be given instructions and automated to e.g.:

a) scout
b) patrol
c) block/defend
d) attack/defend
e) attack/pursue
f) block/retreat
g) retreat/defend

Can anyone think of more?

TR

I'm not sure if the term for some automated pre-programmed effects is "macro" or something but I'm thinking of a "sub-routine" in programming that if somehow applied to an "object/sprite" or whatever they are called causes it to perform some animated sequence.

I am trying now to make a distinction between "AI"
and just a simple instruction.
Can or cannot our units be "clicked" into "retreat mode" which would cause them on each tick at a pre-assigned time to attempt to step into an unoccupied adjacent space and if that can be done can it also be given direction?

Something simple is all that is needed to solve some problems of players not being able to get online to move their units. I'm not expecting the unit to then be put into a complex "AI" where it could play the game while a player is off-line but just to step clear of attack until the player can reassign it.

TR

If someone provides the graphics can we have someday WWI&WWII campaign and battle games with even
naval battles and bombardments including
shipbuilding and factory production?
Also fighters and bombers and tanks and artillery?

TR

Req chose the setting of the game carefully. He picked a medieval setting. Changing that would ruin the charm of the game.

"Sage"
this is just an idea thread. We can offer any idea we want here.
Where's your idea?

can we have machine gunners and napalm too?

TR

Last Edited : Monday, 18 October 2004 - 21:21

lol actually i kinda like this suggestion... i wouldnt mind playin a variation of waronline that included modern like warfare IE ww2.... instead of walls you got barbed wire and trenches

Ok, my idea is that we set the game in the far future. Spearmen turn into mechanized infantry, and can fly. They can blow up mountains and trees, as well. Instead of HC, we'll have nuclear bombs that kill everything on the map. The game should be completely in 3-D, include 20 different races (aliens) and we should have a "create your own unit" option.

All I'm really suggesting is two more character sets.
We already have a flying unit I think.
What would be new would be the naval units.
A flying unit is easier than a naval unit because a naval unit has to only move on water and is more difficult to program because of that I think.

If someone can provide the graphics a lot is just switching them like a heavy tank might be an HC and ballista or cats would become artillery, etc.

It's not "cut and dry" but I did say "someday".
If "Req" doesn't like it he just won't bring it up for discussion.

TR

Last Edited : Monday, 18 October 2004 - 21:39

Yes that is always a good option.

Design your own war machine.
I love that option.

TR

why not

i love sages sarcasm =)

Now that I think of it I would always try to design a sort of "David and Golliath" type weapon like e.g. can anyone imagine a PT-boat equipped with something like just one 22 inch gun?

The Japanese battleship "Yamamatto" had 18" guns which were the biggest guns ever mounted on a ship. A PT-boat with a 22" gun could have run circles around the Yamamatto.

TR

Last Edited : Tuesday, 19 October 2004 - 11:23

I thought this thread would be about balancing, not TR's crazy friggin idea thread.

I thought from the first two posts this was about submitting ideas that might cause the inspiration of other ideas (i.e. brainstorming) including balancing ideas not a thread to make comments with no idea.

PS:
Can we have traps, boiling oil and referees who can see the whole map and inquire about suspicious gameplay?

TR