| Author |
 Topic Search
 Topic Options
|
LauraChristine 
Greenhorn
Joined: 22 Feb 2010
Location: Nottingham
Status: Offline
Points: 56 |
 Posted: 31 Mar 2010 at 22:57 |
 KillerPoodle wrote:
So let's see:
1) No sense of humor
2) Completely convinced he's right and everyone with a different view point is wrong.
3) Convinced that the sky is falling because of one game mechanic.
4) When given an answer, starts spamming everywhere to try to get around the answer.
Good way to make friends and influence people there, bud.
How about you actually live in the game for a while before writing it off so quickly.
|
.... likes
xx
|
|
Cake
|
 |
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 33 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 00:22 |
|
I smiled at your joke. You have me completely wrong poodle. But I think I have you pegged right. You are a complete fool.
|
|
rescendent
Greenhorn
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 60 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 00:27 |
|
You can't kill all of the people all of the time, or there'd be nobody left to respect you...
|
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 33 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 00:53 |
Well like I said, I hope you guys are right. Contrary to what idiotpoodle said I totally admit I could be wrong. Maybe endlessly going round in circles without ever being able to kill or be killed is the way to go. :)
|
|
rescendent
Greenhorn
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 60 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 01:24 |
GM Stormcrow wrote:
This left us with the following options:
1. Make the first city built invulnerable to complete destruction by another player
2. Make the last city built invulnerable to complete destruction by another player
3. Allow a player to designate a single city as the capital (invulnerable) once they have a second city
4. Make no city invulnerable except the last suriving one
5. Make the player's first, invulnerable capital city expire its invulnerability after a period of time.
...
I'm willing to entertain any other suggestions that are better - but please make sure you think them all through and argue them from all perspectives, including potentially exploitable ones.
|
Make all cities vulnerable to complete destruction - however when last city is destroyed the player respawns to random location with new city and n00b protection?
Edited by rescendent - 01 Apr 2010 at 01:24
|
|
HonoredMule
Postmaster General
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 01:28 |
|
Jim, you haven't played many browser-based strategy games, have you?
|
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 33 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 09:09 |
I'm trying to make a constructive and logical suggestion without any repetition. I am not trying to be patronising like you or insulting like the idiot. Resendent and I have made a valid suggestion, it is only a single game mechanic but it is a pretty massive one. I was interested to discuss it with anyone who wanted to.
Mule - I have played enough online to wonder why people can never disagree, or develop a dialogue, without being so rude.
Stormcrow - great game. Thanks for it. xxx
|
|
GM Stormcrow
Moderator Group
GM
Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Location: Illyria
Status: Offline
Points: 3820 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 11:14 |
Jim wrote:
Stormcrow - great game. Thanks for it. xxx |
You're welcome!
Here's a suggestion, that may or may not be of interest:
How about allowing players who have their first and only city "levelled" the *option* to relocate - an "Abandon City" button or somesuch - that relocates them to a fresh city on another random part of the map, but keeping their username / account details.
There could be a timer (say 1 week) during which time players have the option to abandon the city or not. If they chose not to abandon the city during this time, they could seek to join an alliance / hire mercenaries / rebuild their city or whatever they wish to try to keep their foothold - but if the city is still levelled at the end of the one week timer, the relocation could be "forced".
This would apply only to the first city of course.
HonoredMule wrote:
1) Can a player restart from the same account or somehow forward purchased prestige to the new account? Can he optionally retain his username and account id? Or is he forced to abandon one or both of financial investment and a username that he may consider intrinsic to his online presence? Some people like myself invest heavily into a single username whose reputation has been cultivated for many years. Losing my username would be a deeper fatality than losing my account.
|
Think this suggestion handles this.
HonoredMule wrote:
2) Are accounts that have purchased prestige also be subject to inactivity-triggered account closure? Will the account holder be able to re-open/restart his account and retain the purchased prestige? It becomes a sticky matter if real world money could be deducted without any recourse to reclaim the benefit of that investment.
|
No, prestige accounts won't be closed. But they would still have their city relocated under this mechanism.
Any thoughts?
Edited by GM Stormcrow - 01 Apr 2010 at 11:17
|
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 33 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 16:02 |
|
Sounds great to me. I just feel that players need a way of removing things in their way. So whatever way you come up with to make that possible would be excellent. Could you make the relocation not quite random, could you make it at least a minimum distance from their original location. Well away from their conqueror. Thanks for your ear, I guess the forum might have been a little busy today after your little prank :).
|
|
Kumomoto
Postmaster General
Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224 |
Posted: 01 Apr 2010 at 16:54 |
I think SC's idea is a great one! Only a fool wouldn't relocate if they're next to a major power bloc who is pounding them incessantly... Great way for alliances to expand their "spheres of influence" without killing off the other player...
|
|
Tweet
Conquering capitals