|
Post by sparrowhawk on Aug 17, 2004 13:46:23 GMT
But isn't 10k a bit wimpy as threshold for disease? That's 4 lords... Not really. The idea is to get players to stop placing all their lords together in one spot. Battles should now become more interesting as positioning becomes more important. BTW, disease does not affect troops in battle (that would be too harsh!) But the 10K was only a guess. It could be raised, although raise it too far and its effectiveness as a tactical element (can I call it that?) is reduced/removed
|
|
Ringthane
Public Area Guest
Ardet nec Consumitur
Posts: 5,446
|
Post by Ringthane on Aug 17, 2004 14:04:11 GMT
Allow me to suggest 15k... fey maybe not counting...
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Aug 17, 2004 14:31:42 GMT
Not really. The idea is to get players to stop placing all their lords together in one spot. Battles should now become more interesting as positioning becomes more important. I think it makes the recruitment phase and the luck in recruiting courageous lords more significant and reduces the importance of tactics and strategies. But we'll see... Question: what happens if you attack someone's force with 20,000 men and they run away when it is their turn? Do your armies then lose men to disease? Whatever you set it to, it means everyone will just roam around in groups of 4 (or however many) and attack any other group of 4 they get to see. I believe there should be a time factor involved, rather than instant turn on/turn off disease attrition.
|
|
Freiegeister
Morkin Member
'Blasphemy is a victimless crime' - Dawkins
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by Freiegeister on Aug 17, 2004 20:06:24 GMT
Could the message on entering a game saying there was no disease be dropped, and have a "The bloody hand of Disease has brought death to the domain of ####" message instead. Maybe have no bloody sword of battle if there are none?
Also, how about the familiar: "Do you seek dawn?" when entering a game?
|
|
Matija
Morkin Member
The Turtle Moves!
Posts: 1,696
|
Post by Matija on Aug 18, 2004 5:47:52 GMT
I stongly support the time factor idea - a delay of, say 5 days (so one can concetrate lords to do a quick battle, then disperse them, without risking disease). And after that, increase the probability percent every day. Also, after the lords are dispersed, the probability of disease could linger a few more days, decreasing every dawn.
|
|
Freiegeister
Morkin Member
'Blasphemy is a victimless crime' - Dawkins
Posts: 1,126
|
Post by Freiegeister on Aug 18, 2004 20:10:14 GMT
You could link the probability of disease with recent battles or sieges, though the likelyhood of disease would be small due to the frozen conditions.
|
|
SkulkrinBait
Morkin Admin
Haxx0rs == Suxx0rs! v4
Posts: 6,680
|
Post by SkulkrinBait on Aug 18, 2004 20:12:00 GMT
I prefer the idea of a small chance of disease starting with any number of men and getting bigger the larger the army is.
So 0.001% chance of disease per 100 men, going up to 0.01% once you get more than say 5k in one spot and 0.1% for armies over say 15k - I'll let you work out the detail!
Should prevent people "dodging" the rules if you have several different ranges for disease.
Perhaps you can also add in a time factor, the longer an army is stuck in one place the more chance of disease. I suppose armies marching together don't need to worry about the time factor for disease as they are marching in the nice fresh air and have enough to worry about with fatigue! Of course people could then try to avoid the time/disease penalty by just moving out of the citadel or whatever one league and then back in again - very devious some people ;D
I'd also like the names of any lords killed the previous night on the front page, the bloody sword of battle has killed x y and x.
Don't want much do I? ;D
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Aug 19, 2004 11:56:44 GMT
Oh I don't know. People discuss disease for ages, agree it's a good thing and then their armies start melting and they complain. I don't know, I just don't know...
OK, some valid and/or interesting points above:
Riding around in groups of 4: Yes, but a present people ride around the end-game in groups of 12, which means curtains for kings with few troops left. At least this way some form of guerilla war is possible?
Time factor: What if people move out/move back in one day. What if there are 4 lords together (a,b,c,d) exceeding the threshold. Just before disease is due to kick in, lord a leaves, to be replaced by lord e. Does lord e suffer from the outbreak?
15K but exclude Fey: Hmmm, I see where you are coming from with Fey, but wouldn't everyone play as Fey then?
Should disease be an option on New Game? Should the threshold be user-selecteable?
|
|
|
Post by celebaglar on Aug 19, 2004 12:36:40 GMT
Oh I don't know. People discuss disease for ages, agree it's a good thing and then their armies start melting and they complain. I don't know, I just don't know... I apologise. I should have elaborated more in order to get my points across. I will do so when I get 20 minutes free.
|
|
|
Post by sparrowhawk on Aug 19, 2004 12:48:44 GMT
I was kidding Bill. I had a hungry four year old hovering, fish fingers in the oven, spaghetti hoops and peas on the go, and no time to add smilies! ;D ;D ;D
|
|