Okay KS is going well and we’re fixing problems as they’re coming up. Took more work than originally anticipated to get that working but looking very promising now we’ve got over the initial initalising game stuff.
With that in mind I’m looking for new coding ventures. Does any of the following interest you guys?
i) Accounts program updated so that you can have allocated contact points and team mates that receive your turn when we send them out.
ii) Print program updated with your map of your allies details that are shared in i) (not as fully functional as the game)
iii) New SNAs (I have a list at present that we can look at in detail here)
iv) Other stuff - feel free for an open discussion. See iv) below for concepts of what we could do here.
v) Improved look of the game? (More colour art that sort of thing)… $$ btw…
vi) New orders, new character classes, Quests?
Pertinent to that the sort of thing we’ve developed in KS; Champions, NPC recruitment, new artefacts (and powers), new encounters, modified map, new nations, and restricted set-up options that allow customisable nations. I’ll be looking to update that module and not touch others at present mind.
At present a full on browser app is beyond our scope to deliver financially.
While I know you find the idea of ‘out-of-game’ deception distasteful to contemplate, I suggested how it could be done ‘in-game’ with Kin Strife. See my mini-article on the List dated January 15, 2006 entitled “ME Rumors”. Of course, if English Gentlemen only walk down straight and well illuminated paths then disregard.
“It’s the environment, stupid!”. Sorry, had to, it’s so 21st century chique too…
Regardless. All that stuff is cosmetic to the issue. The environment in which we play the game is what’s changed, and it’s resulted in changes in people’s expectations (Environment created as a result of technology…not technology as the evil, because, as you can easily see, it’s provided the solution…just like in real life, isn’t that quiant…?)
People are having a hard time dealing with their own personal human codes of conduct, honour and the like, people being true to their word, etc. Issues with people who disagree, don’t get along, don’t know (newbies) and issues with EVERY person who’s ever a neutral.
The game isn’t meant to have anything to do with the people who play it. Park Place neither cares if it’s the shoe or the car, nor whether it’s me or Ed who end up buying, mortgaging, then selling back, the damn card. But in MEPBM, we seem to care the Who more than the What.
That’s the problem. You can’t play the Easterlings, because it’s still you playing with them/us, as it may be.
A web app where the environment is controlled is the only way to enable people to play the Nation again - the technology has to separate the person from the player. The same technology that brought the players together as people is the only way to do that.
Besides the finances, are there licensing implications? If not, and it’s only finances, then you might consider putting it together 1 piece at a time…
I would expect to log in and see my account, games, etc, pretty much my details on the Front Sheet.
Each game would have the Alias that was playing in it. As 1 Account/Player, I’d have up to X aliases available to me - say, 5. So I could “be” a different “person” (alias) in each of 5 different games…
I’d log into each Game seperately. There, I would see pretty much a JOverseer type app with links. The app would allow me to do everything JO does, only it’s showing me MY information only.
Messaging is through a controlled board. I’d choose Who to message and I would type the From for every message individually.
Relations automate information sharing. Friendly is shared files, just like I got my allies files and uploaded them into my own JO file. I make SG Friendly, they see my info. I don’t see theirs until they make Me friendly.
That’s a quick look at how to control the Environment in which we would log in to play the Nation.
Anyone know anything about this kind of technology to make it happen?
“While I know you find the idea of ‘out-of-game’ deception distasteful to contemplate, I suggested how it could be done ‘in-game’ with Kin Strife. See my mini-article on the List dated January 15, 2006 entitled “ME Rumors”. Of course, if English Gentlemen only walk down straight and well illuminated paths then disregard.”
I’m still not English… LOL I have nothing against English people, even married one I liked her so much. Land of my Fathers and all that jazz. Might be helpful to quote the “article” here so that others can more easily see it.
Upto you guys, if that’s the sort of thing you want then fine. At present the Luddite game has got one sign-up so I suspect not. I’m looking for “paths less travelled by” hence the request for what you guys want to see. If it’s nothing, that you’re ecstatically happy and will consequently be selling various parts of your anatomy to pay for your playing of Middle-earth then that’s, sort of, fine by me… ;)
Otherwise I’m here, I’m offering and would like to see what you want. A 5 month project converting to a web-based application is probably out for tne near future, but long-term possible, something that takes a week to code is definitely in. I gave some ideas of the sort of thing, as a player, I’d like to see for example.
Actually, theres Me, Ed, Trajan (Mike Belancio…?) and Rob Gaul noted he’d play also if necessary. 4. I know, not quite enough to open the game. Ed, really, sign up for the 1 weeker as a Neutral…
One thing the game needs is a revamp of troop types. It’s pretty boring to recruit HI unless you can recruit HC. There should be a way to make all troop types viable.
E.g. make LI deadly in forests and mountains (as in having strength 12 or something), make LC deadly on hills (deadlier than HC), make archers useful in sieges. Or, say, if an army is balanced (i.e. has HI, LC or LI and AR) it has a big (30%) bonus to strength and con.
Or maybe the strength of each troop type should not be fixed, but related to the opposing troop type. So HC tramples infantry but loses to LC and Archers. LC loses to infantry. LI lose to archers, HI beats archers. MA just keep sucking. Sort of like rock-paper-scissors (or DBA/DBM-style, if you like).
Maybe combine that with additional modifiers per troop type and nation - e.g. woodmen LI gets 30% more strength and the woodmen cannot recruit more than 400HI per turn.
Obviously there are a lot of balancing complications, both in order to make the troop types interesting but also in order to not disrupt the balance between armies and characters.
I agree with mscoon that making other troop types viable is a good idea. At present there is just a simple option to recruit HI or recruit HC if you have the materials available. This would definitely be a plus to the game.
As to the use of a more covert nature for the game I’m sure that it would not be impossible to do without a full new application. We already have Joverseer that can take in XML file(s) and process them. What you need is a separated game forum app that users can communicate through and has areas for each game. Thus all FP would go into the FP forum area (and could change their online user identifiable name as they saw fit), a DS forum area in the same way, and a neutral area that everyone could access. The forum could send PMs as well as open forum posts. If users only posted XMLs then they could import to Joverseer and there would be no identifiable names associated with it. So the only thing you need here is the customised forums app. This would be useful to both open players and covert players since the open players wouldn’t need to set up a new Yahoo Group each time and you would have a single place for your messaging. Email me if you want me to expand on ideas for this.
As to what I’d like to see in the game … I must say that I like the idea of new SNAs. These SNAs could give rise to new restricted orders that only someone with that SNA could use. The ability to be able to build roads (which has already been implemented) is an example of this as is the NK/SK ability to influence the market in FA.
I would love to implement this and have put small amounts of thought into it from time to time. As always, the devil is in the details, but I’ll see if there is any way to use the current forum software to implement something like this.
I’ve conceptualized improvements, they usually cost money. I’ve addressed Gavin about this forum thing - what’s different…?
The problem is that technology has brought us together. Instead of playing a Nation, I’m now Brad playing with other People. It was never meant to be this way. What does Honour and the like have to do with a wargame simulation of a fantasy world in a Dark Ages epoch of it’s existence? Why do I have to be “true to my word”…? Etc.
Without going on in an Ed Mills kind of way, I’ll summarize that for this to be a “Game”, People have to be separated from Nations.
How would a yahoogroup replacement do that? It wouldn’t - instead of sending emails nagging people to post their files and orders, I’d create a thread. If someone decided to be “covert” (which is not “bad”…) then the rest of us would harangue him/her into either leaving or abdicating - no different than email…
I’m not advocating “bad”, “mean”, or “malicious” behaviour. I’m simply pointing out that the game is played differently than intended. The only way to play the game the way it was written is via a web app that controls the Environment in which we play. Gunboats, Game 75, “Luddite” games, nope. They’re poor attempts.
Of course it would, if done correctly (that’s the rub, isn’t it?) Naturally, if the service is provided by me, then it’s free. Of course, I can admit that this brings conflict of interest problems into the mix, but this is a brainstorm, so we can avoid touchy topics for the time being.
You sign up for a service by creating an account. That account would be verified by MEGames so that it is confirmed that you are the player that MEGames thinks you are. I.e. some fictional person, let’s name him Brad Mills (completely fictitious name I just made up) makes an account on this new service. The username is a moot point, as you’ll see in a minute, so we could use something arbitrary, such as an e-mail address, as your login ID. You could then add your real name and MEGames account number to your profile, which MEGames would then somehow verify. Note that the only tie at this point is between you and MEGames.
Game XX starts with you playing the Dwarves. Private groups are created for DS, FP, and All nations in the game. The “user names” in the private groups would be the nation names, but would be tied to your account. Only you and MEGames would be aware of this tie. To the other players in the private group, you’d just be “Dwarves”.
This is just a start and it’s just part of an idea bouncing around in my head, and I have to go to work.
Its good to know The HI/HC “problem” bother me a lot.
Instead of new orders, I think the game would be easier to digest with less orders. I think you could filter several orders that are less used, and mix orders that are similar (for instance, you could have only one recruit troops order, and include a troop type field).
