|
Post by pharotes on Jul 13, 2006 0:06:02 GMT -5
Stats should be affected based on what actually happens...don't give out Charm for slaying a general.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor Shao on Jul 13, 2006 0:06:03 GMT -5
There will be many ways to improve stats, which will in turn improve how much you can increase facilities. Working on the same facility multiple times is one of those ways, though a more practical way is through battle, which will grant much larger stat increases than other sites (there will even be stat increases within the battle, not just at the end of one).
Already thought of that. Similarly you will not gain strength if you do not ever duel or personally bring your main character out to slay enemies.
|
|
|
Post by The Darkstar on Jul 13, 2006 0:08:04 GMT -5
Yeah but that also means that here is somebody who has to moderate all of that, whether it be the admins, or the lord in charge... Plus it leaves a bit too much space for the possibility of somebody being too generous.. Me and Jesse can vouch that people don't trust the, "Don't worry, I'm honest" approach to anything. Lots of people don't wanna think that anybody but them can be honest people, as they claim they are.. I dunno, but whatever, *shrug*
Edit - Woah, like 4 more posts came up while I was typing, I really shoulda put a quoted text in there.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor Shao on Jul 13, 2006 0:10:51 GMT -5
I trust the lords of the game to be honest, because if they don't I will deal with them. Considering the fact that I don't really belong to any kingdom (no I will not ever mobilize or rp with troops in Han), I consider myself comparatively (compared to other sites) unbiased. So far I have been checking the player kingdom boards pretty intently, and I will continue to do so in the future. I have the power to "modify" rewards so to speak, if I do not like them or think they were unfair in some way.
|
|
|
Post by Pauly on Jul 13, 2006 0:12:03 GMT -5
Perhaps the only way to improve a stat should be to work on the facilities? Dunno, just throwing that out there. Wait, a question... Is there any limit to the amount of weapons our troops can have? (i.e. crossbowmen with back up swords, Swordsmen with javelins, etc.) I had a question, in case you missed it.
|
|
|
Post by Er Shunruo on Jul 13, 2006 0:16:40 GMT -5
Agreed someone would have to moderate those things and if the leaders give them out they may be generous to their own to boost their army so a centralized one or two people would be best. Not saying all posts have to be long but for those that are maybe a small bonus. Just to get the job done is fine to get the baseline increase of your stat but added extra gives you just that. Sometimes I'll not be wanting a long post so I'll probably do that too.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor Shao on Jul 13, 2006 0:18:44 GMT -5
Ooh I didn't see it. The answer to your question Shang Xi is-No. Unlike Betrayal I am not going to limit the amount of items a troop unit can wield, so you guys can let your imaginations run wild. A side-effect of this though is that if you equip too much stuff on your troops, they will be ineffective and overly expensive in combat. You can easily have troops that have two swords, a bow and throwing javelins, or something along that line however. In this case, not all weapons would be carried, some items would be sheathed (or stored in quivers) while others were used, and then if the troop wanted to change weapons he could sheath some and draw others. Obviously troops only have two hands to use, so it's necessary to see what weapons are two handed as well as adopting tactics suited for whatever weapons your troops are carrying. This game gives you a great deal of freedom, but it's also realistic. You can have troops like the aforementioned example, but if you add on to that a pike, heavy armour, another sword, etc. and the troop type are militia, they won't be all that good in battle and will be very, very slow.
|
|
|
Post by Pauly on Jul 13, 2006 0:22:31 GMT -5
Right, but mounted units could easily wield more weapons. And I wasn't planning on giving each man 6 weapons. Probably 2 max...
|
|
|
Post by Emperor Shao on Jul 13, 2006 0:27:04 GMT -5
True, true. Me and Jesse were talking about this awhile ago and mounted units were brought up. With mounted units you would be able to more easily equip heavier armour (as stated in the troop purchases thread for chain mail and plate armour), and would also gain a bit more storage space, since you could have satchels and stuff on the side of the horse or something.
|
|
|
Post by Pauly on Jul 13, 2006 0:29:29 GMT -5
My point exactly. I like the way you guys think.
|
|
|
Post by pharotes on Jul 13, 2006 0:35:17 GMT -5
I keep my troops historical - if a unit in history could work effectivly with its weapons, so should mine...
|
|
|
Post by Pauly on Jul 13, 2006 0:40:47 GMT -5
True enough, hence my swordsmen with javelins example. But, will having multiple weapons require micromanagement? Say you have some archers with swords as backups get charged by some spearmen. Must you say they draw their swords, or is it assumed?
|
|
|
Post by pharotes on Jul 13, 2006 0:42:43 GMT -5
Depends - But I'd rather not risk it and not say it.
|
|
|
Post by Emperor Shao on Jul 13, 2006 0:43:30 GMT -5
You have to say it. If you don't mention anything, then I won't assume anything. I'll just figure that when your troops are firing and you don't say anything that they are continuing to fire as they are being charged by spearmen. So yes, in that sense, I suppose it requires a bit of micro-management.
|
|
|
Post by Pauly on Jul 13, 2006 0:46:35 GMT -5
That's why I ask these things.
|
|