Search results for query: *

Freelancer adds features that are a must-have for a medieval military cRPG.

E.g. what's the most believable story: "some vigilante weirdo alongside his peasant sidekicks hunted down so many dozens of bandit parties that he became noteworthy" or "an enlisted soldier fought in several small and large-scale battles, steadily rose through the ranks and eventually amassed enough renown and wealth to become a war leader in his own right".

Not saying hunting down bandits on occasion doesn't have its appeals, but I know which option I find more engaging and immersive.

EmptyPepsiCans said:

I love this mod. I really hope that someone picks up the development.

Click to expand...

I can't say for sure, but I suspect @Bloc wouldn't be okay with it; otherwise, he wouldn't have stressed that he won't release his source code.

Afterall, it would sort of defeat the point he's trying to make...

Thank you. Glad to see it fixed

madnessario said:

This will harm the losing side more, thus more snowballing. An army that wins does not need to go back to the villages to recruit, the losing side does; over and over until the settlement is lost.

Click to expand...

But a conqueror has to leave a garrison behind, so he still needs to recruit just to keep the army strength stable.

Is there a recruitable population pool from which notables draw their possible recruits?

If not, then implementing something like this could really help with snowballing: the more a pool is tapped, the slower the respawning of recruits from notables would be. Thus, even a faction that constantly wins would still eventually be hit by this inertia, curbing their momentum.

This (the status of the recruitable population pool) could even be tied to a faction's willingness to war & peace, making the world's conflict feel a bit more organic.

I'd love for this to be a thing.

I agree. Ambushes as a game mechanic would be a phenomenal addition to the game.

Besides the obvious RP benefits (e.g. ambushing an Imperial army in thick forests as a Battanian, or ambushing a merchant caravan as a bandit party), it would grant defenders in a war a better fighting chance against an overwhelming enemy, thereby making snowballing and late-game blobbing rarer, as well as allowing outlaws to remain a threat well into the mid and late game.

I just did that. I got both an "upload aborted" and a "your file was successfully uploaded" message, so please let me know if you actually received it xD

Having this issue as well.

Just reinstalled the game after a few weeks' hiatus.

Never had this issue before...

First of all, great mod 


Suggestion:

- With the addition of several elite troops, coming across a Lord on the battlefield isn't a scary prospect at all (unless the Lord in question is a Ridas Magocracy uber-spellcaster). My suggestion is to boost Lord stats, armor and weapons in order to make them scary in a fight. Making Swadian Lords as strong as a Knight of the King, for example, or making a Rhodox Lord a superb swordmaster...


Keep up the good work! 

Gishank said:

With that being said, isn't the a more appropriate discussion for another thread?

Click to expand...

I made a suggestion which is being challenged as not worth the trouble. This discussion is a direct result and relevant to whether the suggestion is implemented or not, I believe...

Splintert said:

Moridin123 said:

Splintert said:

Perhaps to add to the discussion would be the idea of forcing players to carry 100% of their 'banked' money on them, thus dropping % on death. A very small portion of that money would disappear when inaccessible, plus it would remove the hassle of having to make bank props on maps. Other than that, players would still keep most of their money, other than the percent that they drop when logging out.

Click to expand...

Isn't that the same as removing bank scripts, which we've already concluded the player-base does not support...?

Click to expand...

You're not the first person to misinterpret it, and definitely won't be the last. There is no removal of bank scripts, nor removal of any other character persistence. The only difference is that instead of storing your money in an invulnerable, free-access database, you carry it around. No difference, only that the number is always on your person instead of in an invincible offsite account.

Click to expand...

Sorry if I'm being dense but, if you carry the money, the money you carry is vulnerable and a % drops on death, then in what way is it protected under bank scripts? What are the bank scripts even doing in that situation...?

Splintert said:

It won't matter how hard you make it to get gear initially, given time the same situation will arise, where gear is infinite along with money.

Click to expand...

Maybe the end result is inevitable, but even stretching the time it takes for that to happen is time where PW is alive for awhile longer. Plus, such measures would be in conjunction with the aforementioned banking restrictions...

Splintert said:

Moridin123 said:

While this new "social strata" is probably a result of the economic problem, as you say, I don't agree they're not part of the solution. They are the dredges of PW society, regarded by factions with disdain. The only thing worse you could be is outlaw. Though you're probably the one getting robbed rather than the other way around. Why do these players since strive to earn as much coin as they can and zealously depositing on a bank? I believe they do it because they hope that one day, some day, they'll be rich enough to avenge the slights inflicted upon them.

In my opinion, we want to encourage this. We NEED to encourage this! How else are you going to defeat the established factions? Because we do need to defeat them, to present them with challenges to overcome and keep them engaged in PW. Else, one by one, factions will disband out of boredom and most of their players will stop playing altogether. They make up the vast majority of the player-base and losing them is another nail on the coffin for PW...

Click to expand...

I don't know where you're getting the idea that the only way to defeat an established faction is to encourage individualized gameplay. The only reason 'established factions' exist is because their progress one day is still there the next, and the next, and the next through infinity. All it takes is removing their progress every once in a while, along with everyone else's. That puts them on the same level as other factions, making it a fair fight. These established factions can't win a fair fight. Even if you ignore that, putting a bunch of players who want to play alone in a faction is just disaster. They have no organization, no structure, no teamwork, and no reason to stay in the faction. Which results in being destroyed by 'established factions' who all have a singular goal: kill your ass.

Click to expand...

You're generalizing the attitude of all faction-less. Just because they refuse to join an established faction doesn't mean they wouldn't like to join one. Many faction-less despise the established factions demeaning attitude towards them and would love to get back at them. It's just that they really don't have the means to do so, so they're left with wrecking castle doors and chests and hiding carts during the night or robbing and killing the occasional lone faction levy...

Some of them must surely have leadership attributes, the will to go and start a faction of their own. They just got unlucky, or joined the server late, and find themselves unable to compete. So they keep on going, making whatever money they can get and hoping for an opening...

Splintert said:

Moridin123 said:

What I meant with this, and I think I made it clear further down my post, is that your concept of commoners as a transitional phase for faction members is no longer true. They now represent the faction-less, people who decide to play the game without joining the established factions. And THEY are the ones with the greatest motives and desire to upset the status quo, to shake the dominant factions out of their slumber... Thus my argument: scripts made these faction-less (these "commoners") useless because they can't compete, but they are the ones we actually need to change this stale gameplay PW fell into...

Click to expand...

Ah, I see. In that case I would go so far as to say the only thing that makes the 'commoners' able to compete is actually the scripts themselves. Imagine how difficult it would be to gather money if you didn't have access to sell points or resources for weapon and armour crafting. When everyone has infinite money and infinite gear, they don't need a faction's resource access to gear up and stand their ground against factions. This individualized gameplay is a result of the economic problem, not the solution.

Click to expand...

While this new "social strata" is probably a result of the economic problem, as you say, I don't agree they're not part of the solution. They are the dredges of PW society, regarded by factions with disdain. The only thing worse you could be is outlaw. Though you're probably the one getting robbed rather than the other way around. Why do these players since strive to earn as much coin as they can and zealously depositing on a bank? I believe they do it because they hope that one day, some day, they'll be rich enough to avenge the slights inflicted upon them.

In my opinion, we want to encourage this. We NEED to encourage this! How else are you going to defeat the established factions? Because we do need to defeat them, to present them with challenges to overcome and keep them engaged in PW. Else, one by one, factions will disband out of boredom and most of their players will stop playing altogether. They make up the vast majority of the player-base and losing them is another nail on the coffin for PW...

Splintert said:

Moridin123 said:

Of course nothing of that is enough, else I wouldn't be here... I was just presenting occasions where money is truly lost, so we can think of how to enlarge these losses in order to create more meaningful demand.

Click to expand...

Enlarging losses can only be done by forcing players to either lose gear on logging out or wipe saved gear on server resets. Otherwise it's just chipping away a mountain. The server that I was part of years ago more or less introduced the scripts to the game, and players had literally millions of denars, tens of millions. No amount of disappearing gear is going to dent that short of simply disallowing it to build up (via removal of persistent scripts). Even if you made it so that gear disappeared instantly and players lost gear on logging out, they'd have infinite money and thus demand high starting stockpiles on their maps. No effect on the problem.

Click to expand...

Wiping gear is something that would enrage the community, I believe. As ideal as it would be, I think that option flew out the window a long time ago...

However, we could still vastly increase situations where gear gets permanently lost. Diminishing the time gear lingers on after the owner's death to a few minutes would be one way. Making items in carts vanish after a few hours would be another. Same with chest, though they should be better than carts. Also, high starting stockpiles on maps is something server owners can easily deny players, unlike gear on logout.

If we chip away at the mountain enough times, we can at least prolong PW's lifetime for a while longer...

Splintert said:

Moridin123 said:

Until we can devise a way to create higher demand, you're right. This suggestion, though, isn't meant to stand on its own as the savior of server economy. On EU_Phoenix there are also arguments to tax bank money and to limit withdrawal amounts, so the stock limitation would merely be a piece of it...

Click to expand...

Perhaps to add to the discussion would be the idea of forcing players to carry 100% of their 'banked' money on them, thus dropping % on death. A very small portion of that money would disappear when inaccessible, plus it would remove the hassle of having to make bank props on maps. Other than that, players would still keep most of their money, other than the percent that they drop when logging out.

Click to expand...

Isn't that the same as removing bank scripts, which we've already concluded the player-base does not support...?


P.S.: Really appreciate the time and effort you're taking in this discussion with me. Maybe something good for PW will come out of this 

P.P.S.: Damn, this forum's smiles are creepy... xD

Splintert said:

Not to mention, "With the advent of scripts, commoners were made useless. However, in light of those very scripts, commoners are now more essential than ever, and thus should be encouraged. " is a nonsensical statement, you're contradicting yourself here.

Click to expand...

What I meant with this, and I think I made it clear further down my post, is that your concept of commoners as a transitional phase for faction members is no longer true. They now represent the faction-less, people who decide to play the game without joining the established factions. And THEY are the ones with the greatest motives and desire to upset the status quo, to shake the dominant factions out of their slumber... Thus my argument: scripts made these faction-less (these "commoners") useless because they can't compete, but they are the ones we actually need to change this stale gameplay PW fell into...

Splintert said:

The gear and money loss through wars isn't enough to even come close to creating a demand for newly crafted gear, especially since most servers also start maps with large starting stocks of high tier gear. You can't seriously be arguing that the few hundreds of gold spent on arrows is enough to make up for the hundreds of thousands of gold sitting idle in banks, or a few swords lying around is enough to cause people to run out of swords. It is simply not the case, else we'd already see what you're trying to say would happen.

Click to expand...

Of course nothing of that is enough, else I wouldn't be here... I was just presenting occasions where money is truly lost, so we can think of how to enlarge these losses in order to create more meaningful demand.

Splintert said:

Your suggestions limit the role your commoners are able to play by having a maximum stock of resources. As soon as those stocks are full, they'll never be depleted until server reset. The only thing it accomplishes is preventing newer players from gaining the money they need to compete with players who have infinite money.

Click to expand...

Until we can devise a way to create higher demand, you're right. This suggestion, though, isn't meant to stand on its own as the savior of server economy. On EU_Phoenix there are also arguments to tax bank money and to limit withdrawal amounts, so the stock limitation would merely be a piece of it...

Splintert said:

I'll say again: there is simply too much money and too much gear floating around between players to make gathering or crafting worthwhile. As a single example, neither I or my friends have crafted or collected materials in years and we never ran out of money or gear simply because there's so much of it floating around or lying on the ground at any given time. It simply doesn't work.

Click to expand...

As for gear lying on the ground, maybe it should vanish faster? Sure, most of it would be picked up in time, but every bit you can remove from circulation helps...

Splintert said:

But they never need to restock because of the infinite gear floating around.

A stock limit accomplishes very little to prevent anything if there is still infinite money and infinite gear available at any given time. Money and gear saving stop any economy from functioning; the money is worthless and there is no incentive to work. You could maybe get it to work if you ran the no-money game mode, but then since there's nothing to hoard there's no incentive to do anything either. And you'd still have the infinite gear problem.

"Commoner" isn't supposed to have a place in the game, really. They're a transitional phase between factions. Labor classes are supposed to work for their faction and eventually they've earned enough money to afford gear to fight, where new players who just log in replace them as labor classes. When everyone has infinite money and infinite gear, no one needs to be labor classes because there is no reason to be.

Click to expand...

Gear does disappear. Not nearly as fast as desirable, but it still happens. Nothing is 100% saved during wars. There's always weapons and armors that no one wants, or whose owners died in secluded castle spots and the attackers forget to retrieve the gear. Also, winning factions often carry away loot that they don't really need and can't be sold in their own castles, so it ends up lost in server resets. And horses get killed a lot, so they're still subject to supply/demand. Arrows can't be sold, so they are a net money sink. Not everything is doom and gloom

With the advent of scripts, commoners were made useless. However, in light of those very scripts, commoners are now more essential than ever, and thus should be encouraged. Only from those lower classes will new factions emerge, eager to overthrow the oppressive but stagnant factions. They'll be the ones to provide reasons for factions not to remain too complacent. They're needed to add dynamism to the now inevitably script-full PW servers. They just need the means to compete, and I'm trying to suggest changes that allow commoners to have a more significant role in server economies so that they have those very means.


PW is already dying. The current status quo is slowly but assuredly killing it. We don't have that much to lose by experimenting then...

Splintert said:

However, a considerably stronger effect on the ingame economy is the infinite supply of money via banks and infinite supply of gear via gear saving. There is little to no demand for new gear because one set of gear could shuffle hands many times, reducing the need for engineers and thus reducing the need for miners. It inevitably leads to the scenario where everyone has everything they want and there is no reason to go to war other than boredom.

Servers need to make a stand. It is quite obvious that the broken systems added on does not work in the long run, no matter what else the server does. In addition, servers have halted the production of fresh maps. I am absolutely disgusted to log onto current servers still running maps that were new when I ran a server 2 years ago. There is no innovation, no creativity, nothing new and nothing fresh to draw in fresh players and keep things interesting.

Click to expand...

While I agree with you, I think that's something that won't be leaving PW ever again. Even if you could convince most servers to ditch the scripts, all it would take was one server that offered these scripts and all the players would flock there. Virtually all players have gotten too used to these scripts to now accept playing without them.

The best that can be done is to try and make a game economy where money isn't the be all, end all. My suggestions are geared towards making resource availability important enough to be fought over and allow the commoners to have a place in the midst of the ensuing chaos...

Splintert said:

It's been demonstrated that limiting the maximum stocks has a backwards effect on labor classes: if there is a limit of 100 iron ores then the engineer can only make 100 iron ore worth of materials and a miner can only mine 100 iron ores worth. This artificially limits the ingame economy by restricting the transfer of goods from ore rock to gear.

Click to expand...

With banks now commonplace, there needs to be "artificial" restrictions on the economy, because if there aren't, then we might as well accept that most servers will die one year after their start, when people are so rich that there's just no point keeping on playing...

The problem with high limit stock (100 or more...) is that you assume factions won't fill them if you set them that high... They will, and everyone else will remain as poor as if you had set the limit at 20. I think that the solution, rather than making the stocks high enough that factions won't bother to fill them (still won't work, since factions don't just let commoners stroll about their castles), is making them low enough that they risk running out during a war, forcing factions to rely on commoners to restock their castles (because to use their own faction members would be to sacrifice needed soldiers, which isn't a very good strategy...).

Pendanyk said:

Item stockpiles are virtually limited by the target stock count; When it's reached, it should no longer be profitable to craft more items. If it is, then the scene design/resource prices have to change, as the refund does not reflect the value of the resources.

With var1 being factions and price and var2 being target stock count, there would need to be changes to the target stock count setup (by e.g. making it work the same way as resource stockpile) to give scene creators that option in the first place. However, I don't think that this change would be worth the trouble, as the scene would ideally be set up in a way that does not reward you for crafting endlessly.

Try to give them good suggestions about resource prices/locations and item target stock counts instead.

Click to expand...

The problem is not only profitability, but availability as well.

The thing is, resource stockpiles limits are far bigger than is truly necessary to keep a castle supplied, which results in the first ones to fill the stocks making all the money and the latecomers finding the stocks full and therefore unable to make any profit of their own. This makes commoners an unwanted class, since factions are self-sufficient and have no need of commoners wandering about their lands. This makes casual players lose interest in the game and causes servers to die a slow but sure death...

If the stockpile limits were lowered, factions would need to resupply their castles more often, possibly even in the middle of a war. Reassigning faction members from soldier duties to commoner ones would be highly undesirable in such scenario, thus allowing commoners to fill the gap they were intended to in the first place.

Also, regarding item stockpiles, the issue is that, while crafting above the "soft" limit is unprofitable, selling items above isn't. This causes stockpiles to raise to abnormally high levels in case of a successful war, where the victorious factions return to their castles and sell the excess horses, armors and weapons. The biggest factions thus have the advantage here, since they can easily re-gear their defeated soldiers in an ongoing war. Also, it removes the need of commoner smiths helping stock an armory/stable of warring factions, since the stocks are already full. There are two possible solutions: a "hard" limit on item stock OR a diminishing selling price for stocks above the "soft" limit. Then facions would either need to rely more heavily on commoners OR to conquer additional castles, in order to have access to extra stockpiles.

These measures would help with immersion: as factions choose one method or the other, commoners gain a more prominent role AND wars gain an economic dimension as well, as opposed to the current "i'm bored, let's conquer a castle. Success! GG guys, cya tomorrow. *logs off*". There's only so many of these "boredom wars" one can do before losing interest in PW entirely...

First of all, congratulations. Best Warband mod ever 

Suggestion:

I recently made a suggestion regarding lowering stock limits in order to revitalize server economy in EU_Phoenix.

The reply was:

It's not possible to limit weapon/armour/horse stockpiles, and ressource stockpiles can be capped at 100 minimum.

Click to expand...

Could this be made moddable in the next version, please? If it's not too much trouble?


Thank you again and keep up the good work