Very Loyal Companion

正在查看此主题的用户

Mooncabbage

Sergeant
Starting with me starting playing again this afternoon (same save file as a few days ago), I've noticed something strange. Whenever I enter a tavern or any town scene, Osmund follows me! He has dialogue that matches, but I've never seen this before. Is it supposed to happen? Can I make it happen with other companions?
 
It's the bodyguard feature. Handy if you get ambushed etc. The amount of companions following you depends on amount of current renown I think. If you want someone else to follow you, just place them higher than Osmund in your party list.
 
It`s OK. He is your bodyguard. When you will have more renown, you will have two or even three of them.
He must be first in your party list.
 
That's alright, I don't think I've ever been ambushed by more than 4 guys in this mod (atleast not in cities).
 
I do get a bit tired of being randomly mugged though. I think I'd enjoy it more if it seemed like there was a reason, some more flavour to these events. Assassin type attacks against players with high renown might be an interesting twist on simply being mugged. I mean, once you're established in the game, the standard muggers are hardly a threat unless you're mobbed, and being mobbed isn't fun.
 
Well, they do happen more often as you get renown. I can't remember if the text is changed, but in Native they leave it unclear whether or not the thugs really were assassins.
 
No, the text isn't changed.

My thought process basically went like this:

In BW, Renown is fairly easy to get very quickly, and there aren't really any downsides I can think of. If the threat of violence increases with your Renown level, it keeps players from exploiting the system and power leveling their renown, without enforcing an artificial hard limit. So you want to make these random encounters more difficult in step with Renown. Increasing the frequency isn't fun, it's just annoying. Who wants to have to load a battle against a couple of measly thugs every time they pop down to the shops? Increasing the number of assailants works, up to a point. Beyond 4, maybe 5 attackers, the event starts to stretch plausability, with an entire army sneaking in to attack you, and also, it's not much fun. Any more than about 2 enemies attacking you simultaneously and it becomes virtually impossible to defend yourself, and potentially even move. The constant blows interupt your attacks, break your shield, and eventually you're defeated without having much of an opportunity to fight back. Sure, if you're really powerful or good at the game you can probably handle more, but there comes a point where it's just frustrating. So really the only way to balance the difficulty while keeping it fun, is to increase the power of your opponents, and the stakes. As you become more famous, you're not simply mugged. People recognise you afterall. Instead, a gang of bandits and ne'erdowells might attempt to kidnap you. Lose the fight, and you're whisked off as a captive. Perhaps the kin of men you've slain will come after you, seeking blood for blood. There are a lot of ways you can extend the system, keeping the risk, rewards (better loot from stronger opponents), and difficulty in line with the relative power of a character. By the time you're a nobleman or king you have bodyguards, and these fights can really start to mean something.
 
I don't understand if you're saying it already has a penalty, or suggesting it gets added?

Regardless it's not uncommon for me to fight battles worth 40-50 renown each.
 
If get renown is too easy and player is too strong soon, we can add some penalty (in 1.39)
 
That does seem odd. I can believe getting renown for winning evenly matched battles, even ones you MIGHT lose, but 200 vs 10? That seems ludicrous.
 
Idibil 说:
If get renown is too easy and player is too strong soon, we can add some penalty (in 1.39)
I support this, but instead I think it should be monthly and 1-10% simply because
other lords names get spoken by peoples mouths.
And loss of renown when you retreat from or lose a battle.
 
I disagree about losing renown from retreating from a battle. Sometimes it's just the smart thing to do. Losing renown for losing a battle makes sense, although it should be relative to the battle. If you lose a 200 vs 10 and you're the 200, you should obviously lose more renown than if you're the 10 vs the 200. I guess use whatever the renown calculating formula is in reverse. Ie as the 200, you lose the amount of renown the 10 are set to gain, and vice versa.

That said, I don't think it should necessarily be HARD to get renown, I just think the gameplay would be balanced better if there was a price for fame. Maybe dark age paparazzi :razz:
 
Mooncabbage 说:
I disagree about losing renown from retreating from a battle. Sometimes it's just the smart thing to do. Losing renown for losing a battle makes sense, although it should be relative to the battle. If you lose a 200 vs 10 and you're the 200, you should obviously lose more renown than if you're the 10 vs the 200. I guess use whatever the renown calculating formula is in reverse. Ie as the 200, you lose the amount of renown the 10 are set to gain, and vice versa.

That said, I don't think it should necessarily be HARD to get renown, I just think the gameplay would be balanced better if there was a price for fame. Maybe dark age paparazzi :razz:
I agree with this. Except for the paparazzi part :razz: but giving a downside to renown would be nice.
 
It is a question though, you don't want to make it so hard having high renown that it's just not worth it. It should be a cost/reward balance of scaling difficulty. A large army should come at a price, but it shouldn't be a chore. That's why I disagree with too much renown decay, ie. monthly renown reductions. If you do too much of that, it's going to be a chore to maintain your renown.
 
后退
顶部 底部