Messages

Many thanks for your consideration, Mr. Volkov.

Interestingly, we have indeed an informal acquaintance:  I know you as a formidable debater and reasoner, and you know me as FireFrenzy.  :wink:

Such issues aside, I have no interest nor intentions of "hijacking" a productive thread with my own antics.  Thus, I'm curious if anyone has further thoughts or elaboration on the ideas proposed throughout?

Ah, what a productive atmosphere.  :-)

I see no one has replied to your postings, perhaps given that this topic is not a vogue of the current game.? Nevertheless, even given perceived insipidness of this thread, I'll capitulate my thoughts on a few of the points, in the hopes of provoking some interest:

1+2.
Well, I would have introduced myself, but I'm one of those borish types.? Hence, I typically avoid reminisces, as I prefer to keep my writing lucid and my audience wakeful, as well as to keep subjects in their rightful place.? I suppose that I'm just a man, with companions worthy of such chivalrous praise so that this nor any man could ask for better.? A worn warrior who has long since given into wise reason, the steady pendulum by which we measure passage as we plot our course amongst the stars.? On hurricane gales I have sailed through torrent and tempest, but now I have settled, with hopes of finding some resting place among the names writ on ancient stone, long mossed-over with slow neglect until ages hence.

Or, perhaps I simply frequent various Promisance-type games and boards to relish their full variety.? Maybe both.? ?:wink:

Irregardless, considering the current decadence of the Promisance genre/platform, I prefer to visit the development threads -- particularly those of games, such as this one, which already display innovation and myriad ideas.? I figure that these are the games in which the occasional idea develops reality.? Of course, current alterations take time to learn, and thus I don't consider myself particularly qualified to offer opinion on the game's more distinctive changes quite yet.


Regarding your first post:
3.?
The calcSizeBonus function would be precisely that which you're referencing:? during selectively incremental values of networth, it simply applies an increasingly large multiplier.? This is typically divided into subsequent functions, thereby becoming detrimental to larger values -- and thus larger nations/warlords.

This considered, I think that stagnating the growth of larger warlords -- indirectly, as is the current situation -- is an effective method of balancing gameplay and allowing for greater competitiveness.? Likewise, from my (inexperienced) perspective, I agree that it shouldn't be removed.? However, if its effects are currently greater than what would be preferable, alteration could and should be considered.

4.
Varying the worth of buildings, were they to become instilled with networth, has certain sense.? However, I would counter that the most logical value for the worth of buildings would be that equivalent to their cost; that is, their networth value should be equivalent to the networth value of the money spent on them.? Given the current structure, this would give all buildings equivalent networth.? Irregardless of this detail, however, I would concede that -- in this light -- buildings should have at least some networth, be it arbitrary or not.

6.
Agreed.? Logically, all land should have the same value, unused and used alike -- especially if buildings were given networth.

I have been unable to find information on such details, so I suppose I'll supplement my suggestion with the question:  Is a commission deducted from goods sold on the public market?  If so, rather than -- presumably -- vanishing, that amount could, each time, be added to the lottery sum.  Thus, as the game progresses and larger transactions occur, lottery winnings would increase proportionally.

hmm, I'm not sure that this change was ever implemented, but it isn't imagination:  Assuming your code isn't far removed -- which I understand it isn't -- from the current FAF code (or nearly any other Promisance game, for that matter), it would be due to the 'cashandfood' function in spells.php and, ultimately, the 'calcSizeBonus' function it calls from funcs.php.

Hopefully this has already been done, assuming it correlates with the wishes of the playerbase.  If not, as I understand that our lives are busying, I figure that my post should expedite the process.