Game Department

[Peace Alliance]

Game Department

There's nothing I loved more then thinking up new commanders and watching you guys have at 'em. As the head of the game department, I will be in charge of how the game is run. Resets, game changes, commanders, new idea's, and anything else you guys think should be done to the game.

I also want to concentrate a lot right now i'm evening out the races. So if you guys have any ideas, feel free to post 'em in the game developement forum.

[Scarwake]

Just so you know, some ideas of improvement have already been listed in the Code Department for the game seeing as there are some errors in the code dealing with the Race Specific leader abilities...

[Peace Alliance]

There TONS of suggestions going back over a year. I hope to sift through it all

[Gen. Volkov]

Here's a bit of motivation for you, if you get a new commanders going.. I just might play in it.

[bjornredtail]

I always appricated RWL's troop balence. You could play it any way. Mass rats or stoats you have an attack point advantage. Mass weasals or skiffs, you can get around the masses of other people's troops. It is a bit too heavily slanted in favor of offence, only real problem with that. Economic balence on the other hand is unbareable these days. It seems the only acceptable stratgity there was when I left was that Leader-Loot and varations on that. That is why people are playing that race with gold-mine as well. If you wish to maintain a normal army, you should have the need for and the ability to hold onto land fairly well. That would fix RWL's rather redicilious land starvation..

Another porposal may be worth looking into in reguards to 'land farms'. See http://faf.staronesw.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2869 . Basicly land would go into a pot where it is distribuated to all (or some, depending on how it is implemented) hordes automaticly. No more maxxed out land farm. Might be useful for turbo.

[Peace Alliance]

Randomly obtaining land when you don't want it could potentially destroy your stratagy's for defense. And even though the land farm is maxed, it's not like it ever has tons of land that nobody can get to. somebody always gets to it, so it gets redistriuted somehow, and thats what counts. Doesn't really matter how evenly it was distributed, because if it's back in the recirculation it's just as good.

I do agree, however, that the non-leader heavy strats are at a severe disadvantage. I've been making plans to even that out for years. Look back into some old topics in the developement forum and you'll see some of my endless pages of suggestions, heh.

[Gorak]

land wasn't the issue with indying or having a large army
it's the ridiculously low value of troops on the markets that dibilitates an effective indy strat

[bjornredtail]

You need land to support troops if you plan to run any stragity than that bloody cussed peverted leader loot stragity. If you cannot hold on to it, you will not be able to afford to keep troops around. You shouldn't have to, or for that matter be able to support yourself by selling troops.

[Gorak]

You shouldn't have to, or for that matter be able to support yourself by selling troops.

who taught you how to indy :-o
the whole point of an effective indy strat is support yourself selling troops while producing more then you need to sell
thats the very basic fundamental of indying.
and the only difference at RWL then any other prom site that makes indying harder here is the lower market value of troops here.

this place already has tons of land compared to most other sites with similar turn rates

[Ruddertail]

Aye... where'd you learn to indy, Nev? Markets? Holding land? Ugh... Holding land is impossible unless you're emping, and rare even then. Markets are useless unless running a casher strat. Indy is all about troop selling.

Troops are lower here then at other sites? Never really noticed... I always thought indy was just underpowered compared to leaders.

[Peace Alliance]

A full review of the indy races and stuff is currently going on if you guys would kindly join it. Just go to the game developement forum and add your ideas to the new races and add whatever else you think would be helpfull.

[bjornredtail]

"Markets are useless unless running a casher strat. "
That indeed is the problem. I personally think that the economic aspects of running an army should be much more diffacult and more important in terms of the game as a whole. To this end, I am going to rewrite most of Prominance... Someday.

As far as where I learned indy... Why you upity n00b! :) Back my day, we didn't have indying. And the Delor Indapenant Forces ruled the game...

[Ruddertail]

I don't see why it's a problem. A strat where you make your own troops already requires far more buildings then maging, and (sometimes) as many as cashing. Why should it require even more? Sure, it's not realistic this way... but neither are any of the other strats, for that matter. It's is a game, after all...

Leave our indy alone, Nev the ancient one. :P

[Peace Alliance]

There can be more then one indy stratagy guys. The race dynamics would suck if there were only 2 basic stratagys. Right now i have 7 solidly different races planned out with 7 completely different strats and approches to the game. I'm thinking of a few more (races that require using more camps/markets more). Besides that i need to work on evening out the races. I have their strats down pat, but i will no doubt have to tweak them ALL in order to make them all equally as powerfull.

[Gen. Volkov]

I <3 you Peace. Making the game interesting is a good idea.