bolle idea is a patch on existing holes - it fixes things but isn't very exciting. iluros' is more like getting a new wardrobe: it's a lot more different and you'll either love it or hate it ;)

My idea is a fix, yes. Iluros idea is a fix as well. It's additional. It will make the game go a lot more smooth in the situation where everything is kinda fixed. That's the idea at least. I am not saying the idea you see on page 1 will work this way, I am saying it was intended to work this way. And I can explain it quite simply as well:

Aggressor gets easier to kill, and he can kill better. This means that you can get rid of all those factors that must be fixed, like explorers who MUST be able to outdef attackers while attackers MUST be able to grab explorers. With those variables, you can make the situation standard where explorers can outdef attackers after a few hits cuz of toughness, while really aggressive attackers can still hit them (though thus lowering their defenses immensely. Bonuses CAN go negative). That is the use of the three branches. Industrry is simply a means to enhance production for those who are aimed at that rather than killing. They are all intertwined and if balanced well, they have some simple yet necessary effects. Which is why I'm all in for the idea itself.

I can highlight a few problems with the current idea for you guys:

1) heritage. Inheriting the three branches causes imbalances in the game, quite obviously, cause on the long run you can achieve a 40% fame bonus so to say...
2) Fame decay works different from toughness/industry decay. That's also an inherent problem, because: Industry decays by doing offensive acts. Toughness decays by doing industrial acts. So fame should decay by doing toughness acts. It does so - yet how? This is not clear yet, and i am under the impression that it is possible to boost both fame and toughness, creating unkillable tribes. I base this on the 'half fame is lost'.

It really occurs to me that the things people are pointing out regarding the complexity of the system are really the minutiae of how the game mechanics work. Everyone seems to agree that the concepts are simple.

But when were the minutiae of fame ever relevant to game play? The internal coding and formulae that give us fame are complicated. But is fame itself complicated, to the player? No. Neither are the other two, for the same reason. No one will have any practical reason to be overly concerned with the specifics any more than they are currently with fame.

Could be, though the heritage is quite small. It doesn't seem to me that there have been problems with heritage and fame currently, and what you inherit now is much higher.



If that's the case, we can always keep fame losses the same, but that might make boosting fame quite hard. O:)

Since fame is the aggressive factor, maybe that's not a very bad thing. And I really see no reason why you shouldn't do that with the other two branches as well (75% i mean instead of ~50%, not the 100% you suggest up there).

As for heritage: Currently it's “just” fame, and fame can be taken by others. Toughness and industry can't be taken by others. So you can boost them infinitely.

p.s. we're hijacking the thread ^^

You can 'take' toughness by being an easy killtarget and get yourself killed by your victim :)

75% makes sense, after all it was what I was implying. ^^

There's also the issue of there being a buffer of 5000 points of fame. You wouldn't necessarily have that with fame or the others.

And you can't control how much toughness you gain, so there's a limit to how much that can be boosted.

Edit: In any case, I can easily see us not giving heritage for any of the three (except, perhaps, fame) if its very problematic in the current model

Nah, no limit needed. And all start at 0k ofc.

Heritage is kinda problematic. Even when you put a max limit on toughness gained by heritage, everyone will end up having exactly that. Or use their heritage to do a more risky build for one lifetime. I don't like inheriting that stuff, either way.

a note to normal people: read Iluros' “minutiae” comment, it is very true. The problem is that the gains/losses should accurately reflect the overall course taken by a player.

Pretty difficult changes again:(

I would love to see more changes for winning wars so there would be a lot more wars....Maby smaller alliances...

yeah.. make this game more difficult...
hard for newbie..
>.<

staff, dont make ur player decrease in this game,
because of too difficult calculating and many changes each age..

agreed. me thinks without population gained through fame, Templars will be especially fat since their clerics are no longer capable of defending anything