This page is for any comments about places where the game needs improvements. Or suggestions about the same.


Suggestions 2 (Thelonius)

1. I think you can tie Attribute gain to Influence with NPCs. You gain Influence with NPC A (Recruitment) and they begin to supply you with troops (+Recruitment). This gives Players more stakes to work with certain NPCs and see their fortunes rise. And perhaps tie the amount to Faction Assets - so the maximum number of Attribute points, NPC can provide would be limited and raise and fall with it’s fortunes.

2. Allow use of Attributes to provide Power to your side in Contracts. For example use 1 point of Logistics to say, your troops are well-supplied for the mission or 2 points of Intelligence, to say, good reconnaissance improves battle odds in your favor. Based on the type of mission, 1 Attribute Point can be equivalent to Trained Grunt (5 Power) or up to Elite Grunt (12 Power). If Intelligence would be of vital importance it can provide 8-12 Power. If it would be of little use, it could provide 2 Power.

3. Add condition, that Grunts surviving the mission must be paid a flat wage of 1 or 2 Cash (whether they are Green or Veteran). Or 1 for Green, 2 for Trained, 3 for Veteran, etc. The Grunt wages would be subtracted from the Contract payout. This shouldn’t complicate EoTs too much and you can probably adjust payouts to keep the current faction growth balance.

4. I think you can add Missions of internal politics - factions of the same nation, working to get an upper hand. And perhaps add Stealth equipment.

Suggestions (Thelonius)

I think what you need to do is to give players more room for politics, so they can influence what contracts happen, could plot double-crosses or complicated combinations and have more stakes in the contracts, beyond cash payouts.

Proposal 1
1. We need a list of NPCs (I think current NPCs are fine).
2. The NPC description should include their leadership name, their Assets and values for Prestige, Wealth and Secrets (or maybe other stats).
3. Prestige-Wealth-Secrets is essentially NPCs power. Prestige is their political power and reputation, wealth is their liquid cash and secrets is important information. Contracts can reduce NPCs stat or increase it. If stat reaches 0, NPC is destroyed.
4. Assets are what NPC makes money from - mines, trade routes, control of cities, etc. Every NPC will have 3-5 of those. The more they have, the richer they are. The richer they are, the more generous they could be with contract payouts.
5. The purpose of this is to have clear stakes in conflicts - then players could start to plot, like using Diplomacy to persuade one NPC to steal Asset of another or how NPC with low Wealth can be pressured by sinking their shipments and creating cash liquidity problem. Or hiring to one NPC and then asking for double the money from their enemy, in exchange for switching sides. The contracts against bandits could be low-grade, while the meat of action should be about NPCs fighting each other (directly or via proxies).
6. Establish systems to link NPCs fortunes to PCs. And perhaps a way PCs could play in the stock market/invest, so successes of NPC or their acquisition of complete monopoly, would generate a generous payout, for player, who bet on it a couple turns back.

Proposal 2
1. Establish additional requirements for some Contracts, that would require major investments.
2. For example:
Airships: to access remote areas
Siege Machines: to attack fortified locations
Alchemical Shields: to act in areas with strong Estrada Revenge.
Ships: for naval engagements
Agreements: permission from local warlords to act in their territory.
3. Players would purchase said items at levels 1-5, with higher levels being harder to obtain. So if contract says, Required: Airships 2, player can spend 25 Cash to permanently purchase them or suffer additional losses, since his troops would need to pass dangerous territory on foot.


HerbieRai - I think there needs to be more motivation for players to talk with other players. Another idea would be extremely hard contracts that would require pcs to ally (and potentially betray) to achieve. You would need very good rewards for these since they would be split.

Hipchat Log - 3/20
[5:15 PM] Thelonius: I think partially, it could be that current player base does indeed has less time. With Condottieri specifically... maybe focus on fulfilling contracts was too narrow (personally I enjoyed it and addition of complication made things more interesting) - if there was greater area for diplomacy with NPCs we take contracts from, like a list of NPCs, with what they could do for us and their rivalries. I understand it was in the game, but often if potential to do something isn't spelled out, people don't realize it's there. People like character - like pirates and bandits we were fighting having names and defined presence in the world.
[5:16 PM] Thelonius: Or maybe people have grown a bit tired with game concept, so it doesn't feel as exciting anymore.
[5:20 PM] Arcane Stomper: The problem is I only have 3 EoTs so I'm hesitant to move things along.
[5:20 PM] Arcane Stomper: I know once people miss one eot they are much less likely to continue.
[5:21 PM] Thelonius: Again a pity, as I think the game just started to reach it's potential.
[5:21 PM] Arcane Stomper: I think that I will make a wiki listing everything going on and all the factions.
[5:22 PM] Arcane Stomper: If it comes to it I'll restart, but give people a more vested interest in the great power politics somehow
[5:23 PM] Thelonius: A restart could work.
[5:23 PM] Thelonius: I think a list of factions and hints of special goods and services what they can provide, if their favors are acquired could be good and maybe some notorious pirates/monsters/mercs, that players can gather intel about, in case they met them on battlefield.
[5:25 PM] Arcane Stomper: See I haven't detailed anything for pirates, but I can make some named bands there
[5:33 PM] Thelonius: Hmm... maybe have some sort of Fame stat...
[5:34 PM] Thelonius: Basically, have some variety of objectives players can strive for, beyond earning cash.
[5:36 PM] Thelonius: Something people could compete with each other for.
[5:37 PM] Thelonius: Like have Fame as "Victory Points", and have several ways to become famous or infamous.
[5:37 PM] Thelonius: And about my game, I haven't advertised in in TW thread, since it's not a TW game, but you are certainly welcome, if you have interest.
[10:57 PM] Ascaloth _: @ArcaneStomper , IMO the main issue with your games are passive NPCs
[10:58 PM] Ascaloth _: As in, they're just kind of... there.
[10:59 PM] Arcane Stomper: That is my weakest point I know. I have trouble writing compelling characters.
[10:59 PM] Ascaloth _: They don't seem to exert very much... 'pressure' on the gameplay, I'm not sure what term to describe it
[11:00 PM] Ascaloth _: Compelling characters are one thing, but it'll help greatly if you just give them an active agenda they'll pursue on their own
[11:00 PM] Arcane Stomper: I tried having effective NPCs before and it wasn't particularly well recieved.
[11:00 PM] Arcane Stomper: Though thinking back that was one of my longest running games.
[11:01 PM] Arcane Stomper: Even if I got several pages of complaints back every EoT.
[11:01 PM] Ascaloth _: I don't remember which one that was
[11:01 PM] Ascaloth _: Was i in that game?
[11:01 PM] Arcane Stomper: Girl Genius. I don't think so.
[11:01 PM] Ascaloth _: Yah I think that was before I even joined the TW community
[11:02 PM] Arcane Stomper: Ironically the NPCs in this game are pursuing there own objectives.
[11:02 PM] Arcane Stomper: It's just not obvious if you aren't looking at all the contracts.
[11:02 PM] Ascaloth _: It's probably a delicate balance between NPCs that are just active enough, as opposed to being overbearing
[11:02 PM] Ascaloth _: Yeah you'll probably have to make that more obvious
[11:02 PM] Ascaloth _: Let's see what I can recall from your previous games
[11:03 PM] Ascaloth _: Green Star, for one
[11:03 PM] Ascaloth _: I honestly don't recall a single NPC from that game
[11:03 PM] Ascaloth _: And then there's Spire City
[11:04 PM] Ascaloth _: That one wasn't so bad mostly because you let Lyrica pull almost every shenanigan that I can come up with :p
[11:05 PM] Ascaloth _: And she sort of ended up slotting into the 'threatening NPC' role all the other players had to work around
[11:05 PM] Ascaloth _: But even I have to say, it only really got interesting once you really started throwing obstacles my way
[11:06 PM] Ascaloth _: Half of that was from the PC who was building the TItan thing TBF, but the Tower-spirit thing was something intriguing too
[11:07 PM] Ascaloth _: As for Condottieri...
[11:07 PM] Ascaloth _: Yeah, I think you may have to rework the format entirely
[11:07 PM] Ascaloth _: It's not obvious at all how anything the players do affects the larger world around them
[11:08 PM] Ascaloth _: And that's because there's a layer of 'mercenary contracts' between them and the larger world
[11:08 PM] Ascaloth _: Not to mention it's not clear what the NPC factions about, what their motivations are, and how they are respectively affecting the metagame
[11:09 PM] Arcane Stomper: Yes, I realized that was a problem after the first turn.
[11:10 PM] Ascaloth _: Pretty much, yeah
[11:11 PM] Ascaloth _: Plus, the 'contracts' thing makes it looks like the PCs won't ever really need to engage in PvP at any point down the line
[11:11 PM] Ascaloth _: Early game PvP is not great of course (I mean, look what happened with Sunken Tower)
[11:11 PM] Ascaloth _: But much of the excitement in mid and late game is player PvP
[11:12 PM] Arcane Stomper: Well that was intended to be two things.
[11:12 PM] Ascaloth _: You need a format that would unfold into making that inevitable somewhere down the line
[11:12 PM] Arcane Stomper: One players would compete over the best contracts.
[11:12 PM] Arcane Stomper: And two eventually players would wind up on opposite sides of the same contract.
[11:13 PM] Ascaloth _: Yeah, you need to introduce the second part much earlier
[11:14 PM] Ascaloth _: Word it such that it's not blindingly obvious
[11:14 PM] Ascaloth _: But players can deduce it easily enough given a little thought... or otherwise find out the hard way :p
[11:15 PM] Arcane Stomper: Well I have some ideas. The problem is that it's going to be hard to use intelligence to find out what the enemy forces are when the other players hasn't actually committed their forces yet
[11:16 PM] Ascaloth _: Mmm
[11:17 PM] Ascaloth _: Yeah that might need a rework
[11:17 PM] Ascaloth _: You can start off by having intelligence reveal which regiment is on the other side of the contract
[11:18 PM] Ascaloth _: That lets players at least have an idea of what they might be facing
[11:18 PM] Arcane Stomper: Yes, and that would play into have discrete pirate forces as well.
[11:18 PM] Arcane Stomper: Since you would then be able to get an idea of what you were facing in the case of a regular contract.
[11:19 PM] Ascaloth _: Mmhmm
[11:19 PM] Ascaloth _: Also, maybe have Intelligence give certain bonuses, depending on the tactics the players employ in their EoT
[11:21 PM] Arcane Stomper: I actually already have intelligence give bonuses to combat. When players use it.
[11:21 PM] Ascaloth _: Right, hmm
[11:22 PM] Arcane Stomper: Mechanic wise the biggest problem is human wave tactics with green troops seems to be simply better than anything else.
[11:23 PM] Ascaloth _: Maybe make Intelligence synergistic with Leadership
[11:23 PM] Arcane Stomper: I'm trying to work on that, but I think the issue with engagement is a bigger problem.
[11:23 PM] Arcane Stomper: Like Int Bonus ^ Leadership
[11:23 PM] Ascaloth _: In the sense that a smaller force might have better Intelligence on a greater opposing force, which a superior Leader can then exploit to outmaneuver the latter
[11:24 PM] Arcane Stomper: Hmmm
[11:24 PM] Ascaloth _: Which means a good INT+LEAD combo has a fighting chance against superior grunts
[11:25 PM] Arcane Stomper: Right now the leadership bonus is based on the number of grunts involved.
[11:26 PM] Arcane Stomper: Do you think leadership should only be able to use a limited number of grunts per point?
[11:27 PM] Ascaloth _: Mmm
[11:27 PM] Ascaloth _: Maybe make it that to handle more grunts effectively, you need more LEAD
[11:27 PM] Ascaloth _: If you don't have enough LEAD to handle the number of grunts you have, your grunts fight at subpar strength
[11:27 PM] Ascaloth _: That should put a soft cap on human waves
[11:28 PM] Arcane Stomper: What do you think 3-5 grunts per point of LEAD
[11:29 PM] Ascaloth _: 3 is good
[11:29 PM] Ascaloth _: 5 means a starting faction with 5 LEAD can handle 25 grunts
[11:29 PM] Ascaloth _: That's already a human wave
[11:29 PM] Ascaloth _: 3 means 15 grunts, which is a lot, but not that imposing
[11:34 PM] Arcane Stomper: Well 5 grunts is supposed to be a lot, but I suppose I can up the numbers of enemies
[11:35 PM] Ascaloth _: Alright, just be mindful of inflation
[11:35 PM] Ascaloth _: I mean hell, you should have learned from Lyrica by now :p
[11:43 PM] Ascaloth _: You know what, here's an idea
[11:43 PM] Ascaloth _: Do it like Sir Meier's Pirates
[11:43 PM] Ascaloth _: *Sid
[11:44 PM] Ascaloth _: Have you played that game before?
[11:51 PM] Arcane Stomper: Yes
[11:51 PM] Arcane Stomper: But I'm not sure how it is applicable here.
[11:52 PM] Ascaloth _: Right, so
[11:52 PM] Ascaloth _: Oceania is at war with Eurasia, while Eastasia is neutral
[11:52 PM] Ascaloth _: So the PC takes an Oceania contract where he acts as a privateer against Eurasia forces
[11:53 PM] Ascaloth _: It's successful, the PC gains prestige with Oceania, but loses it with Eurasia
[11:53 PM] Ascaloth _: This goes on for a while, but then Oceania makes peace with Eurasia
[11:53 PM] Ascaloth _: So the PC taking Oceania contracts continues to gain Oceania prestige, but doesn't lose any more with Eurasia
[11:54 PM] Arcane Stomper: Hmm that could work.
[11:54 PM] Ascaloth _: Then all of a sudden, Oceania declares war with Eastasia
[11:54 PM] Arcane Stomper: I was considering something like that
[11:54 PM] Ascaloth _: Yeah I think you get the idea now, eh? :p
[11:54 PM] Arcane Stomper: But I don't have any clear enemies among the NPCs at the moment.
[11:54 PM] Ascaloth _: Doesn't have to be specific NPCs
[11:54 PM] Ascaloth _: Just make it an ongoing low level war amongst nations
[11:55 PM] Ascaloth _: Fufilling a contract with an Oceania NPC gains you prestige with Oceania
[11:55 PM] Ascaloth _: Doesn't matter which NPC it is, as long as it's an Oceania one
[11:56 PM] Ascaloth _: And make the game of thrones determine what contracts are available too
[11:56 PM] Ascaloth _: i.e., more privateering contracts when there's nations at war, etc. etc.
---- Tuesday March 21, 2017 ----
[12:04 AM] Arcane Stomper: I was trying to do that, but it was a bit too general
[12:05 AM] Ascaloth _: How so?
[12:11 AM] Arcane Stomper: You do get influence with people you complete contracts with
[12:12 AM] Arcane Stomper: But I didn't incorporate a negative aspect yet
[12:12 AM] Ascaloth _: Try nation-specific techs
[12:13 AM] Ascaloth _: Thus high prestige with Oceania gains you access to Oceania-specific tech
[12:13 AM] Ascaloth _: But there's no way in hell you'll ever get a sniff at Eurasia tech, unless you get them by other means
[12:14 AM] Ascaloth _: Also, consider making most of your NPCs mere fluff
[12:14 AM] Ascaloth _: Make the nations the only ones the player really has to take into consideration.
[12:15 AM] Ascaloth _: Make the small names like House Rossetta, Raabi'a Traders etc. etc. simply fluff
[12:15 AM] Ascaloth _: To characterise the personalities from each nation, nothing more
[12:25 AM] Arcane Stomper: It's something I was considering, but I didn't want to make equipment too complicated
[12:27 AM] Arcane Stomper: Consolidating the NPCs is probably a good idea though
[12:28 AM] Ascaloth _: Then nation-specific contracts, nation-specific bonuses to recruitment, gear acquisition, bonuses, traits, that kind of thing
[12:28 AM] Ascaloth _: Anything that would incentivise players to act in the interests of a particular nation in general
[12:29 AM] Ascaloth _: Or maybe it doesn't even have to be nation-specific, it could be similar across the board
[12:29 AM] Ascaloth _: Because after all, if you're successfully working in your nation's interests, you're strengthening your nation at the same time
[12:30 AM] Ascaloth _: Thus increasing your patron nation's ability to throw more benefits your way
[12:30 AM] Ascaloth _: That kind of thing
[12:30 AM] Ascaloth _: On the flip side, piss off a nation enough, and they may put out contracts specifically to target your regiment in particular
[12:31 AM] Ascaloth _: Or conduct Intelligence ops against you, or interfere in your contracts, etc. etc.