The Brain Farts - Brainstorm of ideas here

Discussion in 'Ideas & Brainfarts' started by Good Feather, Nov 18, 2010.

Share This Page

  1. sweede

    sweede Guest

    I put this in wrong tread before, so, well here it is;
    There's been discussions about limiting back pack (servers cant handle the amount), It's hard to do since there are many "collectors", some premium (nugget users) who could with all right get very upset over such a limitation.
    Dev's have already hinted the map be changed to "real" map with resources, jobs spread unevenly over same.
    So;
    A button that hide/un-hide building sites (just like "create new town sites", but more, denser). in it you can build one house. In that house you can store anything in excess's of the (say) 50 "stuff" you're back pack holds (new limit to save servers). The more houses in an area the bigger the closest town can grow (dev,s have also hinted new/no levels in buildings). Bigger stores, hotel etc.
    Only you can sleep i your hose and rejuvenate depending on size of house, say five levels. You can have two houses, if you sell one (on the market, if it doesn't sell you can demolished it) all your stuff ends up in second house, This way you can move, bye or build, new house closer to new towns. Bigger town, bigger price for building spot. You can still be around without a house, only back pack. That's how greenhorns start.
    To duel somebody in heavily populated areas you get a minus in your dueling skills, but you're loot grows in % with the size of the city. If you initiate a duel in a remote area you get a plus (10-20-30% ?) in your dueling skills, but original loot.
    The "city's" get to be safer, the "outback's" more dangerous.
    Some jobs ( Dev's have already mentioned this) will be in remote areas, some in city's of certain size (my idea) so you can't only stay in city's or remote area's, to do quests.
    Etc etc and so on! ;)



    Last edited by sweede; 31.03.11 at 04:17.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 5, 2011
  2. TJ Tuttle

    TJ Tuttle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,077
    Likes Received:
    88
    No.

    No change to the dueling system other than what is planned in the road map.

    And no to the houses.

    Building construction in towns comes under what the town hats want built..and in what order and levels they want them built in.

    You want to rejuvenate...check into the town hotel...its free if your a town member.
     
  3. goodmeister

    goodmeister Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cavalry at fort battles

    This idea is simple and the object is to reward those alliances that are active in the game. Currently many of the smaller fort battles are over subscribed and players, after travelling all day to the fort staging a battle have to be turned away through lack of spaces. This can be especially hard on lower level players who some generals only rank last and in desperation to make up the numbers.
    My thought is to allow both attacker and defender to rank and hold back a percentage of the total number of people allowed to partake in a fort battle. Shall we say 10%, therefore if a battle allows 100 players to be ranked for the fort itself, they will actually have 110 at their full disposal.
    Then, after say 10 rounds of the battle, each general can choose whether or not to bring in a cavalry to assist their side during the battle, thus making it far more strategic. There should also be a limit of when the cavalry is allowed to be used so again I'd say after 10 rounds and before the last 10 rounds of battle.
    This way not only do more players get to be involved but it allows those lower ranked ones who are normally shunned during the ranking process, an opportunity to become involved in battles in order to gain the rewards that others get and makes them feel just as important.
    The cavalry would have to have slightly different bonuses that the other fighters in the battle and truth be told i haven't thought it out that far yet. Although I'd suggest aim is lowered whilst dodge is lifted along with an appearance bonus?
    Hope this bigger explanation is well received and feel free to suggest adjustments etc.
    I have no idea if this will get any backing or become incorporated into the game but i think it will help retain the interest of new and lower level players.
     
  4. TJ Tuttle

    TJ Tuttle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2010
    Messages:
    1,077
    Likes Received:
    88
    No

    You want to reward the more active alliances....thus penalizing the alliances who have to work harder to fill a fort.
     
  5. goodmeister

    goodmeister Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2009
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see your point clearly although the concept of adding a different angle to fort battles is interesting, do you not agree?
    The idea can be reworked so that you can put anything up to 10% of your ranked players into a cavalry to be used later in battle. This way you are not penalized if you don't fill up the fort and doesn't make it exclusive to the bigger alliances.
     
  6. Elmyr

    Elmyr Guest

    I don't see anything that can be done to really improve on the original idea. Large active alliances don't need an extra advantage.
     
  7. XimusnucK

    XimusnucK Guest

    Just a quick idea, which has probably been mentioned, more forts. The limit of forts is too small.
     
  8. Jaxis

    Jaxis Guest

    Jails

    I just wanted to throw out an idea....We have sheriffs in towns and I think it would be awesome to have jails as well. If someone duels and wins a bounty capture then the person with the bounty on their head will go to jail. Severe/high bounties can have a penalty of 8hrs in jail....no actions/work/dueling/fort-fighting can be done during this time. Bail can be set as well and, if paid, that money would go to the town where the person is held. Perhaps there can be jail escapes or jail breaks orchestrated by members of one's town, i.e. a breakout gang. If the break fails, all members are imprisoned for a length of time and the original criminal must serve more time for the attempt. Jail breaks or fights would be like mini-fort fights...anywhere from 1-10 people participating.



    Thoughts and/or additional ideas?? :D

    It is just an idea with a lot of changes/suggestions that can be made to it. I just like the idea of having town sheriffs and deputies who have a job supervising a jail. We all know that "westerns" have their duels, gambling and saloons....and they also have their jails for those who get out of hand. It's just an idea for an added element to the game and something that could be as fun a fortfighting. I have to say that the punishments or penalties were totally pulled from the air, lol. Thanks for the feedback!
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2011
  9. Elmyr

    Elmyr Guest

    I don't think making premium players sit out 1/42 of their 14 days would be good for business. Then again, I suppose they could implement an 18-nugget get out of jail free card. ;)
     
  10. -Neo-

    -Neo- Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,773
    Likes Received:
    122
    awesome idea, i like this, it is the natural step forward after bounties.
    get out of jail with nuggets, ingame cash, from anyone, or a jail breakout.

    if you break out of jail a bounty is automatically put on your head for dead, ad is double previous amount, making getting out even more expensive...

    awesome ideas, would add to the game.
     
  11. Noobmic

    Noobmic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    714
    Likes Received:
    35
    I don't like @Jaxis for only one reason, bounty can be put on every player that has a town with no reason and in the end you also go to jail? Big no.
     
  12. Jaxis

    Jaxis Guest

    Hmm, that's a valid point and something that can be looked into. It isn't like I have the power to make this addition happen, haha. I originally thought it would be a good idea to make dueling workers a "crime" or something of that nature. I ran the idea by a town member and they suggested the bounty idea. Thanks for the feedback :)
     
  13. mdog93

    mdog93 Guest

    Also the owners/ building town of the bridge charges a payment every time you cross their bridge?
     
  14. Tzveti

    Tzveti Guest

    :) what about fort fights? i mean there kinda unfair on Melee Duelers because they only have Fort Guns...
    what about Fort Melee Weapons? like cavalry swords? like how the cavalry would charge at the fort?


    i like the bridge idea, although there should be some already made ones....
     
  15. Elmyr

    Elmyr Guest

    Yes, because shooting is such an important fort skill. :rolleyes:

    Melee and firearms duelers both have aim. Firearms is more likely to have dodging, but melee is almost certainly going to have more of the most important fort skill, health, through their strength. I have two golden guns. On both worlds I had a lot of shooting as a job skill. On both worlds I went pure strength and replaced my golden Colts with golden sabers because a fort build favors melee more. If anything fort battles are biased towards melee.

    Melee weapons in the era:

    http://www.civilwarhome.com/weapons.htm
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 13, 2011
  16. futurama1001

    futurama1001 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,589
    Likes Received:
    996
    Yeah, we've got so many trolls here we might as well give them all bridges to lurk beneath...
     
  17. Tzveti

    Tzveti Guest

    yes but the thing is that they may survive longer, but they cant hit very high atall...
    shooters may hav less HP but they can inflict much more damage...
    the only thing us melee duelers r good for is human shields :p
     
  18. futurama1001

    futurama1001 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,589
    Likes Received:
    996
    How can they inflict more damage? Melee duellers generally have almost as much aim, if that's what you're talking about. And in attack they get stamina, something ranged duellers don't get. The only fort battle skill that ranged duellers get is aim. Melee duellers get aim, stamina and most importantly, health points.
     
  19. Elmyr

    Elmyr Guest

    Go through the top players on West Forts on a newer world and you'll see that 90% of the top fort fighters on all newer worlds have golden sabers, not Colts. Melee is much more suited to fort battles than firearms. Any normal firearms dueling build is going to be dexterity (one fort skill - aim) and/or charisma. Melee duelers tend towards pure strength (two fort skills - stamina and health).

    If you wanted to add some kind of melee combat to fort battles, the mechanics would have to completely change and get much more complicated, but I don't see any point. For one thing, you aren't fighting with your firearm or melee weapon, you're fighting with left handed weapons, which are all guns. Dueling is already unrealistic with melee vs. firearms and I see nothing positive about removing realism from fort battles, which have little realism to spare.
     
  20. Tzveti

    Tzveti Guest


    yes i am sorry, it is a mix up, i thought tht shooting is a neccesary fort skill :p soz guys :(