Theodora
Arcane
Jesus, dude, you’re busy. Cool game, been having a blast with it so far.
Right? Eternally in awe of this mad (<3) lad.
Jesus, dude, you’re busy. Cool game, been having a blast with it so far.
Every single time I sit down and decide to start a new game this incredible guy releases another giant update! This man has a spirit and enthusiasm you don't find often, it's clear this game is his passion. Warsim already offered so much two years ago - but it gets better and better almost weekly. I encourage everybody to purchase this gem on all platforms it's available. Huw really deserves it.Jesus, dude, you’re busy. Cool game, been having a blast with it so far.
Right? Eternally in awe of this mad (<3) lad.
Well, when fixing economy, you need to simply break it down and list where the player gets income and where he parts with his money. Ideally, you'd want a situation where the money does not stack up in the player's pockets, ie. the output is the same or larger than the input. This makes player actually value money and makes him try to scrape up every coin. On the flipside, you do not want to starve the player so much as to force him to wait 20 turns to have spare change, nor to effectively kill his chances at survival. Right now, you have an issue in the input, which is gambling – the income from it is so massive that it trivializes the game even at insane difficulty as the player starts stacking up money at a rapid pace. You definitely should change that – gambling should be something extra to make on the side, not the player's main source of income.What sort of measures do you think could be taken to make the economy different and better gameplay wise?
What I think you should do first of all, however, is actually play your game. Play it on some higher difficulty and see if you can actually survive, see how much gambling gives you, etc. You will spot all of these issues very quickly yourself.
Personally, I'd significantly lower the amount the player can earn from it. Arena should be more about raising a great champion (wins in tournament and fights could do more than just increase his strength by one, for example - slowly raise the one man army RPG protagonist that you want to send to solo dangerous places) than about raking in big bucks on bets. As for other pits, I think I found things like the scorpion pit to be about alright - sure, let the player earn like 500gp per turn from it. That's something nice-yet-not-decisive for early game, and does not matter afterwards, which is sort of fitting - the pot of some brawling pit should not be a tantalizing way to balance the budget for a ruler of an entire kingdom. It is critically important, however, that you put in a bet ceiling so that the player cannot just double down forever, otherwise it stops being gambling and becomes free money.GAMBLING BEING THE WAY
Yeah it is the easiest path to finding wealth you can use to help with other aspects of the game, I need to further balance it. I'm not sure what the best way is, to increase the difficulty of success or to lower the maximum that can be gained? both or even something else? Would love to hear your thoughts.
Honestly this sounds like a patchwork solution. The root of the issue is that the player attained godmode so easily, not that there are no more things to fight – ideally, it should be a serious challenge to defeat the first five kingdoms; they should be dangerous enemies rather than free real estate. First fix to that is again fixing the economy so that the player cannot field ridiculously huge armies all the time. Second fix is to make the enemies stop being so passive. From what I've seen, they decide by RNG whether to raid or invade someone that turn and that's basically all they do. In reality, they should be able to put concentrated pressure on someone they perceive as a dangerous enemy and focus on him every single turn, they should be able to replace their losses by recruiting just like you do, they shouldn't basically let themselves bleed to death as you spam skirmish on them. Making a kingdom 10x the size just means it'll bleed 10x longer before dropping dead, but that's not fixing the issue.That's a fair point, there are definitely many ways that make the late game player end in an almost godmode situation where loss never happened and nothing can threaten you too much. I tried to remedy this by making new kingdoms spawn once the previous ones were crushed, Each set of 5 kingdoms crushed of subjugated the next ones are 10x bigger and 10x more populated. Growing to the point you'll be finding 100 land empires. After that it slows down because even with mercenaries at full pelt it takes longer to beat them turn by turn. I plan to change this a bit with the combat update with bigger kingdoms having more than one attack per turn, maximum 10 attacks or something like that excluding mercenaries.
Absolutely not. Misfortune events may decimate your savings a little, but savings are not the problem, it's the money intake that allows you to make large savings in the first place. The only fix for this is to rework the economy from the ground up, you have to change the way income is generated so that a situation where the player sits on 10 million just doesn't happen. You seem to consistenly bring up patchwork solutions, probably because they are usually very easy to implement, but that's just not how you'll ever reach a good system. A good system does not need arbitrary misfortune events or sudden demon invasions or similar things. Events should be there to spice up the gameplay by something new, not to try plugging the holes in the system itself.What do you recommend for making the economy weaker or more logically flowing in late game. Random misfortune events or something like that?
I mean the easiest fix to this would be to simply allow you to choose which troops go in the frontline, which ones go in the second, etc. or at least give you the option to hide peasants at the very back (which makes sense - no sensible nation sends its civilians at the front, they are always the ones being protected and only fight when the enemy is past the walls and they have no other option). Sure, let a desperate player levy his peasants and march them to their death if he wants to, but it shouldn't be the default, and I definitely should have an option not to do that.That's a very very good point. I have thought about it before and I feel that peasants should be protectable. Someone complained that peasants getting slaughtered and all your gold getting robbed without your men fighting them doesn't make any sense. It's true, it needs to be reworked. It could be reworked with either an internal guard faction in your kingdom which could be drained or filled with troops.
Remember that the bandits are only an issue in the early game. Once you get some sort of income going, they won't be much of a bother anymore because you can just suffer them taking 1k from you each turn without too much pain. What you describe again sounds like something that I could use to prevent bandit raids only at a time when I no longer care about bandit raids, just like the palisade – by the time I have the money to buy the palisade and its upgrades, I no longer care about bandits raiding me. Again, play your game (for example, try a run where you do not use gambling at all – you will quickly get a feel for what the issue of bandit raids is).Having too few could mean rule of law is weaker and banditry grows less impeded. Events surrounding crime and robbery could be rolled against guard level for their success, bandits raiding your kingdom could be checked against it, a force of only 10 guards per land could have a 1/2 odds of getting successfully raided by any bandit gang, but one with 150 guards would have a 1/10 chance and would usually jail/murder any caught.
You are going to be ok if you gamble. You will absolutely not be ok if you don't gamble because you will immediately go bankrupt. I think a rule of thumb for testing the balance of the game should be trying to play it without using gambling at all. Maybe not necessarily on Insane, since that difficulty should (at least by the name) require heroic effort to survive, but even the difficulties before it suffer from the same issues.I've done this many times and I'm aware that it's a case of, you're probably going to be ok
Personally, I'd significantly lower the amount the player can earn from it. Arena should be more about raising a great champion (wins in tournament and fights could do more than just increase his strength by one, for example - slowly raise the one man army RPG protagonist that you want to send to solo dangerous places) than about raking in big bucks on bets. As for other pits, I think I found things like the scorpion pit to be about alright - sure, let the player earn like 500gp per turn from it. That's something nice-yet-not-decisive for early game, and does not matter afterwards, which is sort of fitting - the pot of some brawling pit should not be a tantalizing way to balance the budget for a ruler of an entire kingdom. It is critically important, however, that you put in a bet ceiling so that the player cannot just double down forever, otherwise it stops being gambling and becomes free money.
Honestly this sounds like a patchwork solution. The root of the issue is that the player attained godmode so easily, not that there are no more things to fight – ideally, it should be a serious challenge to defeat the first five kingdoms; they should be dangerous enemies rather than free real estate. First fix to that is again fixing the economy so that the player cannot field ridiculously huge armies all the time. Second fix is to make the enemies stop being so passive. From what I've seen, they decide by RNG whether to raid or invade someone that turn and that's basically all they do. In reality, they should be able to put concentrated pressure on someone they perceive as a dangerous enemy and focus on him every single turn, they should be able to replace their losses by recruiting just like you do, they shouldn't basically let themselves bleed to death as you spam skirmish on them. Making a kingdom 10x the size just means it'll bleed 10x longer before dropping dead, but that's not fixing the issue.
Absolutely not. Misfortune events may decimate your savings a little, but savings are not the problem, it's the money intake that allows you to make large savings in the first place. The only fix for this is to rework the economy from the ground up, you have to change the way income is generated so that a situation where the player sits on 10 million just doesn't happen. You seem to consistenly bring up patchwork solutions, probably because they are usually very easy to implement, but that's just not how you'll ever reach a good system. A good system does not need arbitrary misfortune events or sudden demon invasions or similar things. Events should be there to spice up the gameplay by something new, not to try plugging the holes in the system itself.
I mean the easiest fix to this would be to simply allow you to choose which troops go in the frontline, which ones go in the second, etc. or at least give you the option to hide peasants at the very back (which makes sense - no sensible nation sends its civilians at the front, they are always the ones being protected and only fight when the enemy is past the walls and they have no other option). Sure, let a desperate player levy his peasants and march them to their death if he wants to, but it shouldn't be the default, and I definitely should have an option not to do that.
On a related note, I'd appreciate a way to order my frontlines. For example, soldiers, which are expensive, get killed before goblin slaves do. But goblin slaves is exactly the kind of fodder I'd like at the front so as to protect the soldiers, not the other way around.
Remember that the bandits are only an issue in the early game. Once you get some sort of income going, they won't be much of a bother anymore because you can just suffer them taking 1k from you each turn without too much pain. What you describe again sounds like something that I could use to prevent bandit raids only at a time when I no longer care about bandit raids, just like the palisade – by the time I have the money to buy the palisade and its upgrades, I no longer care about bandits raiding me. Again, play your game (for example, try a run where you do not use gambling at all – you will quickly get a feel for what the issue of bandit raids is).
You are going to be ok if you gamble. You will absolutely not be ok if you don't gamble because you will immediately go bankrupt. I think a rule of thumb for testing the balance of the game should be trying to play it without using gambling at all. Maybe not necessarily on Insane, since that difficulty should (at least by the name) require heroic effort to survive, but even the difficulties before it suffer from the same issues.
Seriously though, change how regular income is generated, you won't get anywhere without that.