| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Michael
Celestial Exalted
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 1224
Location: In a poorly shaded shelter within the Great Burning Waste
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:46 am Post subject: The Empire Reborn: A Retrospective |
 |
|
Note: Hey, I figured it out!
Hey all,
Ok. The purpose of this e-mail is twofold. One, is that I’m actively soliciting constructive feedback from The Empire Reborn. Remember how I always said we were playtesting? Well, I’d like to try and make some use of that aspect of the experience. So I have a list of what were the major issues and possible areas to address them.
The second is to see who would be interested in getting back into a PBEM/Forum game. I had two separate conversations with people this past week who both indicated a fondness for the overall game. I know that some people out they may be interested, or may know someone who wasn’t involved previously who may be interested. The system we currently have, after some tweaks, could easily apply to many settings: medieval, current, space, etc.
So back to the first issue: what were the major problems with the previous game? If I could classify most of them, it would be a sort of “is this an RPG or a board game?” question. People slammed out characters just as big pieces, but then as they suddenly developed them, became attached and pensive/angry at their deaths. Simple mechanics got less simple to allow players to do what they wanted to do. Politics became complex and freeform in a quite interesting way, but one that caused some trouble. I tried to run things like a GM rather than a wargame moderator. Which worked OK until the PvP got going. So anyway, some specifics:
In no particular order, I saw:
1. Flexibility of rules. Probably one of the major issues. When it was player versus NPC, this wasn’t so bad. Although people did express concern that the enemies were doing things they didn’t expect. However, when it became PvP, it became a big issue. There were calls of favoritism, that to a certain part were true. Unconsciously and sometimes consciously I see in retrospect that I tended to favor people who were more involved, worked harder with me to develop plot/events, and who seemed to be the underdog. This occurred more on a character level than a battle one. Once it became a serious issue with several people I issued the PBEM constitution as an attempt to set the rules in stone. I think that is a good beginning to addressing the issue.
2. Clan School Balance: There was a lot of arguments about which Clan Schools were more powerful than others. I addressed this early by toning down certain schools like the Crane and Lion bushi to adding rolled but not kept dice. However, there are were a lot of schools out there. Did any seem more gimped or more powerful than is seemly?
3. Investigations: As the game moved on, I think some people became very angry how hard it became to make certain investigations “stick.” It wasn’t a matter of making the roll and finding the evidence, without the Emperor around to punish people it required getting the other Clans to act. This usually with the party under investigation loudly proclaiming their innocence and accusing the investigator of all sort of things. Possible fix: Thanks to the Lo5R 3rd edition book, I see there is now a stat for status, and that the justice system is primarily decided based on testimony, with the person who has the highest status winning. We could implement a system like this, with Investigator providing evidence that gives the person giving testimony a bonus? However, this system assumes a centralized NPC legal authority, and frankly I thought the game got really interesting once there WASN’T such a thing.
4. Honor: The honor system was broke. We tried some changes to make it work, but its still relatively broke. It wasn’t as strong of a deterrent to keep people from being bad, or it didn’t give people a strong enough bonus for staying good. And what was good wasn’t always what was honorable, as Husaki will attest to.
5. Character power disparity. With 10 levels in a ring, main characters tended to roll over lesser characters. And we saw the rise of many “one-stat wonders”. Should initial ring cost rise as you get higher, making it more expensive when making the character? Should we have a limit in range of stats, like the one we implemented mid-game? Or will you have your heroes who are indeed worth 50 regular men?
Also, what DID work, that you saw?
I know that certain people got really worked up over some of these things, myself included. However, a lot of time has passed. All I ask for constructive criticism please! If you want to opt-out of the reply all that will follow, please say so. I would post this over on the forum (remember that thing? www.oofnish.com/forums) but I don’t remember my password for my regular account!
_________________
I like my coffee like I like my women. COVERED IN BEES! -Izzard |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
asa
Primordial
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 342
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The second is to see who would be interested in getting back into a PBEM/Forum game. I had two separate conversations with people this past week who both indicated a fondness for the overall game. I know that some people out they may be interested, or may know someone who wasn’t involved previously who may be interested. The system we currently have, after some tweaks, could easily apply to many settings: medieval, current, space, etc. |
The system doesn't so much need tweaks, it needs a game design overhaul. The things I liked about the game were the stories, the RP, and the fact that my character usually won in the end. In any case, as I said before, I'm interested in a cooperative RP style PBEM if we can come up with something. Competitive style not so much. Most of the frustrations and anger that I know I felt at the time have disappeared in retrospect, but I clearly remember how much I hated some of the arguments.
| Quote: | | 1. Flexibility of rules. Probably one of the major issues. When it was player versus NPC, this wasn’t so bad. Although people did express concern that the enemies were doing things they didn’t expect. However, when it became PvP, it became a big issue. There were calls of favoritism, that to a certain part were true. Unconsciously and sometimes consciously I see in retrospect that I tended to favor people who were more involved, worked harder with me to develop plot/events, and who seemed to be the underdog. This occurred more on a character level than a battle one. Once it became a serious issue with several people I issued the PBEM constitution as an attempt to set the rules in stone. I think that is a good beginning to addressing the issue. |
Setting the rules in stone isn't just a good beginning, its the only one. Favoritism will get you burned periodically in traditional RP, but in a PvP game style it is devistating. As a GM, I understand where it comes from and how hard it is to resist, but resist you must. If the rules are flexible at all, it is too easy to let them bend to get the dramatic angle.
Any and all rules must be introduced prior to their use to all players, and all players must agree to them. The rules initially agreed upon at the beginning of the game cannot be changed unless all players agree without argument. If this public rules concept gets in the way of an action taking place (covert), then that action is clearly unallowed.
In a cooperative environment, there is a lot more flexibility with rules.
| Quote: | | 2. Clan School Balance: There was a lot of arguments about which Clan Schools were more powerful than others. I addressed this early by toning down certain schools like the Crane and Lion bushi to adding rolled but not kept dice. However, there are were a lot of schools out there. Did any seem more gimped or more powerful than is seemly? |
I don't have a reference with me, but I know that some schools were pitiful while others were okay. The crab bushi one where you can roll but not keep school rank dice when resisting death is one example. Kept dice are where the magic is, and if your character isn't facing death its a useless bonus. (You can't choose to take advantage of the school, essentially). Schools need to be rebalanced as a group effort so all agree. New schools are not to be presented and admitted without group consensus.
Even more rediculous in terms of balance is the money situation. While economy is a prime motivator when it comes to conflict and alliance with foreign entities, the distribution was so skewed that those with the money didn't have enough to do with it while those without it had no way of getting it. (treaties were too expensive, incidentally)
Starting wealth/army size is a diminishing compensation for low per-turn economic yeild. Worse, its exponential, since if you spend the money (buy the troops), your ability to fund operations later falls even further behind those who get plenty. An appreciating compensation is required to balance the loss of power in the long term. The concept of a shifting power balance should never be built into the system, but instead should be based on players' success or failure.
| Quote: | | 3. Investigations: As the game moved on, I think some people became very angry how hard it became to make certain investigations “stick.” It wasn’t a matter of making the roll and finding the evidence, without the Emperor around to punish people it required getting the other Clans to act. This usually with the party under investigation loudly proclaiming their innocence and accusing the investigator of all sort of things. Possible fix: Thanks to the Lo5R 3rd edition book, I see there is now a stat for status, and that the justice system is primarily decided based on testimony, with the person who has the highest status winning. We could implement a system like this, with Investigator providing evidence that gives the person giving testimony a bonus? However, this system assumes a centralized NPC legal authority, and frankly I thought the game got really interesting once there WASN’T such a thing. |
The larger problem with investigations is that you couldn't actually catch the culprit. Problem one was that the system required that the investigation take place at least one month after the incident. The offender was then practically guaranteed to be off doing something else (including more crimes) when any clues came out. Problem two was that investigations usually only turned up a 'lead' which meant that a second investigation action needed to take place against the single offending action. Or more. Blatantly imbalanced.
The rules should work as thus: 1) Character A chooses to do a naughty thing. 2) Character A rolls the appropriate stat for the naughty thing and is successful. 3) Next Turn, Character B investigates naughty thing. 4) Character B rolls investigation stat, which is contested against the concealing roll of Character A. 5) If Character A looses, he is exposed and automatically looses Honor. 6) Character A may take a political action THE FOLLOWING TURN to roll Air to restore Honor. Any delay in defense and Character A cannot regain that honor. Some nastier actions may cause the character to steadily loose honor as gossip gets worse until they are successful with an Air roll. If Character A's honor had fallen below 0 the only allowable action is Seppuku. Some crimes may be outlined as to be so reprehensible that even Air or Seppuku cannot erase the stain, character must seppuku to allow the clan to continue to exist with reduced honor.
Permutations:
1) If an investigation does not take place the turn after, Character A may choose to take an additional coverup action that requires another naughty thing stat roll. If successful, the investigation difficulty increases. If still caught, the honor hit is increased as the coverup is an additional action. If the coverup action roll is unsuccessful, no bonus to resist investigations is given and the higher honor hit still occurs if the character is discovered. Note, a trail does not 'cool' naturally over time, a specific coverup action must be undergone to hide the trail. Also, only the instigating character A may perform a coverup action.
2) Purchasing of Assassins, Forgers, and other ciminals to do your dirty work for you does not prohibit you from being discovered in one investigation (investigations follow the trail to its terminus if successful). All rolls to resist investigation are done with Character A's stats. The money spent on the criminal may add a bonus to the roll for the action success. Also, you cannot send someone to perform a crime and take a different action as well.
3) There is no 'trial' for guilty people. You lose honor unless you can talk your way out of it in a Court action. There are some things you can't talk your way out of. There are some things that if you don't provide explanation, you continue to lose honor until explained publicly. Investigations, when successful, provide irrefutable proof of guilt. The air roll is simply there to 'justify' actions.
NOTE: Court actions do not require that one be at court physically, per se, but it does prevent them from doing other things.
4) There does not need to be a central authority for punishment to occur automatically against crimes. Whether or not you can rationalize it, it needs to occur for game balance.
5) Balance must be skewed somewhat toward investigations. Its a game about people endeavoring to act honorably to obtain goals. Those who short circuit the system can gain great advantage for it, but there is a high risk and potential cost. The game you ran was so skewed toward evil that I'm sure Husaki had a goatee and the starship was flying around the planet the opposite direction.
| Quote: | | 4. Honor: The honor system was broke. We tried some changes to make it work, but its still relatively broke. It wasn’t as strong of a deterrent to keep people from being bad, or it didn’t give people a strong enough bonus for staying good. And what was good wasn’t always what was honorable, as Husaki will attest to. |
Good and Honorable are separate concepts, but yes, for playing (mostly) the straight and narrow, Husaki had a shockingly low honor while those who did not had a shockingly high honor.
Instant honor loss for certain actions is good. Also, we need automatic honor loss on successful investigation. Honor loss and gain should have a character component and a clan component for certain actions. Clan honor loss and gain cannot be manipulated through Court in any way, except seppuku. Honor loss potential should occur for more things at high honor, and vice versa for honor gain. And/Or, Honor gains/losses scale per incident based on character honor. (An honor 1 character may gain a potential 3 honor for performing a successful investigation, whereas an honor 5 only gets 1).
There is no reward/penalty system tied to honor except at the extremes. Some sugggestions, mostly positive reinforcement style:
-high honor generals reduce upkeep cost of their armies
-high honor generals can increase movement of a set number of units
-high honor investigators recieve bonuses to rolls
-high honor clans recieve discounts and better returns on trade treaties
-high honor characters may not be denied passage by a lower honor clan/character
-honorable characters retain an innate defense against shadowlands. Honorable clans provide this benefit to a smaller degree to their armies.
-low honor characters receive penalties where there are bonuses above. Neutral point between low / high honor proably around 4.
| Quote: | | 5. Character power disparity. With 10 levels in a ring, main characters tended to roll over lesser characters. And we saw the rise of many “one-stat wonders”. Should initial ring cost rise as you get higher, making it more expensive when making the character? Should we have a limit in range of stats, like the one we implemented mid-game? Or will you have your heroes who are indeed worth 50 regular men? |
First, all stats need to have equal utility. Second, most actions could require two rolls, success based on the average success between them
Duel: Air, Fire (read/trick opponent, strike)
Battle: Earth, Fire (stamina, strike) (Battle is any non-duel fight)
Court: Air, Water (charm, rationale)
General: Water, Air (Tactics, Leadership) (note that a General action is then followed by a Battle Action)
Investigation: Water, Air (Logic, persuasion)
Assassination: Fire, Water (Sneak, planning) followed by Battle
Forgery: Water, Air (Analyzation, convincing)
Resistance: Earth
Death: Earth
Or even more rolls for some actions. The more stats you need to use for general activity, the more you will enforce balance. Also, actions can't be split between characters. Each ring is used 5 times in the list above.
| Quote: | | Also, what DID work, that you saw? |
Mostly everything but the rules and the player corruption. Plus, I say again, I don't really like the PvP aspect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm probably going to diesagree with the majority on something.
In D&D, I had the most fun, not knowing everything that could happen. Ignorance is bliss so to speak. As players, we should all know what the other players know (aka Players Handbook), but we shouldn't all know every page of the DMG and Monster Manuals. That's my personal opinion. Role Playing Game or not.
You disgree? Lets play the "Heroquest on steroids" game (Defiance I think) where we all know every ability of every critter, and know the location of everything. I can tell you since I played the same scenario twice, the second time was less exciting because I knew where to go, and about how tough everything was. This would not be a game I would call a RPG (hack and slash, sure, but nota rpg).
Along those lines, there were sections of the rules, that we didn't all have access to. Of the 3 "NPC groups", the Shadowlands and Gaijin were both in the Appendix section and the Imperial faction which I believe was in the original rules.
To do a Risk style game, all sides need to be equal from the start. Only actions can change what has happened. Starting different groups off at different power levels (percieved or real) would cause the differences.
Since we were "Playtesting" rules, how could they be complete from the start? Part of playtesting is to see what does/doesn't work, and part is seeing what rules don't exist and need to be included? Again, in D&D, you don't ask every player "Can I use this Supplement for my character?" You ask the GM, and they make a decision on it. If a player wants to try something, that isn't covered 100% by the rules, the GM makes a decision on wheteher it works or not.
Even when things are done by the rules, they can be worse off (why did D&D do a 3.5 edition again?). Because players found loopholes that needed to be tightened, or situations that needed to be addressed had to be addressed. In the old days, we left it to the GMs to handle rules disputes. To quote the DMG (3rd ed, I haven't sunk the money into 3.5ed so I'm not sure that wasn't taken out) pg 6 "You get to decide how the rules work, which rules to use, and how strickly to adhere to them." This from a game with 30+ rulebooks on how the game is played.
I came into the game with this mindset, so when Michael made a ruling for or against me, altered my starting abilities, or changed the general guidelines, I didn't have a real problem with it.
Had I the understanding that Michael was just a player rolling dice for everyone in private (which it seems people wanted), I don't know if I would have accepted it.
If we want to do this again, I'm all for it. Provided we have a GM that gets to act like one, with all the needed abilities to GM. Having said that, I think we'd be better off in a Co-op rather than a PvP format. I think with a Co-OP we'd be much more inclined to let the GM be the GM.
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asa
Primordial
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 342
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | If we want to do this again, I'm all for it. Provided we have a GM that gets to act like one, with all the needed abilities to GM. Having said that, I think we'd be better off in a Co-op rather than a PvP format. I think with a Co-OP we'd be much more inclined to let the GM be the GM. |
This is the main difference between how D&D works and how the PBEM needs to work. D&D is primarily a cooperative game, in which it is not only okay, but expected that the GM will try to throw surprises in (Hell, I house-rule the crap out of games that I run sometimes). If we were to do a Cooperative PBEM, I would have no concerns with that kind of thing.
My issue was and will always be that other players cannot have special rules invented for an action that they want to perform, without those rules being introduced to the group for balancing purposes. The Lo5r PBEM was written as a limited-action quasi roleplaying game with more similarities to Risk than D&D. If some players get special actions allowed to them that others do not have knowledge of or ability to match or counter, then there's a problem.
No matter how much you believe in GM's being GM's, it is never the GM's perogative to give specific players an advantage in a competitive environment, intentional or not. At least, if the GM wants the game to continue on good terms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oofnish wrote: | | No matter how much you believe in GM's being GM's, it is never the GM's perogative to give specific players an advantage in a competitive environment, intentional or not. At least, if the GM wants the game to continue on good terms. |
So which is it? The game started with different groups having different advantages and disadvatages. Yet later on, they are not allowed to have any? As I said, if we wanted Risk, the sides need to start equal, and only actions by the rules need to apply. A group that starts off with a Military Weakness in Risk isn't going to survive in game. Yet that's what we had in Lo5R. Or so your complaint stated. How does this group come back from a starting weakness?
The ability of the GM to award people for being creative and doing things not addressed specifically by the rules isn't a bad thing. In real life, did the first person who was assassinated know he was going to be assassinated? Or did he find out when it happened?
To do Lo5R the way you want it done, is to make every province equal in terms of Koku, all troop costs/stats/abilities equal, and starting army values equal. If characters are used, everyone has equal access to the various Schools. The only difference between starting as the Crab vs the Crane, is the name (well, maybe color too). Other than that, you can't do things differently.
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asa
Primordial
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 342
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Don The Anvil wrote: | | So which is it? The game started with different groups having different advantages and disadvatages. Yet later on, they are not allowed to have any? As I said, if we wanted Risk, the sides need to start equal, and only actions by the rules need to apply. A group that starts off with a Military Weakness in Risk isn't going to survive in game. Yet that's what we had in Lo5R. Or so your complaint stated. How does this group come back from a starting weakness? |
I was referring to GM's unfairly giving players special items, money, experience, contacts, invulnerabilities, abilities, or whatever else might give that player a leg up due to outside influence. The Favoritism factor. I think you think I'm arguing for something I'm not.
When I mention 'Unfairly' I mean when a player is given a reward without earning it according to the rules. 'Coming up with a cool story idea' is not a reason to reward a player with ingame, tangible benefits. Its a great reason to buy that player a beer, maybe, or create a special fiction involving the story event. Coming up with a cool story idea, clearing it with the GM, then acting out the plan using hard and known rules and being successful is a viable reward scenario. In most cases failure during the plan should produce a punishment scenario -- also following the known rules of the game.
I do not want everyone to be exactly the same. I don't want everyone to be at the same powerlevel throughout a game. I do want everyone to have the same chance at success because they are able to play to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.
By the way, even if we're not playing risk, all sides need to start out balanced (not equal) such that when you add up all the bonuses and all the penalties, you end up with the same number for everyone. Throughout the game, that number can change as players gain and lose until finally one player gets all the points. If a player does start off with some kind of Miliatary Weakness as you mentioned, and does not have a compensating advantage, then yes, the player would not have a fair chance at winning. Balance is key.
My complaint is that at some moments in the last game, the GM was stepping in and moving those points around without telling people until it was too late.
If, because of success in the game, the GM rewards that player with a special thing that is fine. However, the rules governing that special thing needs to be available beforehand. If not, then the rules need to be published and opened for discussion so all the players can fairly evaluate the playing field.
Say in a PS2 fighting game, one player is playing a fast figher who strikes light but often, and another is playing a slow but hard hitting character. There are differences, and as the players play the game one gains the health advantage, and eventually wins, because of a combination of luck and player skill. Say, however, there was a Game Developer sitting there watching who was able to mystically and suddenly alter the game code to provide one of the players a special instant kill move, and gave that to the player who made the coolest splortching sounds when he mashed a button. Suddenly, the splortchy player has a massive advantage due to factors completely external to the ability to play the game. This would be unfair.
If, however, the Game Developer let both opponents know beforehand that there exists a death move that he will enable on their character should they perform a certain task, it would be somewhat more fair. If the Game Developer allowed both players the choice whether or not that rule goes into effect, it would be even more fair. If the Game Developer ensured that each player had the same ability to obtain the death move (or conversely a balancing countermove equally easy to perform), at last, it would be completely fair. One player could obtain the deathmove and not tell the other until the fateful moment and it would still be fair. Because, both players know what it is, how to get it (generally), how it works, and agreed to play with it as an option. Finally, if it was actually a game-related maneuver needed to satisfy the condition, only then would it be appropriate as well.
(Nevermind the fact that putting something like that in a game changes the success conditions)
I don't know how many other ways I can say this. But i'm pretty sure we had this argument before a few months ago.
| Quote: | | The ability of the GM to award people for being creative and doing things not addressed specifically by the rules isn't a bad thing. In real life, did the first person who was assassinated know he was going to be assassinated? Or did he find out when it happened? |
Are you suggesting that Caine walked up to God one day and said 'hey God, I've got this great idea for a story. What if I kill my brother?' and God said 'Sure. I won't tell that Abel guy... he's been kinda quiet anyway and hasn't been feeding me amusing fiction. Don't tell him, but I'm going to create this thing called a Dagger that will have the power to end his life. All you gotta do is walk up behind him and stab him between the sixth and seventh rib.' and then when it was done God said 'haha, Man, wasn't that fun? I created that dagger thing because Caine came up with this great plot idea.'?
Or, wait, maybe real life doesn't play by rules in an attempt to be fun for everyone involved. If it did, then the first person to be assassinated would, in fact, understand the concept and be able to defend against it either by not provoking the attacker or surviving the attempt. Maybe he wouldn't see the attempt coming, specifically, but he would know that such an attempt is possible.
| Quote: | | To do Lo5R the way you want it done, is to make every province equal in terms of Koku, all troop costs/stats/abilities equal, and starting army values equal. If characters are used, everyone has equal access to the various Schools. The only difference between starting as the Crab vs the Crane, is the name (well, maybe color too). Other than that, you can't do things differently. |
Not at all. I'm talking about rules balancing and fairness. Neither of which are necessarily equality. But when you weigh the advantages of starting koku, troop costs and abilities, and other attributes together with that of other players, you should come up with equal standing. Equal standing doesn't need to persist after the start of the game, but the GM can't be giving a player a unique helping hand because of some outside factor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| oofnish wrote: | | By the way, even if we're not playing risk, all sides need to start out balanced (not equal) such that when you add up all the bonuses and all the penalties, you end up with the same number for everyone. |
Offhand how many people think all the startting Clans were fairly balanced? And again, Playtesting means its not perfect, and subject to change.
| oofnish wrote: | | If, because of success in the game, the GM rewards that player with a special thing that is fine. However, the rules governing that special thing needs to be available beforehand. If not, then the rules need to be published and opened for discussion so all the players can fairly evaluate the playing field. |
Again, we'll have to disagree. I don't think all the players should see all the info available to the GM.
| oofnish wrote: | | Say, however, there was a Game Developer sitting there watching who was able to mystically and suddenly alter the game code to provide one of the players a special instant kill move, and gave that to the player who made the coolest splortching sounds when he mashed a button. Suddenly, the splortchy player has a massive advantage due to factors completely external to the ability to play the game. This would be unfair. |
But if a "Hot Line" exists and one player doesn't feel like using it, should he be privy to all the info the one willing to pay $1.99/minute? Michael didn't come to people and say, "Hey, I'm telling you this that noone else knows", it was Brockman saying, "Hey Michael, what more can I do to serve evil?" I think its a valid distinction to make.
| oofnish wrote: | If, however, the Game Developer let both opponents know beforehand that there exists a death move that he will enable on their character should they perform a certain task, it would be somewhat more fair. If the Game Developer allowed both players the choice whether or not that rule goes into effect, it would be even more fair.
I don't know how many other ways I can say this. |
The Taint option was always there, it was a matter of how much you delved into it. Most (if not all) people with the "unfair" abilities went through Taint, and explored the evil. There was a downside of eventual character loss just by delving into it, let alone the normal possibilities of losing a character. If you didn't go into Taint, you were more "good" and avoided the evil inclinations.
| oofnish wrote: |
But i'm pretty sure we had this argument before a few months ago.
|
We did. We didn't agree then, and I don't see us all agreeing now.
| oofnish wrote: |
Are you suggesting that Caine walked up to God one day and said 'hey God, I've got this great idea for a story. What if I kill my brother?' and God said 'Sure. I won't tell that Abel guy... he's been kinda quiet anyway and hasn't been feeding me amusing fiction. Don't tell him, but I'm going to create this thing called a Dagger that will have the power to end his life. All you gotta do is walk up behind him and stab him between the sixth and seventh rib.' and then when it was done God said 'haha, Man, wasn't that fun? I created that dagger thing because Caine came up with this great plot idea.'? |
Well, do we still talk about the story of how Cain slew Abel? I think it was a good story, and God, being an all knowing and able to do anything kind of guy let someone kill his own brother, who by the way, thought the rules said "Though Shall Not Kill" pretty clearly. If my timeline is off, then I'm sure Abel didn't think it was possible for his own brother to kill him. I'm sure when he got to Heaven he cried foul to God. And since Abel didn't rise 3 days later, I think God flushed his objection down the toilet.
| oofnish wrote: | | Or, wait, maybe real life doesn't play by rules in an attempt to be fun for everyone involved. If it did, then the first person to be assassinated would, in fact, understand the concept and be able to defend against it either by not provoking the attacker or surviving the attempt. Maybe he wouldn't see the attempt coming, specifically, but he would know that such an attempt is possible. |
The first time it happens, you think it isn't possible. Bows made infantry weak, Guns made bows weak, Tanks made Guns weak, and planes made Tanks weak. The first time any of those made it the battlefield, I'm sure the other side wanted to cry foul, they're not playing by the rules (the English did during the Revolutionary War to us). Last time I checked we did have Rules (rather Laws) that we're all supposed to follow. And I know not everyone thinks all our rules are fair to everyone.
| oofnish wrote: | | I'm talking about rules balancing and fairness. Neither of which are necessarily equality. But when you weigh the advantages of starting koku, troop costs and abilities, and other attributes together with that of other players, you should come up with equal standing. Equal standing doesn't need to persist after the start of the game, but the GM can't be giving a player a unique helping hand because of some outside factor. |
And again, how many people felt the Clans were equal at the beginning of the game? Because if it wasn't fair from Day 1, days 2- whatever don't matter.
Last I checked, for every "The Crab have no money" complaint, there were at least 2 "The Crab are too tough." Sounds like it was balanced. So why complain about money? Was it to complain to make sure people didn't think you were overpowered or because you thought it was unfair? Either way, I think I make my arguement. You didn't feel we started out on equal standing (real or perceived) so why would it matter if events happened later on that caused additional unfairness.
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scotty
Blotter
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 296
Location: The side of the universe farthest from Tattoine.
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Starting they are balanced. The military heavy clans (Lion and Crab) have low koku production and the low military clans (Crane and Phoenix) have high koku production. The Lion have a large standing army to move and enough koku to manage the upkeep for a few turns, on the other hand the Crane have a small standing army and the koku to build it over the fist few turns.
Another important distinction is that the rules as is are designed for a 7-10 turn PvP Risk blitz on the throne and the starting clans are balanced as such. In making it a RP event with NPC's and story elements the very foundation of the game balance was tipped into the other playground. The original designers wern't planning on a 24 round game for the Crab and the Lion, espically a 24 round game with them holed up in their starting provinces staring angrily at everyone else and not making any more money than what they had. Conversly, they wern't planning that for the Crane either who, in the end, had more money than Bill Gates.
Also, I agree with Don, the players don't need to know everything. I think you put it that knowing the Players Guide is fine, but you shouldn't know the DMG. The problem is we crossed the line, somewhere in the game several people (myself included) got powers from the DMG, that was the problem. Yes, my story was good, it was truely intresting and at least a little captivating, but as soon as I made that choice the character should have been made a NPC under Michael's control with NPC motivations. The same for Jon. Also, several people still sting over the inclusion of the Gaijin into the game. Again I agree with Don, D&D supplements need not be available to everyone and they are still valid. I'm a big fan of Psionics and I have the supplment and I use them when I can, but not everyone in the game has Psi Resistance, or a Power Pool, ect so I use the Psi/Magic Equality rule. With the Gaijin that rule was kind of used, but not completly. The Gaijin got choices from many schools without having to pay for it, everyone else had to pay. That let Gaijin characters be more effecient in point expendure than any other character in the game. Second, at least two completly new player rules were introduced. Porte and cannons. Where as those supplemental rules may be fine we let (no offence Michael  ) the man with the world's worst track record for creating and introducing new rules into a RPG create and introduce those rules.
On top of all of that this was a competitive game, that just makes everyone want to win. All the stops are pulled out to get there. I was trying to by being unbelievably evil, so was Jon. The PvP nature of the game compounded all the small issues. It needs to be cooperative from the begining to be truely sucuessful.
_________________
"...The Scorpion have purchased a large quantity of Gaijin black power..."
Chase:
"CRAP" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scotty wrote: | | The Gaijin got choices from many schools without having to pay for it, everyone else had to pay. That let Gaijin characters be more effecient in point expendure than any other character in the game. |
For the record, I did pay the "other Clan School" bonus for those schools. I also didn't have access to the School the Gaijin Clan had access to, so all my chearacters paid the character point price.
The second part of the beef I have no arguement for or against thoguh 
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asa
Primordial
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 342
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My final stance is that I will not play or even entertain the idea of playing a competitive game where the rules available to and governing players are not completely clear and laid out to all. GM controlled only actions can have secret rules, and cooperative games are much much more lenient.
Scotty's analogy of players getting abilities from the Players Guide versus the DMG is a good one for the most part. I don't necessarily agree with supplements being withheld for players who don't need it, but thats okay in a cooperative game (and only cooperative).
Also, he's right about many of the rules being more balanced when you consider a combat blitz style game, which isn't what we ended up playing.
| Quote: | | And again, Playtesting means its not perfect, and subject to change. |
This reminds me of all those MMORPG game beta's I've been in. Each time, near the end of the beta, there are clear and obvious flaws in the fundamental game. When people complain about those rules and request that they be changed, fanboi's shout 'Its just a beta', even if the release is a week away. Frankly, if nobody brings up the problems and makes an issue out of them, then nothing gets changed.
We did playtest the game and I'm reporting my findings. Some aspects of the game were not fun for me, such as secret 'Cool Evil Guy' rules that were invented and kept hidden from some of us.
| Quote: | | Again, we'll have to disagree. I don't think all the players should see all the info available to the GM. |
I don't either. But players need to see all the rules information available to other players in a competitve game. The GM has plot and Evil rules for himself that are acceptable to keep to himself. (Unless the evil rules include a giant 'I WIN' button, aka cheating.)
| Quote: | | But if a "Hot Line" exists and one player doesn't feel like using it, should he be privy to all the info the one willing to pay $1.99/minute? Michael didn't come to people and say, "Hey, I'm telling you this that noone else knows", it was Brockman saying, "Hey Michael, what more can I do to serve evil?" I think its a valid distinction to make. |
Not entirely true. The ruby of Iuchiban? Not offered to me. Shadow Powers? Not offered to me. Gaijin Pepper? Not offered to me. While I don't know the exact story behind each of those items, I'm fairly certain those were not player driven. In the case of Shadow power, Michael supposedly didn't expect Scotty to actually accept the deal, but he still offered it. In the case of Gaijin pepper, the rules were published (A good thing) but not in a way that players got a chance to review them.
In your Hot Line example, each player is informed that there is a source for information. If they choose not to use it then its something like not buying the Player's Guide...
| Quote: | | The Taint option was always there, it was a matter of how much you delved into it. Most (if not all) people with the "unfair" abilities went through Taint, and explored the evil. There was a downside of eventual character loss just by delving into it, let alone the normal possibilities of losing a character. If you didn't go into Taint, you were more "good" and avoided the evil inclinations. |
Did you know that Husaki had two levels of Shadowlands Taint? I know first hand just how much those rules hindered people, which is to say, pretty much not at all. All it does is reduce maximum Honor by the rules. It also ended up preventing Paragon status, one of the few 'good guy' side rules made up, and published, during the game.
Character loss occurred much further down the road than it should have for tainted actions, far after benefits were won and cold.
| Quote: | | The first time it happens, you think it isn't possible. Bows made infantry weak, Guns made bows weak, Tanks made Guns weak, and planes made Tanks weak. The first time any of those made it the battlefield, I'm sure the other side wanted to cry foul, they're not playing by the rules (the English did during the Revolutionary War to us). Last time I checked we did have Rules (rather Laws) that we're all supposed to follow. And I know not everyone thinks all our rules are fair to everyone. |
My point, which you reiterated, is that life is not fair. I don't want to play a game as fair as life, because thats not fun. In fact, one of the reasons we play games is to distract ourselves from the rigors of dealing with the imbalanced world we live in. I'm not trying to change the world, only the game.
| Quote: | And again, how many people felt the Clans were equal at the beginning of the game? Because if it wasn't fair from Day 1, days 2- whatever don't matter.
Last I checked, for every "The Crab have no money" complaint, there were at least 2 "The Crab are too tough." Sounds like it was balanced. So why complain about money? Was it to complain to make sure people didn't think you were overpowered or because you thought it was unfair? Either way, I think I make my arguement. You didn't feel we started out on equal standing (real or perceived) so why would it matter if events happened later on that caused additional unfairness. |
Day 1 is pretty statistically balanced from the standpoint that its a rush for the throne. Balance problems occur past that when the rush doesn't happen, or when momentum stagnates. In any case, I don't think i've said that starting balance is off (with perhaps some school concerns). I did say that the balance has aspects that seem to break in a long term game when we play it like we did.
I think we'd better leave the issue of starting balance alone for now, though. For instance, the Crab _could_ probably roll over the lower Crane provinces in the first couple turns so from there it looks like the Crane are too weak. But, after several turns, the Crab can't touch the Crane. Then, this isn't a game of Crab vs. Crane, and there are tons of others out there, including shadowlands... complicated.
Interesting that you heard so many Crab are too tough complaints. Aside from killing off the initial holders of provinces at the beginning, The Crab made no military strikes until after Scotty revealed his Shadow-ness. Except for fighting the shadowlands forces to the south, that is. I was playing two games, one with my forces defending the north from shadowlands movements, eventually pushing past the wall for an extra buffer, and the other with my characters trying to help the good side by leading armies, investigations, coups.
If you heard that crab were too tough, you were hearing propoganda that I supported for my defense. 90% of the game, my border provinces to the north were almost entirely undefended. My troops got no special fighting bonus against other players. My numbers were mostly paper ashigaru becuase that was all I could afford. Frankly, I got lucky that I wasn't wiped off the map. Nobody ever even tried to attack me. I think that mostly people were afraid to do so because they knew I was allied with the Crane, Mantis and Lion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oofnish wrote: | | Scotty's analogy of players getting abilities from the Players Guide versus the DMG is a good one for the most part. I don't necessarily agree with supplements being withheld for players who don't need it, but thats okay in a cooperative game (and only cooperative). |
Again, when I make a character up for a D&D campaign, and don't realize there are 10 manuals out there that other people have and I don't, is it my fault for not asking about them, or everyone else's fault for not making sure I was aware of them?
If the Crab was leaning toward Evil, and made Michael aware of that leaning, that's when the Shadow Powers were presented. Michael didn't out of the blue ask, hey, I've got these nifty things for you, that I'm going to offer you without asking others. When Luigi took his Taint, he went down the path of Evil, he wanted more, and Michael provided. Had Luigi not been going down that path, the offer would not have come up.
| oofnish wrote: | | This reminds me of all those MMORPG game beta's I've been in. Each time, near the end of the beta, there are clear and obvious flaws in the fundamental game. When people complain about those rules and request that they be changed, fanboi's shout 'Its just a beta', even if the release is a week away. Frankly, if nobody brings up the problems and makes an issue out of them, then nothing gets changed. |
Well, when they do changes, do they get 100% agreement on which changes should be made, or do they make those changes, having taken in input from the playtesters, on their own?
| oofnish wrote: |
We did playtest the game and I'm reporting my findings. Some aspects of the game were not fun for me, such as secret 'Cool Evil Guy' rules that were invented and kept hidden from some of us. |
Again, kept hidden, or not looked for? Yes, its a half empty/half full arguement. My view is it wasn't kept hidden, just not offered to people who weren't actively looking for it.
| oofnish wrote: |
Not entirely true. The ruby of Iuchiban? Not offered to me. Shadow Powers? Not offered to me. Gaijin Pepper? Not offered to me. While I don't know the exact story behind each of those items, I'm fairly certain those were not player driven. In the case of Shadow power, Michael supposedly didn't expect Scotty to actually accept the deal, but he still offered it. In the case of Gaijin pepper, the rules were published (A good thing) but not in a way that players got a chance to review them. |
Gaijin Pepper was available to those who treated the Gaijin with respect. the Crab were rather unrespectful fo them, so it wasn't made available to them. You had to trade with the Gaijin to get them. There were only 3 groups that treated the Gaijin well enough to get the offer, and only 1 of them that could make use of it (the Scorpion). Of course dealing with Gaijin was unhonorable, and quite frankly, I'm surprised Andre lived as long as he did.
Onu had things for sale. If you pissed him off, I doubt he would have sold stuff to you either.
| oofnish wrote: |
Did you know that Husaki had two levels of Shadowlands Taint? I know first hand just how much those rules hindered people, which is to say, pretty much not at all. All it does is reduce maximum Honor by the rules. It also ended up preventing Paragon status, one of the few 'good guy' side rules made up, and published, during the game. |
I did, because I read the snappy stories about it. Was Husaki trying to increase his taint during the game, keeping it at the same level, or trying to get rid of it? If he increased it, and no offers came, then Michael was at fault. If Husaki was actively trying to rid himself of the guilt of having it, trying to get rid of it (as he did), then whyoffer him more of what he doesn't want?
Second, there was a limit. If you got too much Taint, you paid a price. The problem is, the price was something you shouldn't know until it is too late to change it. Once you got to a certain level, your character went under Michael's control, with no new character for you. You didn't find out about the trap, until it was sprung. You didn't find the trap, because you didn't go far enough down the path. You stopped before it was too late. Brockman and Scotty both got to the point where they couldn't stop. Once they got there, it was win or lose, with no chance to negotiate.
| oofnish wrote: |
My troops got no special fighting bonus against other players. |
I'm not sure what you mean by this. The Clan Bonuses had no Combat Binuses at all, except for your bonus to Shadowlands. Everyone else had an Out of Combat bonus.
The Elite Hida Berserker Bonus was usabale against other Clans. If that doesn't count, several of your troop types were the cheapest to buy. Siege Engines, Siege Engineers, Fortifications (alone) and Bushi (tied with Mantis) were cheapest to you. If you're still unconvinced, the Mantis Elite didn't die when their ship sank. Talk about a useless ability. Chances are if the ship they were on sunk, most of the fleet would sink too. Noone had a Combat Clan bonus.
Or have I missed what you meant by this statement?
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scotty
Blotter
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 296
Location: The side of the universe farthest from Tattoine.
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2005 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Again, when I make a character up for a D&D campaign, and don't realize there are 10 manuals out there that other people have and I don't, is it my fault for not asking about them, or everyone else's fault for not making sure I was aware of them? |
None of the players is at fault in that example. It rests on the GM to make sure the supplements are balanced properly. Anyone remember 2nd ed Powers book? It was a supplement and completly legal by all rights, but if only one player used it and the rest didn't it was unfair.
Now, it is the players right and possibly responsibility to ask for the ability to use those supplements after they are introduced and it is the obligation of the GM to make them available to everyone who asks in the intrest of play balance. No, we all couldn't become the Shadow Dragon's vessel but to counter it each other player should have gotten a Thunder in the story which would have given each clan a powerful, and balancing, character. We shouldn't all of had access to the Gaijin Black Powder and cannons but we had magic and rules should have been introduced to allow everyone magical strikes in the same fashion as the cannons.
| Quote: | | Had Luigi not been going down that path, the offer would not have come up. |
You haven't played many games with Michael, have you. Once he has it in his mind something is good for you, wether it's "good" or "evil" you're getting it. Period.  Under nornal circumstances though, yes, I agree with your argument.
| Quote: | | Well, when they do changes, do they get 100% agreement on which changes should be made, or do they make those changes, having taken in input from the playtesters, on their own? |
Finally Don and I disagree! No, they don't get 100% agreement. There is a difference between play balancing for 100,000 players and 8 players. The latter is more controlable.
| Quote: | | Brockman and Scotty both got to the point where they couldn't stop. Once they got there, it was win or lose, with no chance to negotiate. |
Except neither of us had the penelty enforced upon us. Both of us, by all rights, should have had our characters removed from our control to NPC status and no new character should have been made in their place. That never happened. Effectively, through short stories and phone calls to Michael while waiting for the ferry to Kelley's Island, we did negotiate control of our characters. That should not have been allowed.
_________________
"...The Scorpion have purchased a large quantity of Gaijin black power..."
Chase:
"CRAP" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asa
Primordial
Joined: 01 Jan 1970
Posts: 342
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Don The Anvil wrote: |
Again, when I make a character up for a D&D campaign, and don't realize there are 10 manuals out there that other people have and I don't, is it my fault for not asking about them, or everyone else's fault for not making sure I was aware of them? |
It is the GM's responsibility to, at the beginning of the game, provide a list of allowable rule supplements for players to use. For most of us, we're so used to the game system that we don't have questions as far as what is or is not possible, and the GM allows all supplements. Also, I say again, there is a huge difference between cooperative D&D and competitive systems.
| Quote: | If the Crab was leaning toward Evil, and made Michael aware of that leaning, that's when the Shadow Powers were presented. Michael didn't out of the blue ask, hey, I've got these nifty things for you, that I'm going to offer you without asking others. When Luigi took his Taint, he went down the path of Evil, he wanted more, and Michael provided. Had Luigi not been going down that path, the offer would not have come up.
|
If thats the case, why didn't the guys who followed the path of Good get similar, but opposite, options? Either way, good or evil, the rules and options should have been available to all. If a clan can't use them because they're not following the path the rules apply to, thats fine, but they need to know the abilities of their player enemies. As Scotty mentioned, though, they should get some option to level the playing field.
Note, this creates a power bloat situation as everyone keeps getting better and better stuff. The better route is to state all of what is allowed from the start and change it only very rarely.
| Quote: |
Well, when they do changes, do they get 100% agreement on which changes should be made, or do they make those changes, having taken in input from the playtesters, on their own? |
As Scotty said, there is a vast difference between 8 player games and 100,000 player games. It is possible to sit in a room with 8 guys and reach unanimous agreement. But this has nothing to do with my point which is that 'We were playtesting' is an invalid argument against a request for change.
| Quote: | | Again, kept hidden, or not looked for? Yes, its a half empty/half full arguement. My view is it wasn't kept hidden, just not offered to people who weren't actively looking for it. |
Kept hidden. Whenever I saw evidence of something odd going on, I tried my best to figure out what that player was doing, and usually was given nothing. Don't forget that to fight an unknown one must first get to know it. I was always trying to figure out the situation with all the evil flying around.
| Quote: | | Gaijin Pepper was available to those who treated the Gaijin with respect. the Crab were rather unrespectful fo them, so it wasn't made available to them. You had to trade with the Gaijin to get them. There were only 3 groups that treated the Gaijin well enough to get the offer, and only 1 of them that could make use of it (the Scorpion). Of course dealing with Gaijin was unhonorable, and quite frankly, I'm surprised Andre lived as long as he did. |
Who you gave Gaijin Pepper to out of your stock was your perogative, since it was yours. I don't care that you didn't offer it to me. I'm concerned that it was given to you and nothing was given to the rest of us, thereby giving you an advantage. Further, you were given an additional ability to govern the distribution of the stuff, indirectly giving your allies an advantage.
| Quote: |
Onu had things for sale. If you pissed him off, I doubt he would have sold stuff to you either. |
Which is a viable, in-game tradeoff. I was able to make the decision not to invade Omanu's territory to preserve my access to these items. Also, the item sales were public, so even if I were disallowed to purchase them (something not likely to happen considering Omanu cared more about money than anything else) I would know of their existence (and who had them)
| Quote: |
I did, because I read the snappy stories about it. Was Husaki trying to increase his taint during the game, keeping it at the same level, or trying to get rid of it? If he increased it, and no offers came, then Michael was at fault. If Husaki was actively trying to rid himself of the guilt of having it, trying to get rid of it (as he did), then whyoffer him more of what he doesn't want? |
Actually, I ignored it until the end. Michael asked me what I wanted for the Character of the Year award, and I asked for an item and the removal of the taint. (Because I was going to go for Paragon of Water when I got a chance).
Incidentally, taint is more of a side effect of evil actions. If you're a dark jedi, you don't go seeking an unhealthy pallor and foul smell, you seek power in the Dark Side. The other bits come as a package deal.
| Quote: | | Second, there was a limit. If you got too much Taint, you paid a price. The problem is, the price was something you shouldn't know until it is too late to change it. Once you got to a certain level, your character went under Michael's control, with no new character for you. You didn't find out about the trap, until it was sprung. You didn't find the trap, because you didn't go far enough down the path. You stopped before it was too late. Brockman and Scotty both got to the point where they couldn't stop. Once they got there, it was win or lose, with no chance to negotiate. |
The limit was either exceptionally high or not enforced. I think Jon managed to lose a character to it, but that was far, far after it should have happened. Scotty should have had to hand his character over the instant he said 'sure i'll be evil'. What you describe here should be how it works, but it really didn't. Effectively, there was very little downside to being evil, and tons of upsides.
| oofnish wrote: |
My troops got no special fighting bonus against other players. |
| Quote: | I'm not sure what you mean by this. The Clan Bonuses had no Combat Binuses at all, except for your bonus to Shadowlands. Everyone else had an Out of Combat bonus.
The Elite Hida Berserker Bonus was usabale against other Clans. If that doesn't count, several of your troop types were the cheapest to buy. Siege Engines, Siege Engineers, Fortifications (alone) and Bushi (tied with Mantis) were cheapest to you. If you're still unconvinced, the Mantis Elite didn't die when their ship sank. Talk about a useless ability. Chances are if the ship they were on sunk, most of the fleet would sink too. Noone had a Combat Clan bonus.
Or have I missed what you meant by this statement? |
I didn't say other players were stronger than me, I said I wasn't stronger than other players, in reply to your assertation that you heard complaints that ' The Crab are too tough'.
At least one clan does get combat-related bonus, the Unicorn calvalry bonus, but I was just pointing out that _I_ didn't get a bonus. Each clan had slightly different purchase and upkeep costs on their units, Mine was not much different than the Lion's Samurai discount or the phoenix shugenja discount. The elite units mostly had good bonuses for all clans, and were all combat related as far as I know. The mantis get shafted in more than one area, so they're likely weaker than most clans, actually. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don The Anvil
God Blooded
Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 334
Location: In the Foundation
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oofnish wrote: |
If thats the case, why didn't the guys who followed the path of Good get similar, but opposite, options? Actually, I ignored it (taint) until the end. Michael asked me what I wanted for the Character of the Year award, and I asked for an item and the removal of the taint. (Because I was going to go for Paragon of Water when I got a chance). |
You mention the Paragon of Water? What was the requirements to get it? Or do you not consider this a Path for the Good to take? (especially since you mentioned getting rid of your taint to do so)
| Quote: | | Gaijin Pepper was available to those who treated the Gaijin with respect. the Crab were rather unrespectful fo them, so it wasn't made available to them. You had to trade with the Gaijin to get them. There were only 3 groups that treated the Gaijin well enough to get the offer, and only 1 of them that could make use of it (the Scorpion). Of course dealing with Gaijin was unhonorable, and quite frankly, I'm surprised Andre lived as long as he did. |
| oofnish wrote: |
Who you gave Gaijin Pepper to out of your stock was your perogative, since it was yours. I don't care that you didn't offer it to me. I'm concerned that it was given to you and nothing was given to the rest of us, thereby giving you an advantage. Further, you were given an additional ability to govern the distribution of the stuff, indirectly giving your allies an advantage. |
Black Powder was my Clan's bonus. Just as the Crane's was to pay less for trade and the Unicorn's was to pay less upkeep to horsemen.
| oofnish wrote: |
| Quote: |
Onu had things for sale. If you pissed him off, I doubt he would have sold stuff to you either. |
Which is a viable, in-game tradeoff. I was able to make the decision not to invade Omanu's territory to preserve my access to these items. Also, the item sales were public, so even if I were disallowed to purchase them (something not likely to happen considering Omanu cared more about money than anything else) I would know of their existence (and who had them) |
Well, again, when the Salesman (Andre) showed up at your door, and wanted to talk, you said, "Sorry, not Interested!" and basically slammed the door in his face. You want to see what goods he has for sale, you need to ask him in to talk.
| oofnish wrote: |
My troops got no special fighting bonus against other players. |
| Quote: | I'm not sure what you mean by this. The Clan Bonuses had no Combat Binuses at all, except for your bonus to Shadowlands. Everyone else had an Out of Combat bonus.
The Elite Hida Berserker Bonus was usabale against other Clans. If that doesn't count, several of your troop types were the cheapest to buy. Siege Engines, Siege Engineers, Fortifications (alone) and Bushi (tied with Mantis) were cheapest to you. If you're still unconvinced, the Mantis Elite didn't die when their ship sank. Talk about a useless ability. Chances are if the ship they were on sunk, most of the fleet would sink too. Noone had a Combat Clan bonus.
Or have I missed what you meant by this statement? |
| oofnish wrote: |
I didn't say other players were stronger than me, I said I wasn't stronger than other players, in reply to your assertation that you heard complaints that ' The Crab are too tough'.
At least one clan does get combat-related bonus, the Unicorn calvalry bonus, but I was just pointing out that _I_ didn't get a bonus. Each clan had slightly different purchase and upkeep costs on their units, Mine was not much different than the Lion's Samurai discount or the phoenix shugenja discount. The elite units mostly had good bonuses for all clans, and were all combat related as far as I know. The mantis get shafted in more than one area, so they're likely weaker than most clans, actually. |
You were the only Clan that had a CLAN fighting bonus. Several Clans had a Clan Elite fighting bonus (such as the Unicorn Horsemen Elites you mentioned), which was limited to but a few troops (ie limit of your elite units). But you were the only one that had a overall Clan fighting bonus. Yes, just against Shadowlands, but all (except Ashigaru) your troops got the bonus from it.
As far as I can tell, your Hida Berserker is a fighting bonus against other players. Your text in a previous post, mentioned that you recieved no such bonus. I'm mearly pointing out that noone had a CLAN bonus against other Clans (in combat) and you did have a CLAN ELITE bonus against other Clans (as did other Clans against you). So I am still unsure what YOU meant when you posted
| oofnish wrote: |
If you heard that crab were too tough, you were hearing propoganda that I supported for my defense. 90% of the game, my border provinces to the north were almost entirely undefended. My troops got no special fighting bonus against other players. My numbers were mostly paper ashigaru becuase that was all I could afford. Frankly, I got lucky that I wasn't wiped off the map. Nobody ever even tried to attack me. I think that mostly people were afraid to do so because they knew I was allied with the Crane, Mantis and Lion. |
Unless it was more Propaganda to make people not attack you.
_________________
There are some things I like about George W Bush. Since he took office, the New England Patriots have won 3 Super Bowls and the RedSox won the World Series after a 86 year drought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scotty
Blotter
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 296
Location: The side of the universe farthest from Tattoine.
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You mention the Paragon of Water? What was the requirements to get it? Or do you not consider this a Path for the Good to take? (especially since you mentioned getting rid of your taint to do so) |
I don't know exactly, but I'd bet a hamburger at Red Robin they were more intensive than me saying "yes" to a question or Jon saying "I want to be evil!" If I remember from a conversation I had with Joel once, it required some specific unique conditions be met, possession of an ancestrial item, and a very difficult shrine roll.
| Quote: | | Black Powder was my Clan's bonus. Just as the Crane's was to pay less for trade and the Unicorn's was to pay less upkeep to horsemen. |
I'd have to check, but I don't think any of the other clan bonuses were a renewble combat resource. The clan bonus should all have been in the form of some sort of economic discount. If your clan bonus was a discount on black powder in some way that would have been fine, but as far as I can tell you were just given it.
| Quote: | | Well, again, when the Salesman (Andre) showed up at your door, and wanted to talk, you said, "Sorry, not Interested!" and basically slammed the door in his face. You want to see what goods he has for sale, you need to ask him in to talk. |
So, you're standing guard on the wall between civilization and unspeakable horrors, horrors that use blood rituals and other dark magics, and this guy steps through a bloody portal into your courtyard. I'm surprised the whole of the Crab army didn't slaughter Andre on sight, you're lucky that they just slammed the door in his face!
I'm leaving the rest alone now, cause I'm confused and have no idea what EITHER of you are saying anymore. 
_________________
"...The Scorpion have purchased a large quantity of Gaijin black power..."
Chase:
"CRAP" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
Forum Index" vspace="1" />
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
