Do You Like to be Teased?

[HeadHoncho]

I'm a little curious about the great enthusiasm for Oratory at 3 points.  So when it gives +15% to MSQ or Usurp, that is similar to what the High Elves get currently with their +10% to MSQ, Incite and Usurp.  In other words, a Baron of a king with 12 influence would give 6 emissary power, then modified for the regional reaction.  With Oratory, instead of 6, he would have emissary power of 6.9.  Said yet another way, a Baron with Oratory would be close to a Count in power.  It's valuable, but I'm not thinking its overpowered at 3 of 5 starting customization points.  Am I missing something?

I'm not too keen on providing the Terrain Adeptness on a widespread basis.  I could see perhaps moving 1 level in a terrain from the setup, so Standard could become Advantaged, but even that begins to take away the terrain uniqueness that is pretty core to the feel of the kingdoms in 3rd Cycle.

I'm actually kind of partial to the 1 and 2 point artifact modifications.  Also interesting that no one has said, "Just give me 100,000 gold for my 5 points."

But upgrading all of your ems to the next level (and then some, if it's 15% instead of 10%) is a big deal.

Plus, the additional influence bump of two points at game start is also a big deal.  I know from our past conversations that you don't rate this to be as highly important as I do, but from orders to political strength to having a buffer for 390 and 510 and natural enemy decreases (although I know there are no natural enemies in the Choosing), it's very strong.

I agree with you, bumping up more than one level in the terrain may be a bit too much, thematically.

Finally, starting gold is good, but once it's used, it's gone, and even after factoring in the early mover advantage, I probably wouldn't take it.  Meanwhile, some of the other advantages will help you all game long.

[Ry Vor]

Once again, all of this feedback is useful.  I am a bit concerned that the entire customization idea kind of washes some of the kingdom uniqueness.  I'm not sure, say, The Tyrant should be able to choose Oratory.  I'm more comfortable with the Talismans. Amulets, Medallions, special mounts, weapons, Foreknowledge, etc. 

I like the gold option as sort of a base line.  I could see spending two points for 40,000 extra gold, using that to raise influence 1x, and hiring two Provincial Governors, so effectively getting two PG's for about free.  Other options that are not part of the customization.  But I might regret not getting some of those artifacts as my options.

On a different note, when Mike and I discuss all that remains to be done, and all the changes already in the design, we may postpone some things, such as the complete revamping of spells and artifacts.  Artifacts are particularly time consuming and sometimes mentally draining to do.  We'll still have revisions and additional ones, but the encounter designs may not change much for The Choosing.

[Jumpingfist]

I tend to agree Ry Vor. I do not really like seeing some of the core traits that make a kingdom so special able to be taken. orator and cunning are both core traits for specific kingdoms EL,DA and GN they are a lot of what make those kingdoms special. I think adding some artifact/medanian that may give one emmy this ability is good and add some special character to the game but still would not change the main focus of the kingdom as whole. To allow the kingdom as a whole to gain these abilities puts a big black eye on the EL and GN type kingdoms.

[Lord Diamond]

Once again, all of this feedback is useful.  I am a bit concerned that the entire customization idea kind of washes some of the kingdom uniqueness.  I'm not sure, say, The Tyrant should be able to choose Oratory.  I'm more comfortable with the Talismans. Amulets, Medallions, special mounts, weapons, Foreknowledge, etc. 

I like the gold option as sort of a base line.  I could see spending two points for 40,000 extra gold, using that to raise influence 1x, and hiring two Provincial Governors, so effectively getting two PG's for about free.  Other options that are not part of the customization.  But I might regret not getting some of those artifacts as my options.

On a different note, when Mike and I discuss all that remains to be done, and all the changes already in the design, we may postpone some things, such as the complete revamping of spells and artifacts.  Artifacts are particularly time consuming and sometimes mentally draining to do.  We'll still have revisions and additional ones, but the encounter designs may not change much for The Choosing.

I am swayed as well. I don't want to end up playing against 11 other kingdoms with all the same abilities. I would love to see the customization points be for minor things that help a player, but do not essentially change the character of that kingdom.

I am okay if the encounters aren't changed. Honestly, I skim over those to get to the casualties and rewards. I tend to get bored after the fourth sentence of a log paragraph in anything other than an actual book or article. It's a character flaw, I know...

[unclemike]

Actually, I'm in the opposite camp regarding customization and would rather provide players greater flexibility in choosing from multiple options even those that may extend a kingdom in a different direction than typically for that position.

For example, a Red Dragon player may want to spend all their points on enhancing their political corp with bonuses and gold spent towards additional emissaries and influence. That would give the RD player another tactic to use than just being pigeon-holed all the time with its military in the game.

So I actually like to see greater options being offered to give players greater flexibility in choosing the type of game that they wish to play at the time. Offering greater options would improve the replayability of all kingdoms as well.

[Sinestro]

UM has a valid point. I would have to agree with him.

Right now as it is one you assume the most likely routes a kingdom will go and how they plan on doing it. More options could take this away. It could make things harder defending against an attack and vice versa.

[HeadHoncho]

Here's the thing about more and more customization options -- which really become all about optimization options -- if you look at most games, when you add supplements, expansions, bolt-ons, etc. etc., you increase the danger of the unintended consequence and overall power creep. When this happens, you create potential imbalance in the game which can really turn off other players.

An exploit might be a fun thing for a player to find, and use, and enjoy once or twice, but it could ruin the experience for many more.

I think it's important to find a good balance between some options to spice up your Kingdom, and too many options. We're already going to be exploring a lot, with the new Kingdoms themselves.

[Ry Vor]

I'm taking all this under advisement. 

I am cognizant that Alamaze has been enjoyed for 28 years, which may be more than any computer-based game.  (Civilization by Sid Meier came out a year or two later.)  And some of those original players are still key parts of our community.  That is a source of pride.  While some players were not in favor of some of the adjustments that have been made in The Resurgence, believe me, I do respect the Alamaze legacy, and I believe I know what I am doing when I make changes.  They aren't just for the sake of change.

The above is part of the evidence that randomization or customization hasn't been required to keep player interest high.  Another chess analogy probably in order.  Chess hasn't changed in 1500 years.  Players don't quit playing because the pieces don't change.  They play to keep getting better, to try new tactics, to one day defeat their nemesis or become a Master.  When asked by someone unfamiliar not just with Alamaze, but with any game of this style, it is a somewhat difficult thing to explain it in a minute.  I usually say, "Imagine chess for 15 players, on a larger board, where each side has a different set of pieces, there is terrain, and each player executes 12 moves in a turn, all resolved simultaneously."  Its not a perfect explanation, and usually results in head spinning. 

As to customization, as of this moment, I think we will take it a bit slower.  Likely a total of 3 points, not likely traits, but the inclusion of personal artifacts as have been described and possibly a few more options there.

I'm not opposed to the idea of randomization and customization.  In fact, I have a design mostly done around that in a two to four player game played in an evening, where you build your position from possibilities available to your House.  But that game is not Alamaze.

[Lord Diamond]

It looks like there are many ways to go with this. Perhaps there is an opportunity for both directions. Is there some restriction that would allow both concepts to be options depending on the game type? Either one will eventually dominate the other, or we will enjoy two very distinct game types.

Now I want both....

[Stromguard]

– so while an agent reconning a PC with no counter espionage will always succeed in the mission, a PC with counter espionage will reduce the chance by the counter espionage percentage.

So I guess that this is not active, as I just lost 2 L1 on a #970 order this turn and 1 L1 on a #970 last turn.