Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and trade

Thoughts on the further development of Haven & Hearth? Feel free to opine!

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby sMartins » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:26 am

Isn't working already in that way, shift+leftclick...we are speaking about the whole game, so default client....not customs.
Make friends with the other crabs or try to escape the bucket.
I'd hardly call anything the Bible of our times. » special thanks to MagicManICT
I only logged in to say this sentence. by neeco » 30 Oct 2018, 02:57
Default Client, Best Client!
User avatar
sMartins
 
Posts: 3046
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 10:21 pm
Location: Italy

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby NotJimmy97 » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:33 am

sMartins wrote:Isn't working already in that way, shift+leftclick...we are speaking about the whole game, so default client....not customs.

Is that already a feature? Huh. News to me.
NotJimmy97
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:16 pm

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby Adder1234 » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:01 pm

nice ideas, but i'm too tired to think about them right now, so I'll give a more critical response tommorow
Adder1234
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2015 11:16 am
Location: Australia

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby maze » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:49 pm

The land generation- would not be so thrilled about. I like to explore.
Seas are always a nice idea.

The world needs to have proper biome assortment...hot, cold. mountains, jungle, deserts, snow.
J&L have seasons planned.

So the World will likely change to that kind of degree. and Q of crops and speed will drop in colder areas, where mining would be rich.
Likely a lot of other small little things... ;)

Sorvereignty
I see this works similar to Ladygoo and my own relic ideas. but more of a king of the hill winner take all.
The problem with this is the same as Ladygoo and myown relic idea.
People will just end up joining the greater power cuz of bonuses and their will never really be any real war.
In this, any time a faction on a main island or any island that does not comply to the rules of current faction in power. that faction will be destroyed.
See world 6 as example.

Trade
the idea charter stones not being able to teleport over sea, brilliant (i hate charter stones)
and again seas + dmg also good idea.
WARNING! MY ENGISH SUCKS.
game ideas
User avatar
maze
 
Posts: 2633
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:15 am
Location: Canada

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby Kaios » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:29 pm

maze wrote:Sorvereignty
I see this works similar to Ladygoo and my own relic ideas. but more of a king of the hill winner take all.
The problem with this is the same as Ladygoo and myown relic idea.
People will just end up joining the greater power cuz of bonuses and their will never really be any real war.
In this, any time a faction on a main island or any island that does not comply to the rules of current faction in power. that faction will be destroyed.


I agree with you here which is why I would be a bit hesitant about adding such mechanics myself. The relic idea is decent because those are presumably static objects that never move and thus becomes a point of contention if you give bonuses to claiming over it whereas giving perks for simply being the biggest realm seems a bit more absurd to me. When it's easier for someone to say "destroy your cairns or I'll raid you/camp your roads/destroy your kingdom" rather than go out and attempt to destroy the cairns themselves that to me seems like a rather large problem with the way it works already.

However, cairn destruction itself is an issue of its own.

Regarding fast travel:

I think if roads weren't restricted by line of sight, as in, the thousands of trees getting in the fucking way weren't an issue maybe building them to longer distances wouldn't be such a big deal and there would be less of a need for charter stones. Also gigantic rivers being an obstacle but that's a well known issue.
User avatar
Kaios
 
Posts: 9171
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:14 am

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby loftar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:22 pm

NotJimmy97 wrote:a single large, main continent, circled by a coastal beach and ocean, with an in-land area looking similar to the current way that the map is generated. Along with the main continent are 10-20 medium-sized islands situated around it.

Sorry, but this is a non-starter for me. Any mapgen organization that does not even in theory allow for arbitrary expansion post-start-of-world is something that I do not find interesting.

That being said, I don't mind such things as continents or islands at all; rather, I would welcome a map that has those things. What I mind is an "island map": that is, a map whose primary attribute is that it is made of islands; this is not the West Indies, after all. I would, however, not at all mind the odd archipelago here or there.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
loftar
 
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby Bowshot125 » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:53 pm

loftar wrote:
NotJimmy97 wrote:a single large, main continent, circled by a coastal beach and ocean, with an in-land area looking similar to the current way that the map is generated. Along with the main continent are 10-20 medium-sized islands situated around it.

Sorry, but this is a non-starter for me. Any mapgen organization that does not eve in theory allow for arbitrary expansion post-start-of-world is something that I do not find interesting.

That being said, I don't mind such things as continents or islands at all; rather, I would welcome a map that has those things. What I mind is an "island map": that is, a map whose primary attribute is that it is made of islands; this is not the West Indies, after all. I would, however, not at all mind the odd archipelago here or there.


Confirmed Loftar is scared of the ocean.
Also I like how you said this isnt the west indies well im sure there werent trolls and teleportation/magic anywhere else.
Last edited by Bowshot125 on Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bowshot125
 
Posts: 1045
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:31 pm
Location: In tanning fluid limbo

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby loftar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 5:54 pm

Bowshot125 wrote:Confirmed Loftar is scared of the ocean.

When I say I don't mind continents, that would imply that I also would not mind oceans between them, though.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
loftar
 
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby loftar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 6:01 pm

Also, for the record, I do to no small degree agree with the point about the map being homogeneous, however I look at it a bit differently. What I mind, primarily, is that exploration is not a challenge. The only thing standing in your way is the odd tree, which you can simply walk around. I would love to be able to introduce some kind of structures that actually make it legitimately challenging to get between "areas" of the map, like mountain ranges or deep forests or stormy seas or whatever. The main problem is just how to actually make it difficult, in a fun way, to pass through such structures.

Ultimately, my ideal for the map is that it be boundless, basically. I've said it previously on quite a few occasions, but I've always wanted to make it such that new map is automatically generated whenever players close in on the edge, making the map literally boundless. Of course, I realize why we haven't made it thus yet, since that just makes people spread out and no meaningful interaction ensues, but I'd like to fix that problem rather than sidestep it, in the end. I imagine the "fix" would consist in incentives for player to flock together rather than disperse, be it in the form of boons from cooperation or from wanting to avoid the very harsh wilderness, or anything else.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
loftar
 
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am

Re: Thoughts on Sovereignty: Map homogeneity, realms, and tr

Postby loftar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 6:24 pm

Another thing which vaguely relates to the topic of this thread, by the way:

On the topic of realms, I've considered trying to make it such that, if a realm "encloses" an otherwise realm-empty area with cairns, the interior of that area is also automatically claimed by the realm. If any part of the enclosing claim is breached, or a new realm if founded in the interior, such a projected claim is again broken, but can be reformed by closing the area again. There are some non-trivial technical obstacles in the way of such an implementation, of course, but I figure it might be fun, and would allow for claiming of vastly larger areas, with some perhaps interesting "instability".
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
loftar
 
Posts: 9045
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am

PreviousNext

Return to Critique & Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Claude [Bot] and 69 guests