Forthcoming changes that will affect adventures

[LadyBarbara]

On the test server last week a new version was deployed with a number of changes that will affect many of the adventure guides.

This is what BB have changed:







I have played The Nords on the test server and no matter where you place your generals you cannot skip some of the camps as you can at present.

I think this is a retrograde step and should not be implemented. It is quite unfair to change the pathing at this stage.

[sk_setttler]

I agree that this new pathing is step backwards at this point.

I've wanted to quit TSo a long time ago, but old pathing which results in nice tactics kept me here!

I've already written in another post on the forum: they should consider stick with the old pathing for the old adventures and introduce 10,20... new adventures which can have new pathing! -> I'd like to see some sequent adventures...when you finish level 1, you enter another island and so on.

[Tage]

The new path finding will probably not significantly affect such adventures where all camps appear after each other and that cannot be skipped, even if some pretty advanced blocking methods have been made for them, e.g:

• The Island of the Pirates
• Witch of the Swamp
• Traitors
• The Dark Priests
• Wild Mary

However, the new path finding will affect existing guides for adventures where you today can skip camps, e.g:

• Horseback
• Stealing from the Rich
• Outlaws
• Victor the Vicious
• Sons of the Veldt
• The Nords

[Hasmir]

So 95% of maps will have to be made again....

[sk_setttler]

So 95% of maps will have to be made again....

Probably...but let's hope not .

[LadyBarbara]

I'm gradually working my way through the adventures on the test server to see what changes will need to be made.
As Tage said many of the limited route adventures won't be affected. The Nords certainly is as you cannot avoid camps in the first sector. I am playing through Surprise Attack at the moment and have found just one camp that can't be avoided.

[TheBadger]

Seriously i have to say this is what the Game needs the Adventures are far too easy currently
And many Higher level players are becoming bored...
I personally hate repetition and would much prefer if the enemy camps were randomised

This could include:
Camp location changes and can be anywhere within say a 16square area
Troops defending a camp 10 variations
Time limit which could include tiers 1st 2nd 3rd so a fast completion you receive the best loot slower and loot diminishes accordingly

Currently once you have done an adventure once, the fun is lost I am at the moment doing all the adventures others refuse as (Too Hard/Not worth it)

It is sad when you realise there is no point making anything apart from Bread Bronze Swords and Brew as the loot from adventures far out weighs the cost to a player to complete.
All the expert buildings with the exception of the Exotic wood mills are redundant once players realise a few adventures and they have all the X-bows they will ever need then follow a guide and never lose any high value troops unless of course the Lag monster strikes when attempting a block or retreat

The Loot & simplicity of the current adventure system will kill what could be a very good game
I would like it if an 8day adventure took me more than a few hours to complete
I would like adventures where you have no choice but to lose high value units and I mean more than 1 swordsman here and there

I know the game is in BETA and still being developed I just hope the view is towards the end game and making it a bit tougher and less repetitive

[Dopey]

There are major discrepancies in what is ‘difficult’ and what just need high value troop loss.

Difficult is when you have to climb a rock face and have no idea where any good ledges and groves are.

What is not difficult is knowing that rock face, 1, 4, 7 and 10 have foot placements that are easy to navigate and 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 have terrible placement and will make you fall and bash your head, arms and legs countless times and are not worth it.

These ‘optimisations’ are designed to make it take longer to reach 50 so we keep playing the game for longer now we have spent time and effort going over the maps and discovered how to ignore a significant part of it. We have in fact done there quality control checks for them.

I could accept these changes if they also changed, sons of the veld, outlaws, victor, witch, traitors, secluded experiments etc to be more competitive with making us want to do them and be worth it like The Nords or Black Knights are. I could have no gc, and 1 explorer and for weeks only get sons and I still wouldn’t do it!

The suggestion above to randomise maps a bit with camp placements I think would make things more interesting and achieve the same result in making things take longer for us to play the game up to lvl 50.

What I think should happen is all adv are the same in terms of troop loss values and XP gain but what would make them hard is not knowing what the losses and rewards will be before we start the adv.

For example if we kill 100 housecarl or 50 cav with a big bertha then we get added to our loot rewards 20 granite. If we kill 40 militia then we get 5 granite. Then all maps when we activate the adv have there units randomised. We could do traitors that randomly gets generated to need 2000r troop loss but it wouldn’t matter because the reward would be equal to the loss compared to all other adv maps. The XP could also work the same way. It is not the map that dictates the XP but the units generated on the map that gets killed. This way all adv’s would be worth it and there difficulty would be random meaning they would all be equally difficult or easy depending on the random number generator. We would need to work out the best way to go about killing our randomly unique camps each adv we do making things a lot more interesting and providing difficulty each time.

The benefit of this is when we need to send in 100 cav to die or lose 50 soldiers its ok because the reward for doing so is a set standard across all adv maps and there is no way to discover if the maps will generate enemy units that will need 100 cav’s to be sacrificed or not. It will make all adv’s appealing because they could all be generated so we would need to make that sacrifice and we wouldn’t know it till we start it.

Instead of losing 2000r 200cav on sons and getting 33k XP and losing 50r and 150m on Nords and getting 27k XP we could lose 1500r and 50cav on Nords and get 25k XP and lose 500r and 30m on sons and get 6k XP. It would all depend on what the map generates when we activate it. Not that these numbers are suggested to be equal, just demonstration numbers.

The way adv are found should also be reorganised. When our explorers get sent out to find an adv it should only return with adv appropriate to the LVL we send it out for. I don’t want to send out an explorer on a medium search only to have it return a horseback or witch. What can be found should be based on the LVL at which the search can first be used and end when it gets superseded by the next search up. Basing the searches on time is wrong. I’m not saying an adv shouldn’t take longer the higher up the searches go. What mean is that short should become LVL 1, medium should become LVL 2 and so on. This way we could classify a Witch, Horseback, Pirates etc as LVL 1. At LVL 2 would be Sons, Outlaws and The Nords etc and then at LVL 3 would be Black Knights, Dark Brotherhood etc. If we want to only find LVL 2 then we do a LVL 2 search. If we want LVL 3 we do a LVL 3 search. This way loot and XP rewards could be kept equal amongst each adv groups LVL so horseback and the other LVL 1 adv for example couldn’t give crossbows and the enemy unit loot values would reflect that and not be compared to LVL 2 or 3 loot values.

[Kotugo]

The problem at the moment is the guides are a requirement to do the adventures, you can't just start one and then start making the troops in reaction to the camps which are up. Making them random would mean any adventures with short times that need large amounts of cav would not be possible for example as the cav take too long to produce.

You can get around this if you stockpile troops beforehand, but that means you need a lot more settlers which would also rule out people who don't buy gems, since they wouldn't be able to get enough residences on the limited amount of licenses they get.

Rather than messing with the pathing, they need to rebalance the adventures so they are all desirable, even if this means making the rewards slightly worse for some of them.

[Dopey]

Dont give them time limits then or generate time limits based on enemy units generated.