S3rgeus
Emperor
Isn't the maximum 7%? (Only the unit being affected by Quest stage.) I didn't make it clear in my last post, but I think having % per stage could be a bit too powerful.
We could ask them to sleep trade units (caravan/cargo ship), but that's difficult, because trade routes last ~30 turns, they may not have access to any/most of their trade units for the duration of the Quest. Given that we can replace the GPT one with the demoted Demandred Quest, I think we can just go with that and keep the generic Quest count at 10.
No, that was in reference to our mechanical discussions.
I'd been thinking a similar thing for the Jumara. There's actually a giant worm monster in Civ:BE, which we may be able to port to CiV to use as a unit model. It's a bit alien-y, rather than fantasy-ish, but porting the model is certainly easier than anyone making a new one. I think there are some effects issues (clouds of dust and flying chunks of rock and stuff) that may make that challenging, but it's a good place to start.
I don't think Civitar has made any progress on the WoT models, but I'll check with him to be sure!
I'll go through our thoughts on the appearance of the agreed icons tomorrow, and send some details on to Trevor about what we'd like to start with! Or, if you're reading this, Trevor, I can post it up in my next post!
Right, I was forgetting to count the free Quest from the TW as separate. I'd be fine with dropping the 7th Quest, a nice side effect of that is that we can have them be farther apart (discussed in more detail below).
200/400/600 should be fine for 6 total Quests - pays out a maximum of 2400 (2600 with extra TW stage 1 Quest). If we find it's too much we can adjust down later.
Done
Yeah, it should be pretty common. Done
Sure, I've created one below this post.
Right, I'd forgotten that it was possible to make a configuration where the player got into the 25 turn interval region while still on stage 1, by failing one of their stage 1 Quests. This all sounds good to me.
Based on what we're discussing above about possibly axing the 7th Quest, we could have the first 3 be 30 turns apart and the last three be 20 turns apart? (In which case stage 1 now definitely has an interval of 30!
Not explicitly tying the two together, but there's no configuration in this setup where a player sees a stage 1 Quest and has less than 30 turns to complete it.)Discussed above.
Changed
Much better!
For designations, the generic Quests and Ishamael's two stage 1 Quests are the only ambiguous ones when we know which Forsaken and which stage the Quest is. Labeling the ambiguous ones with letters sounds good - I've done that in the master list below.
Done
Given that the Tower doesn't have allies like traditional CSes and can't be dragged into secondary wars that way, we could make declaring war on/being declared on by the Tower cost the player all of their Tower influence? (Doesn't affect their Ajah influences.) So after the war ends, they're at 0 again. It makes it have a lasting effect, which I think we want.
In which case this is all right as a Stage 2 Quest? It's certainly harsher than some of the others, but it's a similar kind of league.
Done for Be'lal
Yes, done. X == 5?
It's difficult to classify all of the "nears" here - where is near enough to be available for the Quest (not so much of a problem, the player just doesn't see this) and when the False Dragon is near enough to a city to count towards the "5 turns." (That's more of a problem, since the player doesn't quite know what to do.) We could go for within X tiles of a city, but the player doesn't control the False Dragon, he may decide to wander off some other direction, and having that cost them the Quest is kinda bleh.
Having a living False Dragon that was spawned by the civ as our restriction would certainly be very easy to assess, but we'd have to operate on the assumption that that False Dragon did attack that civ. (He may have gone for another nearby neighbor.) Otherwise this would be a free Quest for the spawner, since he wasn't obligated to take part in that fight. Still, there's a definite opportunity cost of the yields the False Dragon would have paid out. If the FD is fighting abroad, true, the player can just back off, but presumably the other player will kill the FD within 5 turns. If the FD is attacking at home, then that's the effect we want already.
The only "free ride" player is one who spawns an FD, that FD decides to attack another nearby civ instead of the spawning civ, and the spawning civ doesn't even try to get involved. If the spawning civ gets this Quest, they can just continue to do nothing and get the reward. I'm not quite sure what to do with this one yet, so I'm going to leave it highlighted red in the master list and work on the stage 3 Quests for now.
In the list
Axed (I think)
Done
Maintained for at least 5? Most players will probably leave it for the full 30, not knowing or able to pillage the resource to end the trade route. (If they have more than 3, I think they need to pillage themselves all the way down to less than 3 total, which might be even more costly than waiting out the trade.)
Ok, let's start with 1 and ramp it up if we find it too easy.
Done
Done
I'm not a big fan of "likely to spawn within" because we can't say reliably how many turns it will be before that GP spawns, so there will be situations where this Quest is actually impossible, which isn't good.
Most GPs don't stick around that long, but the Quest will be given at the start of the turn, at the same time the GP appears, if they have spawned a new one, so there's an overlap even for the instant-expend GP types. All of the restrictive complexity is invisible to the player, they just won't see this Quest that much. I'm also thinking we're probably going to introduce some GP types that it is costly to sleep for a time, but that won't be instantly expended all of the time, which makes this quest occur more often.
To clarify what I meant before, I was suggesting that we take an approach sort of like this:
- Turn X starts and player Y should receive a Forsaken Quest this turn.
- Generate a random number to choose between the Quests of the right Stage to try to give them. Choose Quest Z.
- Does player Y satisfy Quest Z's restrictions? If not, go back to 2.
- Give player Y Quest Z.
So at step 3, if we randomly picked the "sleep a GP" Quest, we'd look through all of the player's units and see if they have any qualifying GPs. If not, then we can't give them that Quest.
It looks like what we want is at least 3 connected cities that don't themselves have harbors, but even that gets confusing. The capital might be connected by road to city B and city B is connected by road to city C. If the capital and C have harbors, pillaging any road between them doesn't break any city connections. (Even if the game is "using" the road to make the connection right now, before pillaging.)
This would also include landlocked cities on other landmasses - even though there are harbors in between. This could also lead to weird "backward" connection situations where players need to pillage roads in multiple directions out of landlocked cities because of harbors in cities on either side of them. (B in the above example.) An example of where this goes crazy:
Spoiler :
Say Rome, Ostia, Velitrae, Palmyra, and some other cities off the bottom of the screen all have harbors. Working out how to complete this quest is now very confusing for the player. "Can I just plunder the roads near Rome? Then none of them are land-based connections." (Even though no connections are broken.) If we restrict the Quest to players who don't have harbors in their capitals, then it becomes much more understandable.
I've posted the Forsaken Quests Master list below. I've made a few changes that I've also highlighted in red, with the rest of our ongoing discussions (new restriction on the Generic B Quest, new Demandred stage 2 quest to replace the demoted one.
And new stage 3 Quests are in there too!
My own fault for writing so much Governor stuff in the intro, though it's since we don't want any of these decisions made in isolation from the others. I may have to split my posts over multiple days on weekdays for a little while, if they stay this length!
