New NESes, ideas, development, etc

That was me commenting on the colour scheme of the forests on the map at the moment. Though ignore it the symbols would provide more than enough distinction between the two types of forest. I think the scale should be fine.

Just saw this. Yeah as you said, in colder regions and high-mountain areas, deciduous forests will be seen as different icons. I hope it will be easily noticeable by the players.
 
Here you all go. Please tell me if you prefer this latest version over the last one (has it improved?).

Spoiler :


To answer some questions about scale. When this NES begins, the area you see will be shared by two players (not literally, but in terms of the amount of space revealed at the beginning). So if we have 10 players, this beginning area will be multiplied by 5, and starting locations will be first-come, first-serve. Each player will essentially be a sorcerer, and have a "seeing eye" - so anything one player explores, the others will all see simultaneously.

I know this doesn't answer specific scale questions - so on the final map I will actually have a scale embedded. That will be important, because units will have to move according to the scale.

The "Settlements" and the roads in the above map are examples only. I just wanted to show you all what it might look like. Still working on fonts. I like the simple italic Times New Roman for the mountains and rivers, but the settlement font might change. Also, unexplored settlements/castles/points of interest will be shown by a single dot. It will be up to the player to explore that dotted location to reveal what it is, and whether or not it can be annexed by the player, further explored, or whatever.

Some great suggestions... keep giving them. Most importantly, let me know if you like the current version better than the first version I posted, and why/why not.

Impressive, Starlife, impressive. You could run a very interesting NES with this kind of mapping ability. You should stop by #nes sometime to run your game mechanics by us.

Also, I personally take no issue with this particular font.
 

Having made some fantasy maps myself, here are my favorite fonts.
 
@Thlayli: Thank you. It'd be great to hammer out some details over chat. I'll log on sometime today hopefully. In addition to that, I'll post some of the basic stuff sometime soon.

@Northen Wolf: Aerofoil is interesting. I download my fonts from external sites. But finding a good font to fit a map is a long, drawn-out process to me. The key is making it not look too cluttered, but still large enough to be informative.
 
Strange. Anyone else having that problem? Maybe something is weird with Imageshack.

Spoiler :



Direct link to original image http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/734/ffs2.png
rehost: http://img858.imageshack.us/img858/734/ffs2.png

For files above 200 kb it's wise to put a direct url as well. Does not matter what hosting site. Also, it seems I could not directly view this image even through the direct url, however a proxy (2012.ws) allowed me to see it. No idea what is going on. I can see my rehosted image just fine.
 
One thing I wanted to run by everyone is the concept of mana and gold. Like many great Civ-ish fantasy games, I want to have these two currencies for the game. Mana pays for spells, while gold pays for everything else. So, similar to Masters of Magic, there would be mana nodes dotting the map which will generate mana and often be protected by monsters. Whereas settlements in the traditional sense (towns, cities, castles that you can take over) will generate gold. Mana can summon armies with fantastic creatures (such as an army of skeletons if one is proficient in Death magics), while gold can pay for troops loyal to the settlement they would generate within.

I hope it doesn't over-complicate things for people. It would be really easy to see on a map - I would make mana nodes be little dots, and each of those dots would generate a certain amount of mana depending on a few simple factors.

Also, I am thinking of limiting the amount of players to 10. Is this typically too small a number for most NESes, and should I think about making that # much larger, or just have no player cap at all?
 
One thing I wanted to run by everyone is the concept of mana and gold. Like many great Civ-ish fantasy games, I want to have these two currencies for the game. Mana pays for spells, while gold pays for everything else. So, similar to Masters of Magic, there would be mana nodes dotting the map which will generate mana and often be protected by monsters. Whereas settlements in the traditional sense (towns, cities, castles that you can take over) will generate gold. Mana can summon armies with fantastic creatures (such as an army of skeletons if one is proficient in Death magics), while gold can pay for troops loyal to the settlement they would generate within.

I hope it doesn't over-complicate things for people. It would be really easy to see on a map - I would make mana nodes be little dots, and each of those dots would generate a certain amount of mana depending on a few simple factors.
Not too complex :p
Also, I am thinking of limiting the amount of players to 10. Is this typically too small a number for most NESes, and should I think about making that # much larger, or just have no player cap at all?

NWolfNES had 10-18 players. Over the course of turns, active people were around 4-8 (depending of turn), rest either forgot to send orders or did not contribute that much into discussion/orders. So, My experience shows that 10 players would give you 2-5 active players, who post stories and diplo other than just smithing something. For me, 15 players in comfort level - above that it's too many, below that thread is just not active enough. But that's my experience. You can always set a cap and then lower/rise it as you wish.
 
I would also advise against a low player cap. As a player I know that in some NESes such as your current one Starlife or Northen Wolf's I have had to disappear into RL, often for an update or two. This then makes the game very difficult to rejoin as a player, unless it is quite slow moving. However, you know the map and we do not so you also have to make a judgement call on how many cradles you, as a mod, can run and the map can support as well as considering whether too many cradles would reveal too much of the map too quickly to players. Perhaps 14 or 16 players would be a better figure, though it would mean you would have to find two or three more cradles given your policy of two players per cradle. You could allow more players per cradle but then you would have to make sure cradles do not become overcrowded.

Sorry that probably wasn't very helpful but its a tricky thing to get right, especially when you have already generated interest with the excellent map.
 
Yes, it's an excellent map. :) I think the coastlines are a bit angular, and even more so are the depth lines in the sea; you should be careful IMO that they don't touch each other at all, for instance in the middle of the sea to the east of settlement A.

Your idea of two currencies isn't complex at all really. If you wanted complexity, the way to do it would be to have some things that required mana and gold to buy them, or to have it so you could buy some spells with a particularly large quantity of gold or some other things with a particularly large quantity of mana, but what you're suggesting is not complex at all.

A NES can have any number of players, and 10 is plenty if the NES's world works well with 10 factions. Nevertheless, I'm surprised by that really as a limit for a map stretching the length of Europe from France to Poland. From my experience of modding, it's easier to have a player than to NPC any given faction. If having only 10 players is going to mean that you have to NPC other factions or that the world is unrealistic because it is too empty, then 10 players is too few players. If it fits your setting, I'd advise a low player cap, but if it doesn't, I wouldn't.
 
I hope it doesn't over-complicate things for people. It would be really easy to see on a map - I would make mana nodes be little dots, and each of those dots would generate a certain amount of mana depending on a few simple factors.
It's not going to be too complex. I had mana + gold in dominionNES and it worked fine.

Also, I am thinking of limiting the amount of players to 10. Is this typically too small a number for most NESes, and should I think about making that # much larger, or just have no player cap at all?
Whatever you feel comfortable handling. I don't think it's too little. The question is really how many other players can the players interact with? If they can only interact in pairs, you'll run into trouble if one player drops out due to RL. If they are clustered, they can still interact with someone even with one NPC'd.

Nevertheless, I'm surprised by that really as a limit for a map stretching the length of Europe from France to Poland. From my experience of modding, it's easier to have a player than to NPC any given faction.
I don't think managing an NPC is much more difficult than handling a player. At least you're sure of not misinterpreting the player's orders ;).
The map may or may not be crowded depending on whether it's actually populated or not. If most of the map is wilderness without NPCs or only a few NPCs (independent villages, monsters...) then the size can be all right.
 
I do like the font. Font picking is an art- I use Neuropol X in GalaxyNES.

I quite like the basic premise you have, it's quite straightforward.
 
Wow, there is some amazing advice in here from all of you. For me this is one big learning experience because Tales from the Ether is entirely based on another concept that already exists, so it was kind of easy to put together.

While this fantasy fresh start concept is loosely modeled on Masters of Magic, I am definitely going to include my own hand (the map is a big part of that - not visually speaking, though I did try to make it pretty, but more in terms of exploring and having players create kingdoms from scratch in different terrains). So for me this is much more challenging because it has more of "me" embedded in it, so to speak. And I'm glad none of you think it is too complex to have those two currencies. I'll keep things pretty simple overall, but I want to run it by the people playing it.

From what I've read in here, I do think it is wise to have more than 10 players. Perhaps I'll form a cap later on, when I see how many people would even be interested to play. But yes, since everyone will start rather small and build up from a single Wizard's Citadel, it makes sense to have more players.

Thanks for all the advice and keep it coming.
 
My next bit of advice is regarding Magic. I want there to be five main schools of magic: Chaos, Life, Death, Nature, and Sorcery. My main issue is how to do spells. I want there to be spells that have different basic effects. Is it too complicated to have a massive listing of spells to choose from and research as if they are technologies, or should things be significantly simplified?
 
Instead of a broad list of specific spells, you should encourage your players to come up with their own. Provide guidelines, examples, and perhaps specific tiers. Maybe have a limited number of spell 'classes', say de/buff, direct damage, and summon. Maybe have a higher mana cost provide greater power, or greater focus (i.e. a 5mana chaos debuff will make an entire regiment slightly more clumsy, but a 15mana chaos debuff will cause the cavalry on the left flank to drop their lances and flee)

Short version; create a specific framework, and let your players fill it in.
 
Nice idea.

How about these categories:
Summoning, Settlement Enchantment, Unit Enchantment, Direct Damage, and Land Altering?

Summoning is obvious. Settlement Enchantment can up the defenses of your settlements. Unit Enchantments can up the power of your units. Direct Damage means that your Wizard casts a spell directly at an enemy unit. And Land Altering would be that your Wizard casts a spell directly at an enemy location, settlement, or land.

How are these categories? Can I trust players to come up with good spell names on their own? Perhaps I should give a list of examples? They would only be names. Because the effects of the spells will be dictated by how much mana you have and how many spell books you have in a certain school of magic.

I also might make it so you have to research or train your Wizard in order to allow the Wizard to put more mana into a spell.
 
More categories could be added with time. Make sure the rules of magic are properly drawn up and air-tight to keep from abuse. Players should be able to come up with good names on their own in my opinion and experience, though you could always modify the less good names, along the lines of the suggested name.
 
Anyone have ideas for a Nuclear Weapon research chain? This is assuming that in this world that the ultimate goal isn't to make a bomb to end a war, but to explore the possibilities of a new technology.

So far, I have (not in this order, mind you.)

Low Yield Nuclear Weaponry
High Yield Nuclear Weaponry
Pure Fission

...more ideas are going to be greatly appreciated.

The most basic shell of a skeleton of a tech tree.
Civilian
Atom-Powered Engine - Atomic Trains - Atomic Cars

Atom-Powered Battery - Atomic Computers - Atomic Radio


Military
Low-Yield Atom Bomb - Mid-Yield Atom Bomb - High-Yield Atom Bomb

(With Rocketry) Low-Yield Nuclear Sub Missile - Mid-Yield Nuclear Sub Missle - High-Yield Nuclear Sub Missile

(With Rocketry) Low-Yield ICBM - Mid-Yield ICBM - High-Yield ICBM

(With Atom-Powered Engine) Basic Small-Scale Seaborne Nuclear Reactor - Intermediary Small-Scale Seaborne Nuclear Reactor - Advanced Small-Scale Seaborne Nuclear Reactor (allowing various degrees of speed/efficiency in nuclear-powered ships)
 
What about schools of magic? Should I have them or do away with them completely? Do you all generally think such a thing is cliche, and would rather focus on a wide range of spells based on their effects - or would you want your Wizard to be limited to, say, only Death and Chaos spells?
 
Top Bottom