Re : Poll

K.B (
Sat, 19 Sep 92 00:28:16 +0200

About Steve's Poll :

>> 1) Was it too complex? Was it too hard to prepare for battle, or did
>> you find the extra factors (leadership, loyalty, weather) enriching?
>> 2) Would you prefer a simpler model? If yes, how would you simplify
>> the model (e.g. Russell might want only swords and leather armor :-)?
>> 3) Would you prefer a more complex model? If so, which of the
>> following are features you'd like to see:
>> 4) Do you want auto-attacking, if you see someone you hate?

Not complex enough... Magic had little use (could only screw up archery use),
and most fighting only involved HUGE armies against much smaller ones, reducing
strategy to nothing : the winner was the biggest. Final point. What I'd like :

* Fighting should include far more parameters. For instance, there could be
some predefined tactics (the range of which would increase with leadership
abilities...), supply and terrain should play an important role. This would
enable ambush, guerilla style warfare (harassment, supply raids...) all of
which is currently impossible (unless suicide is the required result).
If you're not interested in warfare, fine, but it should be very very difficult
to raise and lead large armies unless you want to have them fight
barbarian-style... I think it would be more fun to be a successful
brigand/highwayman, leading a small band you're interested in (Robin Hood
style...), than a bulldozer conqueror with countless anonymous units, which
is the way all warlords will choose if only number counts.

* By the way, I favor faction trees...

* Units should contain far less men (say 10 max?), but better defined and
restricted to soldiers/guards. You could recruit peasants/workers to provide
you with some income, but these should not be appear as units in the report
(though you could train them to form militias...). In the playtest, my
character, Derek, ended up with a gigantic faction (some 2.000 men, 75
units...) most of wich spent all their time working, simply because they had
nothing else to do. All those I was interested in were my characters : Arhain,
Gully Billy, Derek, Strider, Silbur, Dancing Mammoths and they had a very rich
social life.... (THAT was fun...)
All those units that you could recruit to ASSIST you as well should
disappear, the peasants should be a work force you could train in some
specific area. That is you would have some ressource pools at fixed
locations/villages (not the 100+ men units of road builders that wandered in
the countryside, building 3 roads a day...), wich you could train and expand
as you see fit (and ressources permit), and maybe move (ie:transfer) in
a limited way. I'd like a game that would be more character oriented than
Olympia was : though it was much fun to play, once you had mapped all the
locations and experimented with all the commands, you had not much to do, and
still had your 75+ units to manage...

* Auto-attacking (and thus some kind of terrain control) should be

>> 1) Did you like markets in olympia? Why or why not?
Yes, despite the bug which still enables you to gain infinite money in
zero time (BUY n javelins. SELL n javelins and gain 1gp per javelin...).
That is TRADE was way too simple. I think markets should only enable the
beginners to equip themselves, the rest being handled between the players, the
merchants never taking back the items at a fair price (say, half the value ?)
with only the most precious (illegal?) items sold to them for a profit.
The common repetitive trade (MINE stone, MOVE to market, SELL stone...,
or maybe CATCH horses, TRAIN horses, SELL horses) should be simulated with
ressource pools as the peasant/workers (you could set a percentage of what
should be produced, and what should be sold...).

>> 4) Would you favor doing away with markets completely, and having the
>> only source of new items be players manufacturing them? If so, how
>> would you like to see inter-player commerce handled?

EXCHANGE <other unit number><item 1>:<number 1> ...<item k>:<number k>
AGAINST <item 1>:<number 1> ...<item l>:<number l> ? The order
only being executed if the other unit has given the corresponding reversed

I realize the ressource pools would be a radical change in Olympia
philosophy (not to mention code...), but I really didn't like the repetitive
aspect of the game once your faction had achieved a "decent" size.
Another advantage would be that the report could be tremendously reduced in
size (as most units would disappear, as well as most uninteresting day-to-day
events), and far more readable. I'd like the subject to be discussed, that's
why I didn't answer to Steve directly.

K.B. aka Derek Holyblast

Main Index  |  Olympia  |  Arena  |  PBM FAQ  |  Links