Goodies... goodies everywhere!

Lets fix the the rate they spawn at and the number that appear over time... :D

9,634 views 22 replies
Reply #1 Top

What is your point? Is it to say that something that is a significant source of entertainment in the game should be reduced so the game is less entertaining?

 

Reply #2 Top

After 400 turns and what looks like a momumental endeavor not to use any of the goodie huts, this is more of a hilarious joke than a serious problem with the game. I have never felt there to be a significant problem with the spawn rates of goodie huts or quest locations at all. What pace/map size is this?

Reply #3 Top

Large map, normal pace. I dont have issues with the goodie huts but they should not be all lined up next to eachother, its not "realistic" so to speak, you should have to go looking for them. I also generally dont research adventure tech until I am well established so they do pile up.

Reply #4 Top

Having reflected a bit on this, I can say that it probably shouldn't be allowed to happen this way. I think it might be more interesting if the game had a sort of natural saturation cap on how many goodie huts can be in any part of the world at any given time. This would then necessitate some change in the adventure tech line, such as adventure techs wouldn't spawn them directly but simply increase how many and how often they trickled into the world up to the saturation limit. Looking back at your screenshot, I realize that a slow player would be drowning in unusable goodie huts which would simply break any form of immersion for these players.

Reply #5 Top

don't they only spawn when the ai (or you) research the tech?

Reply #6 Top

Lets fix the the rate they spawn at and the number that appear over time...
End of quote

Do you know that all those goodie are not spawned only from your own tech?

Goodie from your own tech won't be that many (in fact it's just 1/4 of all goodies in your picture), it's because of ai(s) also research the goodie spawn tech.

Reply #7 Top

wow, and how many of those have multiple spawns on the same tile? not that it should happen, but sometimes these just pop over other poi's, such as other goody huts, quest locations or resources.

Reply #8 Top

Quoting "Mystikmind",
What is your point? Is it to say that something that is a significant source of entertainment in the game should be reduced so the game is less entertaining?

 
End of "Mystikmind"'s quote

 

my oppinion, perhaps if it were more involved than simply move unit over site, get often ridiculous reward, as it is i don't see any significant entertainment.

on a large map i had over 80 charisma from +1 and +8 books,(i could recruit people for pennies). i had ridiculous attack and defense values, and more money than i could spend. there is no strategy involved in collecting them, no real risk. wheres the fun?

Reply #9 Top

The main problem is that they are spawned instead of being revealed by a tech.

 

The quest objects should be created with the map according to the map definition of how common or rare quests are.

The quests should be later revealed and be visible and usable only by players who researched the appropriate tech.

This way, players will be more motivated to research the quest techs, so they can "steal" the goodies before the others do.

 

If there is a quest spawn over time, it should follow the same rules and exist in the map but be visible and usable only by the players with the right tech level.

 

 

BTW, more or less the same thing should apply to the resource revealing techs. They should reveal, not spawn.

Reply #10 Top

A lot of those are probably level 0 which are like 10 gp or 5/25 materiel, which have minimal impact the further in the game you are, but are definitely more valuable in the first 50 turns.

Also those little white huts need to be fixed, probably 1 out of 5 don't work. A lot of the quest are broken, I go to the quest location and the picture there disappears & nothing happens. Sometimes I go to level X goodie hut when I have level X+n leader and absolutely nothing happens.

I'd be happy if they just all worked like they're supposed to.

Reply #11 Top

Ugg my worlds are usually filled with level 3-5 goodie huts as well and since I neglect the adventuring tech It is extremely annoying to see them.

I find them to be rather annoying as clicking on something and getting free stuff just isnt my cup of tea... now if the quests were actual quests and stopped the flow of the game while your hero was adventuring through some maze or dungeon to do something then I wouldn't mind.   But the fetch quests annoy me.

Reply #12 Top

Actually most were level 3 and up, so I could not get them, I was researching the adventure tech as you can see because I was tired of all that clutter, and I must say there was a lot of goodies piled on goodies in the same tile.

I also think the goodies should be revealed by your tech level, I had level zero adventure and got all these goodies. Of corse I could not use them until research.

I think there should be a global limit of goodies lets pretend that 100 goodies is the max limit globally. Well once that 100 is reached no more goodie huts spawn until the ones that are already present get removed, so lets say four factions each remove 10 huts. There for those 40 would respawn over time brings the number back to 100. We could also have a limit to prevent goodie hut numbers from going to low. so for example there can be no more than 100 but there can be no less than 20. This way we can ensure the steady spawn of goodie huts through out the game.

And seriously why should I be able to see what the AI has revealed with techs when I have not researched them? Sure its useful when a kingdom player researches the tech for fruit groves then I radomly get a bunch of fruit trees spawning in my territory for me to use, but the adventure tech thing is annoying.

On an unrelated note I dislike how the monsters also get more dangerous even if you dont research the techs that awaken them.

Reply #13 Top

Quoting Polistes, reply 12
I think there should be a global limit of goodies lets pretend that 100 goodies is the max limit globally. Well once that 100 is reached no more goodie huts spawn until the ones that are already present get removed, so lets say four factions each remove 10 huts. There for those 40 would respawn over time brings the number back to 100. We could also have a limit to prevent goodie hut numbers from going to low. so for example there can be no more than 100 but there can be no less than 20. This way we can ensure the steady spawn of goodie huts through out the game.
End of Polistes's quote

A better idea would be if there was a limit to the number of goodies within an area of N radius, preventing any one spot from being over saturated. This would be harder to implement, but it would be better.

Reply #14 Top

The only thing i would definitely agree with would be that you do not see goodies you cannot claim except for perhaps a select few to act as bait to tempt the player to research the appropriate tech. You should be able to build on visible goodies too and they simply get automatically destroyed in the process.

Reply #15 Top

Quoting Mystikmind, reply 14
The only thing i would definitely agree with would be that you do not see goodies you cannot claim except for perhaps a select few to act as bait to tempt the player to research the appropriate tech. You should be able to build on visible goodies too and they simply get automatically destroyed in the process.
End of Mystikmind's quote

 

Or better yet, build on them & they don't get destroyed.

Reply #16 Top

Quoting cpl_rk, reply 15

Quoting Mystikmind, reply 14The only thing i would definitely agree with would be that you do not see goodies you cannot claim except for perhaps a select few to act as bait to tempt the player to research the appropriate tech. You should be able to build on visible goodies too and they simply get automatically destroyed in the process.

 

Or better yet, build on them & they don't get destroyed.
End of cpl_rk's quote

 

Well it cannot co-exist with the construction? In real life, builders would most likely notice any treasure uncovered during the building process, but also there would be some chance they would not notice it and destroy it. So based on that, perhaps building on a treasure can recover it, with a small chance that it will not be recovered (Large treasures involving temples etc cannot possibly go unnoticed tho).

Reply #17 Top

the other alternative is to simply reveal all of the sites.. except with a big question mark or some such instead until you've researched the relevant tech to know what it is and explore it.

 

or lots of generic dungeon types - tower/dungeon/etc... with no specified lvl stated. research past its (hidden) level will allow you to explore/etc. instead of all towers being lvl 4 or what not, you have lvl 1 - lvl 5 towers, etc.

 

ie.. no spawn at all.

 

since it's there at the start, you can't build over it.. perhaps a 1 square exclusion zone (ie.. 3x3) so you can't build around it easily enough?

 

 

----

quest huts should probably be a building that you can use over and over to get different quests. (once you've finished previous ones)

 

perhaps even re-use dungeons - like they get repopulated every whatever turn if not within zoc, and repopulated less quickly if within zoc.

Reply #18 Top

Alaknebs - interesting, I have noticed that treasure taverns and those little gold square box treasures stay on the map after they have been used. This is quite irritating actually! They should either regain another mission, disappear,  or become a structure that can be used by a city (the treasure tavern especially).

Reply #19 Top

Personally, I like having a lot of goodie huts. But, there's just something not quite right about matching goodie hut availablility to a tech research improvement. It's like matching perception to research, just doesn't make sense .. people eat food not buildings. What would make more sense to me would've been to have a "perception" trait and a "search" function (right down there with the "shop," "trade," and "guard"). A hero could search any square comparing his "perception" to the goodie hut level with perhaps a random roll (higher levels are harder to find), a successful search = found the goodie hut, at which point the goodie hut appears on the map. Search could cost 1mp, say, so one guy could search 2 or 3 squares while moving.

Also, in order to match the quest or dungeon goodie huts, a restricted subset of pieces should only be allowed to venture into the quest/dungeon. Say at most only 6 or 8 champions (no multi-man squads) are allowed to enter .. in all reality a killer stack "army" would not fit into a small cave to go dungeoneering. This would also make the fighting there much more interesting, as you could potentially lose some strong heroes fighting for that level 4 quest location treasure and not just an expendable squad. It's also much less of a guaranteed-win like it is now. Wouldn't it be fun if we could actually lose a battle trying to get to that level 4 quest location treasure!!! Wouldn't it be kool if we could actually lose the game by having our sovereign go into a dungeon for that level 4 treasure & die trying to get it!!! I don't know about you guys, but that would be a 100% improvement over the auto-money generator we now have, which should only happen for the level 0 stuff which is equally matched by minimal gain (10 gold, 5 metal, etc..).

In my opinion, a level 4 quest location, or dungeoneering expedition, should be matched with sufficient level 4 monsters such that they should win 50% of the time against 8 (average) equipped heroes. Level 6 should be same with level 6 monsters vs level 6 characters. Of course, higher level characters (or better equipped characters) would increase their likely chances of winning, but at a cost of time since it will take much longer to level-up. A level 3 group can try for a level 4 quest, but the chance of success should be small (attenuated proportionally).

Reply #20 Top

Quoting cpl_rk, reply 19
Personally, I like having a lot of goodie huts. But, there's just something not quite right about matching goodie hut availablility to a tech research improvement. It's like matching perception to research, just doesn't make sense .. people eat food not buildings. What would make more sense to me would've been to have a "perception" trait and a "search" function (right down there with the "shop," "trade," and "guard"). A hero could search any square comparing his "perception" to the goodie hut level with perhaps a random roll (higher levels are harder to find), a successful search = found the goodie hut, at which point the goodie hut appears on the map. Search could cost 1mp, say, so one guy could search 2 or 3 squares while moving.
End of cpl_rk's quote

Please no.  That would be so incredibly monotonous after about the 1st time.  While I appreciate the concept and it would be more realistic I would hate having to constantly check, and recheck, squares expending mana in the hopes of maybe getting something.  I would quickly stop doing it as I'm sure many others would.

 

To the OP, I've never seen that many goody huts that cluttered together.  Though sometimes I've had patches with lots in it.  Seems to be largely random and you just got lucky (or unlucky if it bugs you).

Reply #21 Top

Personally, I like having a lot of goodie huts. But, there's just something not quite right about matching goodie hut availablility to a tech research improvement. It's like matching perception to research, just doesn't make sense .. people eat food not buildings. What would make more sense to me would've been to have a "perception" trait and a "search" function (right down there with the "shop," "trade," and "guard"). A hero could search any square comparing his "perception" to the goodie hut level with perhaps a random roll (higher levels are harder to find), a successful search = found the goodie hut, at which point the goodie hut appears on the map. Search could cost 1mp, say, so one guy could search 2 or 3 squares while moving.

Please no. That would be so incredibly monotonous after about the 1st time. While I appreciate the concept and it would be more realistic I would hate having to constantly check, and recheck, squares expending mana in the hopes of maybe getting something. I would quickly stop doing it as I'm sure many others would.
End of quote

I completely agree with you, in so much as this would end up being fairly monotonous having to constantly perform a search to find goodie huts. However, I don't think the idea of having to actually go look for goodie huts is actually a bad idea. I think a good way to balance fun with a questing feel would be to simply make goodie huts only be visible under the following conditions:

1) A goodie hut is only visible if you can use it.

2) A goodie huts inside your influence are visible if the first condition holds.

3) A goodie hut outside your influence is only visible within a certain distance of a sov or champion, as long as the first condition holds.

Under these conditions, one could not simply look at the map and rush the goodie huts, but would instead merely stumble over them as they set out on various quests. Additionally, new adventure techs and champion skills could be created to expand your perception radius. More than likely this would make a good idea for a mod, once scripting tools become available.

Reply #22 Top

Quoting Dhraconus, reply 20


Please no.  That would be so incredibly monotonous after about the 1st time.  While I appreciate the concept and it would be more realistic I would hate having to constantly check, and recheck, squares expending mana in the hopes of maybe getting something.  I would quickly stop doing it as I'm sure many others would.
 
End of Dhraconus's quote

Actually, the idea was 1 movement point to search not mana. Searched squares should be flagged by the game app so that the player knows where he's already went (that should go without saying). 

Although an area spell that searches, say an larger area, say 2x2, 4x4, or 6x6 that had increasing mana cost wouldn't be a bad idea either.

This is much more realistic than tying "tech research" to "goodie hut appearance." I'm all about realism, logic, and immersion.