Official KaM Remake Ideas topic

[Tiank]

Now you can make it disappear by using "show objects" checkbox. However, it would be pretty useful, if we could switch these red boxes on/off and being able to see all the objects at the same time.

[Remake 2012]

Now you can make it disappear by using "show objects" checkbox. However, it would be pretty useful, if we could switch these red boxes on/off and being able to see all the objects at the same time.

:/

Damn it now works. Maybe it was a different version Remake.

[Remake 2012]

I have 4 versions of this game: P

[Ben]

Something sado mentioned gave me this idea:

When testing game balance, it can be very hard to quickly find ideal balance. After rigorous testing, the results still need to be given to the developers in a convincing. Then it takes time to convince, implement, and finally test the new "balance" in the next RC. Of course, the balance may not be right there either, so now we (the testers) have to wait another 4 months just to tweak the balance again...

My point: Let there be some hidden menu in the RCs that can let the host change stats for single games. The purpose of this menu is not for mutators but for testing purposes. As such, it will (as said) only be accessible in RCs. Further, there will not be a "button" on the GUI to access it. Instead, there would be a chat command such as "/show test menu" or something like that. Here, the host change many states, such as shield bonus, shield attack bonus, horse attack bonus, attack, armor, resource production, etc. If the host changes stats, a warning will appear in chat (in red or some other obvious color) that the host has changed stats. If a non-host user uses "/show test menu" he can see the menu with changed stats, but not make any changes to it (this way players can see if the host is honest in his testing purposes).

This is just my idea of what it would work like. I'm sure it could be better. This is really needed for better testing imo, and I do not believe that it will cause any "splits" in the community since it will be kept very private and in RCs only.

[Lewin]

That would not be simple for us to implement because balance stats like that are spread throughout the code, and they would all need to be synchronised for multiplayer/replays. If we do large scale balancing again in the future we could consider it.

[Aristos]

In long Multiplayer matches, players usualy give up by quitting. After i've won my first multiplayer-match, b(eing the last one of 8 players ingame) there was no winning screen or something... the game just went on as every year. It was a rather unsatisfying experience imho.

[dicsoupcan]

you need to destroy every enemy storehouse, school and barracks in multiplayer to get your victory screen, but i think the devs are going to implement a victory screen that comes after every player left the lobby.

[cmowla]

How about the ability for laborers to level multiple tiles of terrain simultaneously and elevate terrain?

The ability to level obviously promotes easier building, and the ability to elevate can create more beautiful villages and more deadly border defenses. Raising the terrain and placing ranged units up high enables them to be more effective. Raising the terrain can enable players to build forts in the middle of a map, for example, for battle in MP.

The cost of elevating should be 1 stone per tile elevated by one level (and thus the elevated terrain becomes roads, but the ground in which the roads are built on raise one level). Terrain must be level before it can be elevated, and a maximum of 4x4 = 16 squares (the size of the building fence of the barracks) can be elevated or leveled at once. If choosing to elevate, all stone must be delivered into the "elevating fence" before a single laborer digs in each tile. The duration of the dig per tile is the same as building a tile of road, but once the dig is complete for a tile, the laborer immediately breaks up and beats in stone into that tile space.

The ability to level is no different than a building fence, but it will cost anywhere from 1 stone to the number of tiles the "leveling fence"'s area occupies, depending on the severity of the required leveling.

[dicsoupcan]

the idea is quite original and impressive, but i can think of a huge drawback, if you elevate the terrain too much it will bcome unwalkable which in turn will enable you to dig in so depe that the enemy cannot reach you, ever. this will result in stalemates and possibly frustration because if the enemy pulls it off to dig in that depe he basically becomes invincible.

on other gamemodes besices classic building it might be an interesting feature though. reminds me of the team fortress 2 mod fort wars where you have a minute to build a fort from random props and then you need to capture the enemy intelligence. the same sor tof thing could be made here then.

[RandomLyrics]

Fishes respawn - after run out of fishes, 15 or 20 mins to restore them back to full count.

Destroy or rather Demolish houses - demolish will give back 40% of materials, reverse building steps, every laborer hit reverse 50 hp, when laborers fisnish job to HouseSite with restored resources serf are able to pick it up and move to storehouse/etc. I think the reversed House will need something like flag/banner so player would know which houses/house-sites are in demolish process.

Just some ideas, what do u think ?:D

[Michalpl]

MapEd option show elevation (default on) that would help fixing some wrong placed tiles

[Ben]

Hey! I was wondering if we could have possibility to add "fallen trees" to maps. Basically, the objects would just use the same sprites of trees that a woodcutter has cut (the animation when the tree has fully fallen down). The difference is that the tree would "stay down" and not bounce up again. I suppose that these trees could be built on like other objects so they wouldn't be a hassle to remove for building. I just don't think woodcutters should cut them

What do you think?

EDIT:
Another idea: Can there be different views for the object toolbox? It's soooo tiny right now. I wouldn't mind having large lists in column format; even if the icons were very tiny. It wouldn't take long to get used to the tiny irons and it would make word go sooooo much faster!!!

[Krom]

Not sure about felt trees, they are kind of weird to have, who had chopped them down and why did not he took them away?

What do you mean by "object toolbox"?

[dicsoupcan]

Not sure about felt trees, they are kind of weird to have, who had chopped them down and why did not he took them away?

What do you mean by "object toolbox"?

i actually like the idea of fallen trees. fallen trees do not have to be the work of someone cutting it down, but sometimes trees grow too old and will fall by itself because it cannot support itself (i know because a tree had to be cut here before it would fall and crash into one of our houses). i agree it will look odd when a woodcutter is near and not taking the tree though, but on the other hand the wood quality might be bad enough that he refuses to take it with him.

and i think Ben means the screen in the map editor where you can place objects. he's requesting to fit more objects on one screen using smaller icons i think.

[Krom]

If those trees would have looked differently (i.e. clear indication to a player, that they are UNLIKE felt trees by woodcutter..)

I see yeah, that could be good