Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2014, 21:08
I dont like towerspammers. What about if host could decide in the lobby how many towers each player can build? 0-15? 
The answer has always been a solid "no."
Knights and Merchants.net Forum
Talk about Knights and Merchants!
https://knightsandmerchants.net:443/forum/
Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
https://knightsandmerchants.net:443/forum/viewtopic.php?t=794
Page 157 of 179
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 30 Dec 2014, 22:04
It has been suggested many times. Maybe even a hundred times
The answer has always been a solid "no."
The answer has always been a solid "no."
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 02 Jan 2015, 08:57
I like the rally points for the barracks in the new release. Maybe it can be improved upon slightly?
Here's a suggestion:
If I right click a group of units, the next unit that I train that matches that unit type, will automatically join the group. This could be nice if you're constantly training unit per unit, instead of (like most people do) large groups of units at the same time.
Here's a suggestion:
If I right click a group of units, the next unit that I train that matches that unit type, will automatically join the group. This could be nice if you're constantly training unit per unit, instead of (like most people do) large groups of units at the same time.
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 02 Jan 2015, 09:42
I'd rather have an option similar to "join closest army in sight when going out of the barracks (in reasonable distance)" since that'd work for all unit types and would prevent stuff like "lots of soldiers standing at the rally point doing nothing because I didn't have time to join them because I was fighting 10000 enemies at once"
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 02 Jan 2015, 13:05
I agree with sado, having this option could really improve rally points.
And I have one more idea for rally points. Having an option when right clicking on a place where I want my soldiers to rally to set their looking direction. Like with soldiers.
And I have one more idea for rally points. Having an option when right clicking on a place where I want my soldiers to rally to set their looking direction. Like with soldiers.
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 18:24
Idea: what about removing the bonus that Anti-Cavalry units get against Cavalry units, and reworking it as follows?
FAQ
Is it needed?
It isn't. I just like this idea and think it would add strategic depth while feeling more realistical, which to me seem both good things.
Units are fine the way they are.
Indeed they are. If you had read what I wrote, you'd have noticed that I expect this idea to change little directly, and to instead "only" add more viable strategies.
I don't like this idea.
Nice to know. Care to also write why?
TL;DR?
No. This post is very short, read it.
- Cavalry units are guarenteed to wound the first enemy unit they attack when starting to fight
- Storming units are guarenteed to wound the first enemy they attack immediately after storming
- Anti-Cavalry units never get wounded per this bonus, and instead are guarenteed to wound the aforementioned units in the aforementioned cases
- Making Axe Fighters and Militia stronger while not improving Sword Fighters, because of how much cheaper they are
- (Sword Fighters would not actually get stronger at all, because Anti-Cavalry units are the ones who actually get the bonus if storming against them and Cavalry units both get the bonus too and can still outmanouver a storming troop)
- Making Pikemen stronger against Storming troops, thus also enforcing their role as defenders as opposed to the Storming units, who would instead be enforced in their role of attackers
- Making Wood troops more useful without directly buffing them, because their cheapness would allow strategies that exploit this bonus by using them differently than what you'd use Iron troops for
- And, last but not least, all this would be done while adding tactical possibilities instead of changing the actual numbers
FAQ
Is it needed?
It isn't. I just like this idea and think it would add strategic depth while feeling more realistical, which to me seem both good things.
Units are fine the way they are.
Indeed they are. If you had read what I wrote, you'd have noticed that I expect this idea to change little directly, and to instead "only" add more viable strategies.
I don't like this idea.
Nice to know. Care to also write why?
TL;DR?
No. This post is very short, read it.
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 18:28
It's not needed, units are fine the way they are now, and I don't like this idea because of the first two things I said 
But at least I read the whole post!
But at least I read the whole post!
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 18:31
But at least I read the whole post!
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 18:49
I actually like this idea, it can bring us more possibilities in strategies and it also sounds better than actual unit balance.
I also read the whole post!
I also read the whole post!
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 16 Jan 2015, 23:23
So. Imagine a map with lots of snow. Some mountains, some ice, some fir trees... Just a little grass here and there.
Now imagine that same map, but with a woodcutter near the grass. Now what's he doing?! He's placing all sorts of weird trees there that are totally out of place in this map's climate.
Could it be possible to designate areas for different kind of trees? Or maybe some auto-detect function (if the map is > XX % snow, woodcutters will plant only fir trees or something (I know, very debatable)?
This was always one of my bigger frustrations with TPR; something HAS to be done!
Now imagine that same map, but with a woodcutter near the grass. Now what's he doing?! He's placing all sorts of weird trees there that are totally out of place in this map's climate.
Could it be possible to designate areas for different kind of trees? Or maybe some auto-detect function (if the map is > XX % snow, woodcutters will plant only fir trees or something (I know, very debatable)?
This was always one of my bigger frustrations with TPR; something HAS to be done!
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2015, 03:49
Woah mega map changes from The Dark Lord. The end of KaM is truly near.
I don't like only fur trees for certain snow percentage, but a method of selecting climate in certain areas would be nice indeed. Someone more creative than I will have to come up with a method...
I don't like only fur trees for certain snow percentage, but a method of selecting climate in certain areas would be nice indeed. Someone more creative than I will have to come up with a method...
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2015, 07:16
That's an interesting idea, but it is rather hard to catch up with mapmakers intentions in MapEd. For example WorldMap map scale is so huge, that each and every tile matters and each tile needs a perfectly right tree in order to keep with the maps intent.
It's also worth noting, that if there's a patch of green grass in the snows, then there's something very warm going on in there and that might be just as good for the grassy trees. Maybe placing a brown patch will be better - it prefers pine trees and does not look as unnatural as fresh green grass )
It's also worth noting, that if there's a patch of green grass in the snows, then there's something very warm going on in there and that might be just as good for the grassy trees. Maybe placing a brown patch will be better - it prefers pine trees and does not look as unnatural as fresh green grass )
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2015, 08:46
Well this can partially be fixed by adding new tiles to the Remake... But right now grass is needed for stone mountains.
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2015, 09:06
Yeah, that's true. Too bad that adding new tiles means a big change in the code. Atm tile type takes 1 byte, which is 256 different tiles max. Expanding this to take 2 bytes and 65536 tiles means rewriting a lot of code and fixing a lot of bugs, since there are many many places in the code that assume the tile max size constant 1 byte. That's a lot of work for relatively little gain. Better approach would be to redesign the tiles to be layered, so that Stone mountains could "layered" on top of any tile types. The amount of work required would be similar, but the effect would be much better.
Re: Official KaM Remake Ideas topic
PostPosted: 17 Jan 2015, 10:51
Idea: what about removing the bonus that Anti-Cavalry units get against Cavalry units, and reworking it as follows?
This should have the effect of
- Cavalry units are guarenteed to wound the first enemy unit they attack when starting to fight
- Storming units are guarenteed to wound the first enemy they attack immediately after storming
- Anti-Cavalry units never get wounded per this bonus, and instead are guarenteed to wound the aforementioned units in the aforementioned cases
What do you think about this?
- Making Axe Fighters and Militia stronger while not improving Sword Fighters, because of how much cheaper they are
- (Sword Fighters would not actually get stronger at all, because Anti-Cavalry units are the ones who actually get the bonus if storming against them and Cavalry units both get the bonus too and can still outmanouver a storming troop)
- Making Pikemen stronger against Storming troops, thus also enforcing their role as defenders as opposed to the Storming units, who would instead be enforced in their role of attackers
- Making Wood troops more useful without directly buffing them, because their cheapness would allow strategies that exploit this bonus by using them differently than what you'd use Iron troops for
- And, last but not least, all this would be done while adding tactical possibilities instead of changing the actual numbers
FAQ
Is it needed?
It isn't. I just like this idea and think it would add strategic depth while feeling more realistical, which to me seem both good things.
Units are fine the way they are.
Indeed they are. If you had read what I wrote, you'd have noticed that I expect this idea to change little directly, and to instead "only" add more viable strategies.
I don't like this idea.
Nice to know. Care to also write why?
TL;DR?
No. This post is very short, read it.