HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

    Loads video thumbnails from YouTube, which lets it see your IP address. Off until you turn it on, and remembered in this browser only.

Posts from Expedition: general discussions.

Expedition
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
User Avatar
Offline Драккошка
Registered:
Posts: 32,020
#16
Auto-translated

I only remember sketching my character for one of the early expansions... And I don't even remember if it was him or some other similar character.
А, вот почему.

🏹🎪+⛓️♿=💕
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#17
Auto-translated
Gentlemen, I have an idea for a light expedition. Remember the "gladiators" from Moldavia? Or the coliseum at Revant in Darkshade? I propose creating an arena, but not quite like those. The focus should be on combat, with minimal or no role-playing. No events, just battles between players and NPCs. The format would be 3x3, meaning tactical roles can be quite diverse, as can the tactical possibilities for allies and opponents to interact on the battlefield. We could also brainstorm many additional features, such as bosses (overpowered NPC opponents, but only one at a time), obstacles, and generally unconventional arenas, etc.
Although calculating battles can be complex, the lack of a storyline reduces the workload on the GM in this format. And player interest is maintained by entirely different things: not by the variability of the plot and not by how quickly the GM responds in the thread during various dialogues. Interest is sustained specifically by the combat, in a sense by team spirit, and by achievements in the arena.)
What do you think, would such a format be interesting?
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Heroist
Registered:
Posts: 19,413
#18
Auto-translated
The role-playing aspect is zero, or almost zero. There are zero events.
Well, then players will simply lose interest. After all, this is the most important thing in an expedition, isn't it? You can create bots and make them fight; the meaning won't change.
If something like this is to be done, it is necessary to partially replace the role-playing and game events with something, although I am not sure if this is possible.
For example, you could develop a complex turn-based combat mechanic where you need to find the enemy's weak spot and crush it, otherwise you won't win. But honestly, it's hard to imagine, and in that case, you would really have to implement a million different skills, abilities, and events, which would make the GM's and participants' work even more difficult.
The format is 3x3, meaning that tactical roles can be very diverse, as can the tactical possibilities for interaction between allies and opponents on the battlefield. Additionally, you can think of many more features, such as bosses (overpowered NPC opponents, but only one), obstacles, and generally non-standard arenas, etc.
Yes, I'm reading it in parts; that's correct.
Interest is maintained specifically by the combat, in a sense by the team spirit, and by achievements in the arena.
I'm not sure it will hold their interest. You could try to implement PvP or competitions between teams of players to see who is more successful in the arena, but I don't know...

Whatever
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Online now Граф Орлов
Registered:
Posts: 8,644
#19
Auto-translated
Well, I'm not sure. In my opinion, a forum based solely on battles won't last very long. However, it depends on the implementation. Also, it would be good if players gathered at the same time; otherwise, we'll be waiting half a day for responses, and interest will quickly fade. But it's definitely worth a try.
E si sui vius, er mi grans benananza,
e si ieu muoir, er mi grans deliuriers
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Небо
Registered:
Posts: 35,862
#20
Auto-translated
In my opinion, Dal Shabet, for example, was successful because many players and GMs were online almost around the clock. There was almost no long wait for a response from a GM or player. That's what made it so great. Interest is lost when you have to wait a long time for a response. So, it's more about the ability of players and GMs to spend a lot of time playing the game, rather than the specific features of the game itself.
Небо – мольбы не ждёт
Небо – угроз не слышит
Небо – ведёт особый счёт
Небо – тебя найдёт

По вопросам модерации: [email protected]
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#21
Auto-translated
If that happens, players will simply lose interest. After all, that's the most important thing in an expedition, isn't it? You could create bots and make them fight; it wouldn't change the meaning.
Well, I was actually thinking about rethinking the interests in that way. That is, not to completely remove the possibility of role-playing, dialogues, and so on, but to leave the possibility of some game choices, but to remove the need for role-playing.
Bots are something completely different. This way, you have your own character, with their own story, motivation... You have complete control over the combat part of your character, determining their tactics, actions...
For example, you could develop a complex combat mechanic in turn-based mode, where you need to find the enemy's weak spot and crush it, otherwise you won't win.
That's the point.
I'm not sure it will work. You could try implementing PvP or Competitive matches between teams of players to see who is more successful in the arena, but I don't know...
Me neither... PvP is a must, though. I was thinking of organizing teams of three characters (some of them could be bots to get more teams or ensure balance). Plus, teams of completely bot opponents (these enemies are intentionally strengthened to make it not boring). Plus, all sorts of bosses, as I said.
In my opinion, Dal Shabet, for example, was successful because many players and GMs were involved, and practically around the clock. There was almost no long wait for a response from the GM or player. That's why it turned out so great. But interest is lost when you have to wait a long time for a response. So, it's more about the ability of players and the GM to spend a lot of time playing, rather than the specifics of the game's implementation.
I understand that, which is why I'm suggesting a change in format. Requiring the GM to monitor the thread around the clock is too much. We only have one person who is really capable of doing that.)
Well, I don't know. In my opinion, a forum based solely on battles won't last long. However, it depends on the implementation. Also, it would be desirable for players to gather at the same time, otherwise we will be waiting half a day for a response, and interest will quickly fade. But it's worth a try.
Set specific dates and times for battles that will suit everyone. That's what I had in mind.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Heroist
Registered:
Posts: 19,413
#22
Auto-translated
many players and GMs were online almost 24/7.
But why were they online? Well, the GM might have had a lot of time to dedicate to running the game, which is understandable. But what about the players? It was precisely because of their interest in the game, which arose from its good implementation.
interest fades when you have to wait a long time for a response.
And it also fades when nothing happens in the game for a long time, and no one "encourages" the players to move forward. Take, for example, "1257" or whatever it was called. Actually, things were moving along nicely until we got to the future and found ourselves in a half-empty city where it's unclear what to do or where to go.

Whatever
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Небо
Registered:
Posts: 35,862
#23
Auto-translated
But why were they involved? Well, perhaps because he had a lot of time to dedicate to it, which is understandable. But what about the players? It was precisely because of their interest in the game.
Why? Because they are hardcore gamers? x)
Небо – мольбы не ждёт
Небо – угроз не слышит
Небо – ведёт особый счёт
Небо – тебя найдёт

По вопросам модерации: [email protected]
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Heroist
Registered:
Posts: 19,413
#25
Auto-translated
(Properly chosen time <---> Good implementation and development of the expedition <---> A large amount of free time for the GM) ---> Player interest ---> Player activity ---> Expedition success ---> Group death ---> Expedition completion.

Whatever
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Online now kcfgogbfalgfl
Registered:
Posts: 61,982
#27
Auto-translated
And I remember I once had an idea to run an expansion based on the nation-states of the HeroesWorld players.

Стартовый пост - Квенты - Разное - Список НПС - Турнир -
Резара - Аксель - Орвальд - Эмилия - Стэфания - Амвросий - Лестер - Альсира - Алария - 

0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Online now Happy Life
Registered:
Posts: 24,192
#28
Auto-translated
arena
Oh, how interesting. What could be better?
My sword, my trusted ally, unphased by my aspect.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Online now Ple-Sen
Registered:
Posts: 30,875
#29
Auto-translated
I once had an idea to host a forum game where players would capture a city divided into sectors, with each player representing their own faction. Character creation would involve traits that determine specific abilities and available troops. However, the focus would be on gameplay rather than role-playing. Furthermore, this wouldn't even be close to an expansion. And having too many players would significantly slow down the process. Perhaps I should have done this instead; maybe I wouldn't have messed it up.
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Heroist
Registered:
Posts: 19,413
#30
Auto-translated
I once had an idea to host a forum where players would capture a city divided into sectors, with each player representing their own faction.
If that's the case, you could expand it to an entire state; why limit it? However, the idea is quite interesting: alliances, nuclear bombings, uprisings of the civilian population, and encouraging revolutions in other countries/parts of the city – there's something to it, if implemented intelligently, of course...

Whatever
0
⚖️
0