Currently Online

Latest Posts

Topic: Temples and MDRL

Forums » Player Forums » Game Suggestions » Temples and MDRL
Astuur
Avatar
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-02-28, 09:08
Posts: 733
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Posted at: 2011-07-03, 07:42

From time to time the idea of temples comes up as a suggestion.
Taking this as a starting point, and considering some other ideas we have seen lately, I am trying here to introduce
a rough concept, and make this thread a home for a general discussion of this topic.

A somewhat logical function for temples might be to increase the amount of damage soldiers will endure before drawing back.
(Maximal damage retreat level, MDRL)
For this, the ratio of existing soldiers vs. "blessed" soldiers (those that have visited the temple), could be calculated dynamically,
and from that an MDRL for all your soldiers (which now is a conf statement) could be set and displayed.
We would also need a UI element to allow the user to adjust the actual retreat level ADRL with a range
between "Initial damage retreat level" IDRL , set at game start, and current MDRL.
A visit to a temple by any soldier should keep him there for a certain time (like training, but shorter)
and might additionally require an oblation (Food?, Gold?, Cattle ect.?)

Pros:

  • This may mitigate the problem with hidden military strength (i.e. basic weapons and armour stored in warehouses, but not converted into soldiers), as a sudden massive increase of soldiers would automatically lead to a low MDRL and soldiers running away from battle very early.

  • It may help (hopefully?) to stop the brainless aggressive AI attacks with the initial set of untrained soldiers, very early especially on smaller maps, where it fights until it is totally powerless.
    With a low MDRL, AI soldiers may have a chance to heal and come back afterwards.

Cons

  • The MDRL and optimal ADRL may be hard to explain and confuse some players. The highest possible MDRL is not necessarily the best one to choose, and the ADRL should in fact be set locally (per military building) and not globally (per economy).

  • We may not want to see religion-empowered killing in WL from an ethical point of view. On the other hand - why should we be more considerate than reality? face-wink.png

  • Depending on the temple size and the oblation, we may introduce new map-dependencies and increase map-related imbalances.

I am sure I have forgotten some pros or cons, but it's a starting point for exchange of opinions on that matter.
In the end it may lead to a well founded feature request.

Edited: 2011-07-03, 07:58

Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills.
I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino).

Top Quote
Venatrix
Avatar
Joined: 2010-10-05, 19:31
Posts: 449
Ranking
Tribe Member
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2011-07-10, 20:29

Well, I’m not sure about the idea to change anything military with temples. As SirVer always says, we don’t want to intensify the military aspect of the game, right? With temples I would change the behaviour of ressources. That there are more ressources in the mountains or let the animals repopulate or help the farmers get the crops in more often. Or shorten the working cycle times of special production sites. Something like that. In the end it could help strengthen the military, but in the first instance it would be an improvement to the economy and that’s what Widelands is really about.

Two is the oddest prime.

Top Quote
Astuur
Avatar
Topic Opener
Joined: 2009-02-28, 09:08
Posts: 733
Ranking
One Elder of Players
Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Posted at: 2011-07-11, 05:13

Hi Venatrix, thanks for answering!
I agree in principle about not wanting to emphasize the military part,
but using temples to help solve the "hidden strenght" problem was tempting. face-smile.png
That is in nature a sort of military problem, and might not be solved without changing
something related to the military part.

As for your suggestion: If anything at all, religion can influence people's behavior
- not that of animals, not that of crops, and not the abuncance of mining resources.
Yes, it's "only" a game, but must we really deliberately introduce "wonders", when we can avoid it?

Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills.
I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino).

Top Quote
Venatrix
Avatar
Joined: 2010-10-05, 19:31
Posts: 449
Ranking
Tribe Member
Location: Germany
Posted at: 2011-07-11, 09:59

Astuur wrote:

If anything at all, religion can influence people's behavior - not that of animals, not that of crops, and not the abuncance of mining resources.

Well, I suppose people like the Romans and Teutons believed, when the harvest was rich or the hunting good or the mountains high in ressources, it was the will of the gods. So temples could possibly change something like that without appearing not to fit in. And there was my suggestion with changing something at the working cycles. That would be peoples behaviour and could help a lot, too.

Yes, it's "only" a game, but must we really deliberately introduce "wonders", when we can avoid it?

You, too, want wonders when changing the possible behaviour of soldiers just because of temples, don’t you? I mean, that’s what temples are for in the end: Pleading supernatural beings for help and change in the life you or your people live.

By the way: I’m not sure, whether the people have to really visit the temple or just have one in the nearer distance to work. I can’t imagine a way to make them go to the temple, for just once would be ridiculous. They had to go on a regular basis. After all you can’t expect to be blessed for the rest of your life, just because you once visited a temple, can you?

Two is the oddest prime.

Top Quote
Warnuf

Joined: 2011-02-26, 17:57
Posts: 16
Ranking
Pry about Widelands
 Posted at: 2011-07-12, 02:30

In all times people sacrificed at religious places while owner of religious places took profit from it. So why not making people 'sacrifice' (placing them in stock in the temple) sometimes goods in a temple in range (if there is one) regardless whether it is a temple of the same player or not.

Top Quote
Marcelo_do_Pagode
Avatar
Joined: 2011-07-23, 17:59
Posts: 36
Ranking
Pry about Widelands
Location: Brazil
Posted at: 2011-07-28, 20:00

I must say that the temples that were introduced in the Settlers franchise (settlers IV I think....) kind of dissapointed me. I really don't see why we should have them in the first place. I perfectly understand it in the historical point of view, but I agree with Astuur that the only thing that a temple should influence is the "willingness" of soldiers, that is, how strong is their will to sacrifice themselves in battle for their tribe. It is quite plain that to have a faith - no matter in what or from where - is a driving force. But I still think that the game is better off without temples.

Marcelo do Pagode
Ubuntu 11.04
Colorado com muito orgulho!

Top Quote