Topkilla, did you just pull the $3,000 out of your ass or..?

The bare minimum is that specialist balance and fixing the recording function should be our first task. If there is enough money left over that, then we move onto adding features. Fix a game, before adding to its 'broken' state.
Also, a steam port is not a priority on my eyes. This just isn't a PC game at heart.

Another idea would be an additional way to monetize the game, without jeopardizing the integrity of the system.

Totally pulled the number out of my ass. $3,000 is both a lot, and a little. And it should get us our goal of an update. Even with those who claim to issue support, and then decide for whatever reason, to not donate when the time comes.

Obviously, priority goes to fixing the specialist balance and recording. - But I believe adding a few more 'map options' for things like the size of the map/number of bases in between players, turning specialists on/off, and the like, would be a simple thing we could try to sneak in.

nojo34 wrote:Also, a steam port is not a priority on my eyes. This just isn't a PC game at heart.

Another idea would be an additional way to monetize the game, without jeopardizing the integrity of the system.

That's exactly the idea of a steam port... Whole new highly active user base there who I think would love this game. And it's not like a steam port would make it a 'computer game'. It would just be another cross-system way to play. Kinda like Minecraft, or frozen synapse.

TK, porting a game to a new platform is expensive. Porting this game to android was costly, in the top 5 costs of making the game. Getting the game past steam greenlight, not to mention the $100 cost to actually get it on. It's not like people care their computer around with them...

Suggestions:

1. A way to select an ally. Only that ally knows they are selected. All attacks toward an ally become gifts. The option to make an ally an enemy would be allowed. But, it would take 24 to 48 hours (not sure what the time limit should be) for the process to complete and the player would be notified.

2. The hypnotist shouldn't be an option for one who already has a KING or hypnotist.

3. If a player has multiple KINGs there should be a negative effect. Slower speeds overall. Or only allow the king to come into effect on defense.

4. Option to create matches and change the amount of Outpost needed to win.

5. Remove the ability to see what others may hire? Maybe even only show what one has to those that have them in sonar.

6. Don't reveal queens radar. Players can currently touch the outpost to see range. Gives away position.

7. More specialist to choose from then 3 at a time. Especially if your adding more. Maybe even allow players to pick their favorite Specialist. Giving them a better chance to get them.

conundrum,

I think, from your recommendations, that 2, 5, 6, and 7 can't really happen, they remove things that are vital to the game.
I personally disagree with number 1, because it completely destroys the diplomacy of the game. The biggest part of the game is making allies and trusting (or distrusting) them. It destroys the ability to backstab, which while it may be nice if you're too trusting, ruins the ability to make false partnerships. The game is, after all, called subterfuge, not "i promise I won't attack you and so I'll make it impossible for me to do so with a 24hour alarm".
The kings are somewhat overpowered, its a known fact, and a nerf is a priority for many other forumers as well. But you can't really stop them from hiring hypnos, and I don't think speed is what needs to be changed.
But you're right on number 4, that would be cool

nojo34 wrote:TK, porting a game to a new platform is expensive. Porting this game to android was costly, in the top 5 costs of making the game. Getting the game past steam greenlight, not to mention the $100 cost to actually get it on. It's not like people care their computer around with them...

I have no idea what the costs would be to get it on steam. But I believe the probability that this game would do well on it would be very high. And because it's relatively cheap at $10, I believe there probably would be a solid number of people who buy it.

Again, I don't know. Just throwing it out there. - But you don't seem to understand that it wouldn't be a 'computer only' game. It would just be another cross platform that supported the game.

coltspaesano wrote:conundrum,

I think, from your recommendations, that 2, 5, 6, and 7 can't really happen, they remove things that are vital to the game.
I personally disagree with number 1, because it completely destroys the diplomacy of the game. The biggest part of the game is making allies and trusting (or distrusting) them. It destroys the ability to backstab, which while it may be nice if you're too trusting, ruins the ability to make false partnerships. The game is, after all, called subterfuge, not "i promise I won't attack you and so I'll make it impossible for me to do so with a 24hour alarm".
The kings are somewhat overpowered, its a known fact, and a nerf is a priority for many other forumers as well. But you can't really stop them from hiring hypnos, and I don't think speed is what needs to be changed.
But you're right on number 4, that would be cool

Thanks for the reply.

I get why this game is called what it is. Maybe I'm alone in this desire. I guess I'd like to play a match based more on skill of moves then diplomacy.

I pledge happiness.

conundrumcypher wrote:Thanks for the reply.

I get why this game is called what it is. Maybe I'm alone in this desire. I guess I'd like to play a match based more on skill of moves then diplomacy.

Nah man I completely understand where you're coming from. It's so frustrating when people backstab you because they suck and need some sort of advantage. Skill still comes into play, but you're right, diplomacy dictates the game.
Personally, I enjoy it; my recommendation to you is to always plan to backstab someone, even knowing that you won't do it. Try and make alliances with 24 hrs notice of breaking it, and always be ready to attack and/or defend within 12 hours, just in case.
I just think that your specific way of going about it breaks the whole idea of trust and distrust that makes the game so addictive. I think it's a good idea, just that it may not be the right solution overall.



Also, I said this before, we need to be more organized about this if we want to get anywhere. If you guys want, I can set up all the different threads to keep things organized and on-topic. We don't want one giant thread with tangles of pledges and donations, ideas, problems we might face, and the likes. Just please let me know, and we can make this so easy for the devs that they just might do it again...

coltspaesano wrote:Also, I said this before, we need to be more organized about this if we want to get anywhere. If you guys want, I can set up all the different threads to keep things organized and on-topic. We don't want one giant thread with tangles of pledges and donations, ideas, problems we might face, and the likes. Just please let me know, and we can make this so easy for the devs that they just might do it again...

Woah, I was literally about to ask the same thing. I was thinking a thread for New Specs, A thread for Current Spec Changes, and one for game mode changes. (Since these seem to be the most requested items so far. That and fixing recording, but I don't think that's controversial.)