In-game Artillery Facts / Questions / Concerns

[Dutchconfederate]

Too early to tell.

- Trusty

Something the players can test themselves I presume.

[Leifr]

I think this thread is a little premature.

[Dutchconfederate]

I think this thread is a little premature.

Asking questions about upcoming features etc. Happens all the time. Always thought that was one of the purposes of a forum to talk about current and upcoming game stuff

[TrustyJam]

Asking questions about upcoming features etc. Happens all the time. Always thought that was one of the purposes of a forum to talk about current and upcoming game stuff

Of course.

Just be aware that we are not able to answer most of your questions currently (which is why I would imagine Leifr would believe the thread is a tad early).

- Trusty

[Leifr]

Asking questions about upcoming features etc. Happens all the time. Always thought that was one of the purposes of a forum to talk about current and upcoming game stuff

Of course friend, I wouldn't presume otherwise. However, Trusty has said in a couple of places now that there is absolutely nothing to report on regarding artillery. Feel free to kick around ideas but pitching direct questions (as in the OP) is fair too early - better to do so in a couple of months.

Well, as you were.

[EneCtin]

Just be aware that we are not able to answer most of your questions currently

Well, Mr. Trusty, you should, since it seems you've embarked on adding cavalry and artillery to the game, so a concept should have already been fleshed out.

It would be to your advantage, I believe, to have a healthy discussion on that concept and its impact on gameplay. By the time you guys get the first iteration to work, the community will have used its collective brainpower to your advantage, maybe in time to steer clear of loopholes.

At any rate, repeating ironic comments like "no one said it will be ..." should cease.

PS. why a few months until the first working model? Muppets can come later, it is innovative gameplay people are interested in.

[Dutchconfederate]

Well, Mr. Trusty, you should, since it seems you've embarked on adding cavalry and artillery to the game, so a concept should have already been fleshed out.

It would be to your advantage, I believe, to have a healthy discussion on that concept and its impact on gameplay. By the time you guys get the first iteration to work, the community will have used its collective brainpower to your advantage, maybe in time to steer clear of loopholes.

At any rate, repeating ironic comments like "no one said it will be ..." should cease.

Amen .

You can share your visions and ideas and we can understand those plans / ideas will be tweaked or adapted when tested in game or technical restrictions etc. I

[TrustyJam]

Well, Mr. Trusty, you should, since it seems you've embarked on adding cavalry and artillery to the game, so a concept should have already been fleshed out.

It would be to your advantage, I believe, to have a healthy discussion on that concept and its impact on gameplay. By the time you guys get the first iteration to work, the community will have used its collective brainpower to your advantage, maybe in time to steer clear of loopholes.

At any rate, repeating ironic comments like "no one said it will be ..." should cease.

PS. why a few months until the first working model? Muppets can come later, it is innovative gameplay people are interested in.

I disagree.

Yes, we have a concept that we are working towards.

That does not mean it being a good time to bring the community into a design discussion.

Once we have actual features done we’ll be ready to talk about them/have you test them/listen to your feedback and requests regarding them.


Until then we’d all be wasting our time discussing a list of target features where we have no clue if they ever will be doable in the first place.

I’m sorry you are troubled by me answering stuff without really answering stuff (this is because the mechanics are not ready to be discussed yet).

Feel free to post your arty suggestions (we read everything) but we won’t be going into details regarding arty just yet.

- Trusty

[Dutchconfederate]

I disagree.

Yes, we have a concept that we are working towards.

That does not mean it being a good time to bring the community into a design discussion.

Once we have actual features done we’ll be ready to talk about them/have you test them/listen to your feedback and requests regarding them.


Until then we’d all be wasting our time discussing a list of target features where we have no clue if they ever will be doable in the first place.

I’m sorry you are troubled by me answering stuff without really answering stuff (this is because the mechanics are not ready to be discussed yet).

Feel free to post your arty suggestions (we read everything) but we won’t be going into details regarding arty just yet.

- Trusty

Well thanks for the stuff that you did share. I will get some suggestions together and then leave this thread for what it us until you do have more to share.

[TrustyJam]

Well thanks for the stuff that you did share. I will get some suggestions together and then leave this thread for what it us until you do have more to share.

No worries!

The concept constantly changes as more work is put towards its implementation. So discussing it in detail with you guys currently would result in a lot of people being confused/let down, etc. by what it ends up being for the initial arty implementation.

- Trusty