a very small suggestion for the next patch for ryhleh ( devs plz read )

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by Stormbinder:
I don't. In fact custom UI programing is one on my specialities, and I don't mind doing it.

For real?

I don't program much, but to me it would be more rewarding making a change that made the game more fun to play and as I rarely am bothered by the UI in dom2 I would prefer a new interesting feature.

The 'dissmiss' however would fall under features in my book, as it is something that would affect the game play. Thus it must not go through the UI filter but the general preference filter.

We have speculated in different forms of dissmiss costs. A year of pay, a small cottage by the sea etc. The army takes care of it's own you know.

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
I don't program much, but to me it would be more rewarding making a change that made the game more fun to play and as I rarely am bothered by the UI in dom2 I would prefer a new interesting feature.

The 'dissmiss' however would fall under features in my book, as it is something that would affect the game play. Thus it must not go through the UI filter but the general preference filter.

When evaluating what is "most rewarding", you must give a great deal of weight in prioritization to eliminating things that a majority of Users find annoying. Whether that be quashing a bug, making a UI tweak, or adding a new feature. "Interesting new features" are not of as much value as the removal of things that are constant irritants that detract from the enjoyment of already-existing cool features.

The dismiss function, isn't really a new "feature". It's fixing what is technically a design flaw in the UI. (Sorry, but not having it in the UI is a design flaw, despite the fact that the current system works as designed. Explanations of why it's a design flaw have been made in various threads over the past six months, and I won't repeat them here.) As such, many people consider it a bugfix, not a feature.

I think the real issue here isn't so much a case of aVersion to making a UI change as it is an aVersion to the thought that the current (no-dismiss) system (which the devs favor) isn't what players want. Which goes back to another thread where I brought up the subject of "what the devs want in their game versus what players want". Which in this case is fundamentally an issue of how much of a customer-oriented company IW is (or isn't). Which is a case of "giving the customers what the devs think they should get" versus "giving the customers what they ask for".

As for "the army takes care of its own", historically this isn't true for most nations and periods. Service in the feudal era was an obligation, and normal troops weren't paid. Mercenaries were paid for work, and when their work was done, simply dismissed, and if they were good they might get a thank you and a recommendation. Severance pay is a modern concept (which derives, in part, from what Roman *officers* -- elite and hardly typical soldiery -- got upon retirement). IMO, troops should be dismissable without cost. Commanders should have a dismiss cost, which should be reasonable, and less than the cost of hiring them in the first place.

[Boron]

it would be funny if the dismissed troops would attack you after you dismissed them.
i don't remember the name of the game but i think that was in a game .
it would be a real nice solution since you could test then in sp how good your sc's are
would be really very funny ihmo
you summon e.g. 2 archdevils and equip / script them differently then you dismiss one and watch who wins
edit : i think this feature would greatly enchance single play since the ai can't build Übersc's
so you could practice for mp in sp much better and it would be really funny to make duel's with your troops you could organize whole tourneys if only 1 ai is left

[ July 12, 2004, 13:26: Message edited by: Boron ]

[Cohen]

Well probably you should go for some options:

Dismiss A:
The troops aren't payd anymore and start attacking the current province they're in, but pillaging the province even before any battle occurs.

Dismiss B:
You want to pay your veterans, you spend X gold for piece (based on unkeep cost), and they raise the currently province where they're locate population by Y where Y are the soldiers dismissed, and IF the soldiers are national troops of a certain quality (ie crippled elite and so on) the PD of that province raises of a Z amount (they can train better the commoners levying in that province).

I'd add a feature when you cannot pay the unkeep.
If a troop fail his Morale Check it deserts as usual, if a commander fails a MC all his troops under command and him become a new mercenary company with the name "*commander's name*'s* *asset of randon names*" ... like Fighters, Warriors or according to the troops he's commanding.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Arryn:
Which goes back to another thread where I brought up the subject of "what the devs want in their game versus what players want".

What, you mean the poll where you flat out told the devs that you knew more about how the game should work than they did?

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
What, you mean the poll where you flat out told the devs that you knew more about how the game should work than they did?

Yes. I'm paid pretty good money to do exactly that sort of thing (telling people what their software products should or should not do) in my professional life. The fact that I've been doing it for 28+ years implies that I've been fairly successful at it, too.

The additional fact that the poll rubbed you (one of the worst fanboys on this forum), the devs, and many others with too-sensitive sensibilities the wrong way does absolutely nothing to lessen the underlying point. I don't believe in tap-dancing around issues or sugar-coating replies for ease of consumption. I assume other people are adults (until they prove otherwise) and have the maturity to accept arguments in a rational and logical manner. Alas, I find way too few people that understand the concept of reasoned discourse, much less are willing to practice said concept.

Finally, I'd also call your attention to the statistically significant number of poll respondents who agreed with me.

EDIT: PS - this is about as polite a response to flamebait, GD's obvious intent in his reply, as I can make.

[ July 12, 2004, 14:52: Message edited by: Arryn ]

[Chazar]

Umh, does UI stand for User Interface?

If so, then dismissing isnt a UI problem, imho: Just add a "get lost"-command, which tells a commander to drive his assigned troops away during a fake maneuver in the woods. The commander should then go away himself by a percentage chance based on the troops' experience points, because of his bad remorse due to disbanding his loyal servants...

(Oh, wait, this would also implement another new option: the option of resigning a game, if you give this order to your pretender... )

[Arryn]

Originally posted by Chazar:
Umh, does UI stand for User Interface?

Yes.

[PvK]

I've mentioned this idea before, but I think ideally, most or all units who are dismissed without pay, or who retreat and are eliminated due to no-retreat-province, or retreating mercenaries...

... should be remembered, grouped by compatible type (hopefully no paladins mixed with undead, or iceclads with hot abyssians), and occasionally reappear in the form of either good event reinforcements for the lucky (not necessarily for the side they originally served), or as independent attacks on provinces, or as new mercenary bands.

PvK

[Arryn]

Originally posted by PvK:
I've mentioned this idea before, but I think ideally, most or all units who are dismissed without pay, or who retreat and are eliminated due to no-retreat-province, or retreating mercenaries...

... should be remembered, grouped by compatible type (hopefully no paladins mixed with undead, or iceclads with hot abyssians), and occasionally reappear in the form of either good event reinforcements for the lucky (not necessarily for the side they originally served), or as independent attacks on provinces, or as new mercenary bands.

An interesting idea ... that I suspect would be extraordinarily hard to code. You get points for original thinking though.