Fewer towns and bigger map

DeletedUser

i think the original reason you want to change this is not very well thought out. if you want it to feel real then why not go plant some corn in your backyard, buy a gun and a cow and a horse, and start terrorizing your neighbors? we play a GAME because we choose to LEAVE reality not live it. walking to the closest town taking an hour is not my idea of a fun game.

on the mechanics of town community and game building, what i DO think should happen is the dev implement a system where you could recoup some of your lost investment in a town that isnt going anywhere. example:

you start a town and get 1 or 2 people to join. you work really hard and build a hotel and a mortician. then one guy quits to go to another town, and the other dude doesnt read the forums or participate much. you have dumped all your time and money and effort into your little town, but it seems kind of lonely. then your old friend telegrams you and says "hey this new town is great, come join us!" now your stuck with leaving all your hard work behind, or hoping that you can recruit more players.

lets say it was a 1000 point town. 500 point put into it by you. maybe their could be a "salvage" option where you could tear down your town and convert the points recouped to another town(maybe 1/3 - 1/2 of points invested, randomly assigned into constructions of newly joined town). THIS would clear up a lot of the tiny towns you see, as well as cause a large merging of several close by towns. and people wouldnt feel so stuck.
 

DeletedUser1105

No, you should not salvage anything. If you make a bad decision to found a town and cannot maintain it, then that's your own bad luck. Cut your losses and move on kieghlon
 

DeletedUser

:p most people do. but i think it would give people more options, and be more realistic. there is a reason ruins dont stay around verylong... natives use the stone and material to build new things. it would be along the same lines. "hey look im going to tear down my saloon and use the siding for a horse corral".
 

DeletedUser1105

You CAN reuse the materials, by refounding the town if you so wish.

I think it is a bad idea. Once people know about the game a bit more, there won't be as many people building towns, because they will realise that demand for towns will be far less than the supply.
 

DeletedUser

that may be true in the long run... but then the original point of this thread would be more accurate... why so many spots if the supply will be so much more than the demand? alot, surely, to give choices, but the plethora of spots seems overwhelming and gives new players the idea that its smart to start their own town. i dunno.. im for flexibility. i think a moreforgiving stance on towns, skills, stats, etc, is a good thing. not too forgiving though, because then people abuse it..
 

DeletedUser

In effect what you wish to happen is already happening because more towns are becoming ghost towns creating 'desert' To make things more realistic resourses should be less easily available and more clustered in regions. Then there would be long treks across the desert only to find some punk at the place you wanna be and finally something to fight about.
 

DeletedUser

Because noobs will leave and ghost towns will make up most of the game world
 

DeletedUser1105

The fact that there is so many spots is because it gives people the option to have these little '1 man towns'. I think it makes sense. Worlds are not full of bustling cities, they always have small towns, villages, hamlets.

This game just provides that option. Some people may actually ENJOY being in a small town, keeping themselves to themselves and slowly building their town up. I would bet that these people will have a bigger sense of achievement when they upgrade a building that most of us do.

But yes, I agree that it should be harder to found a town. $300 is a bit cheap. I'd go for $3000. That way, people can still have thier little towns, but they'd have to save up for it. And it would stop new players fron diving in and building a town, because by the time they got that amount saved up, they would hopefully understand a little better.
 

DeletedUser

marecone said:
As for possible solution for smaller towns developers could perhaps include ranches wich would take up to 5 ppl and would have limited buildings. Let say, safe instead of bank and so on.
They would get another filter so ranches would not appear when filtering for towns.
Click to expand...

I like the ranches idea...it could even potentially provide "steady" jobs for hired hands. To expand on that idea the idea for :indian: Indian camps and bandit hideouts would be acceptable and could provide "steady" jobs as translators or henchmen as well as their own special buildings in place of the normal town buildings. The special buildings would provide goods and services you could not find in a normal town while limiting those who choose to go with one of these options as opposed to a normal town to fewer members and the absence of "normal" buildings like the mortician, bank, general goods, and tailoring stores. Ranches could provide smithing-to improve speed of mounts and so on...a "hot meal" at the ranch house to boost health and energy in a quicker boost though far less than a hotel at all levels it only takes 2 hours or even packed lunches to take with you that take only 10min to eat but restore only a few points of health/energy ...It would come in handy when you have to log off but you only need one more energy point to get that next job in line...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

i like the idea of ranches as invisible 'hideouts' but the topic seemed to go pretty cold.
 

DeletedUser

i like the way thisis going... it needs work, but the ranch idea is pretty cool. i think it hsould be very limited though. maybe the general stores at ranches could sell job items, with variations of stock based on the level of the building. and you couldnt sleep there unless you were a member of the town.
 

DeletedUser

marecone said:
Seeing so many towns (red dots) in one square just looks ugly and not like real wild west. I suggest we limit number of towns per world or per square in map. Also, make founding a town much harder. More money, time and so on. When distance from one town to another is 2-3 minutes then it just looks stupid. So, lower number of towns and make greater distances between cities. It will look more realistic and plus this way rail road (one of the icond of wild west) would finally make sense.
Click to expand...

Hightower, can you review this thread as well, please. 6 pages and hopefully a nice game improvement.
 

DeletedUser

sdjx22 said:
The fact that there is so many spots is because it gives people the option to have these little '1 man towns'. I think it makes sense. Worlds are not full of bustling cities, they always have small towns, villages, hamlets.

This game just provides that option. Some people may actually ENJOY being in a small town, keeping themselves to themselves and slowly building their town up. I would bet that these people will have a bigger sense of achievement when they upgrade a building that most of us do.

But yes, I agree that it should be harder to found a town. $300 is a bit cheap. I'd go for $3000. That way, people can still have thier little towns, but they'd have to save up for it. And it would stop new players fron diving in and building a town, because by the time they got that amount saved up, they would hopefully understand a little better.
Click to expand...

I COMPLETELY agree. Mainly with the first part - Some people like to have a couple of friends in a town. When I started one of mine, it was me (worker) and one dueler. We got up to a 1200point or so town by ourselves before anyone else joined (before we even invited anyone else to join) and yes, the sense of acheivement was far greater than other towns where you pump the money in and others decide how it gets spent. I'm not hassling that way of doing things - it needs to be done to get a great town. But looking to a long term involvement in the game. A small town with a few people will be able to work on a town for many months. A large town will max, and then what is the point of 40 points in construction?
 

DeletedUser1105

Exactly. Making it impossible for people to play the game how they want to should not be allowed.

Not everyone wants to be a number or a cog in a massive 50 man town.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top