[tinkthank]

ADDENDI to my post above, v. 1

These fall under section III, "Concrete Suggestions", with one Plea at the end

- Concrete suggestion for UI overhaul: Make the "message" screen an interactive interface with either these 5 "filters" or with click-links to 5 different "tabs", "registers" or screens, each of which will have some of the functionality described below. The gist of this is to give the nation a "feel" for their various branches, ranging from executive (message) to the various operational aspects of running a nation.
1. Trade (shift-f1): The trade screen shows a list of all items, gems, and money you have sent Last month and to whom; on this screen you also see who sent what to you; this is also the screen you use to send gems, items or money to others next turn. I envision an interface that looks a bit like a webmail screen, with an IN and an OUT section, and there are buttons for sort-by (type, nation, etc.) and for sending new tradable resources (send-gems, send-money, send-items). EDIT: Individual trade actions in the Outbox can be edited and/or deleted here without having to delete all Messages.
2. Message Board (shift-f2): Another webmail-looking screen in which your incoming Messages are sorted and from which you can send new Messages to other nations. EDIT: Individual Messages in the Outbox can be edited and/or deleted here without having to delete all Messages.
3. Events (shift-f3): "Unrest in increasing in Bobville." A list of feedback from events, sortable by type: Battles, luck events, sneaking events, etc.
4. Magic (shift-f4): "Bob has cast Snotty Rain". A list of all the spells you have cast and who cast them Last turn.
5. Laboratory Reports (shift-f5): "Bob has forged a Hammer of Hatred": Lists the mages who have forged items, what they forged, and where they can be found.
Edit: Screen 6: Ally Screen (see below).

- Function: Disband Troops. I can think of two ways to do this; probably one of them is too hard, and the other may not be as neat but better from both an RPG as well as a game mechanics perspective.
v1: On a troop overview screen, click on and highlight the troops you want disbanded and hit "d"; a popup screen comes on and asks "Do you really want to disband these troops permanently?"
v2: Disbanding can only be done by a commander. Gather all the troops you want disbanded under a commander who can lead these troops. Set commander's orders to "Disband"; next month, all the troops under that commander's lead have disappeared (have been killed by "diseases", if the game mechanics require some way to do this easily).

- Some Random Events should be more strongly tied to the province in which they occur. For example, snows blocking trade routs resulting in tax losses of 100 gold should not be able to occur in provinces whose income are only 20 gold; there can be forest fires harming resource production, but only in forest provinces.

- I like the way that Dominion plays an important role in many ways, I would like to see this implemented even more. I would like to see more spells which are influenced by higher / lower dominion, and could imagine seeing tax income *slightly* more affected by dominion over and beyond scales (such as the way that Miasma works, but globally and with somewhat less potency).

- (odd BALANCE SUGGESTION: Taxes can only be raised in a province which is not your capital by 20% per month that province is owned; thus newly conquered provinces can have at most 120% taxes, although they can be set to 0% at any time, but to 200% only after 5 months.)


- ALLY INTERFACE: I know nothing about programming, but I think this would be a really big job; if successfull, it would easily take Dominions3 into a new dimension worthy of a new game, not just an expansion.
Screen 6 is Ally Screen: You can offer your alliance here to any nation you can "see"; if an Alliance offer is sent, the recipient may accept or decline. Once accepted, an alliance can be broke by using this screen -- but one can imagine setting up the interface to allow for certain conditions. Perhaps there are different kinds and types of alliances one may share.

Here's the kick: Once an alliance (of, say, Type A) is made between nation A and B, *the troops of nation A are treated as FRIENDLY by those of nation B and vice versa*.
That means at least these two implications: Nation A and B can both move into province X simultaneously without conflict; they then fight *together* on the battlefield against any enemies that may be there with all restrictions normally applied. (E.g., if Nation A brings 1 commander with 10 militia, Nation B brings only SCs, the armies of A and B will both route once the militia are dead; flaming arrows cast by A, for example, affect all A and B's units.) It also means that A's Globals affect allied B's units as if they were their own (GoH helps B too, Wrath of God does not hurt B).

If nation A and nation B are allied, and A asks nation C if he also wants to ally, both B and C will be messaged and both must give consent.
My suggestion would be that an alliance formed by using the Ally Screen would not change the victory conditions.

Perhaps some alliances can be set at the beginning of the game under Create Game. If A and B ally from the beginning against C and D, one could imagine that the VCs are shared; at least, this could be an exciting option. If the "Share VC" option is clicked, the sum of whatever quantified statistic could be taken (dominion, provs, whatever); I dont think that would be too problematic.

There would have to be rules (perhaps different settings which one can choose when setting up a game) which stipulate IF and if so, under what conditions an AI nation can become an ally. I think, however, that AI nations should not be allowed to ally; their reasons for accepting an alliance with A over B or not at all would be very hard to quantify. For simplicity's sake, I would be more than happy to exclude AI nations from the Ally Screen interface, but allow for AI nations to be allied at the start of the game under Game Setup.
I think this would be a fornicatingly bucketload of fun.
Thanks.


PLEA: It would be most helpful if a member of the Dev team were to express his or her feedback regarding (at least some of) the suggestions on this thread and/or the makeup of the thread in general (till now, there have been but two very brief comments on 2 aspects: commander renaming (already in) and the nagot gik fel message); what is the deal? Are we being helpful? Are we being constructive? Are some of the suggestions good, or bad, or noteworthy, or what? Which types are helpful? Or are we being useless? Are we being to vague? Are we being to unrealistic? Are we being read?
Are we being ignored?