Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 36

Thread: The state of Utopia

  1. #1
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,409

    The state of Utopia

    So, I'm generally curious about how players feel regarding the state of the game.

    Warning: Some thought processing may be required.

    • Do you enjoy the race/personality options available?
    • Do you believe these combo's could be changed to become more unique?
    • Do hostile or war situations occur in a manner that allows for good political involvement?
    • Do hostile situations escalate at a quick enough level?
    • Do you think the protection standards of the game against hostiles are fair? Why/Why not?
    • What do you believe could be done to alter the pace and dynamic nature of the game for the better?


    Edit:
    • Have there been any major gameplay changes since Sean and Brian took over? If so, what?
    • Do you think an easier, but equally more aggressive version of the game would catch on better?
    Last edited by Ezzerland; 25-02-2012 at 20:19.

  2. #2
    Enthusiast Twyla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    433
    Part of my overall sentiment regarding Utopia is somewhat colored by how small the player base has gotten. Time was when one could play for Land, NW, Honor, or War Wins - same game with multiple goals, all valid. It seems that a majority of the remaining players - or, at least, the most vocal of them - are strictly obsessed with War Wins to the exclusion of all else.

    This, in turn, has led to considerable biases concerning Races, Personalities, and their combinations. Though they generally change to some degree from Age to Age, the overwhelming majority for Age 53 are optimized for warfare. Over 27% of all Provinces this Age are Undead, mainly Tacticians and Warriors - each of these pretty much double the total for all Orcs, once consider a formidable Attacker Race.

    It's as if Crowns and War Wins have become the exclusive goal of Utopia, and anything which doesn't idolize this goal to the exclusion of all else is ridiculed. This attitude has escalated to the point where many Kingdoms will actively strong-arm any members which don't adhere to their self-righteous standards of precisely what Race/Personality/Build combination they've decided to be min/max optimized.


    Utopia is in trouble, and the source doesn't lie in the game itself so much as the prevalent attitudes of many of the players. Utopia is not unique in this regard, though it is far more vulnerable to it due to the fact that it's archetype (BBS Doors) is older than most of its players. It's unique in the online gaming world - lacking the immediacy and graphic spectacle of first-person MMORGs - which is both a strength and a weakness.

    Like any game, it requires an influx of new players to build - or even maintain - a player base. The prevailing elitist attitude common to these Forums stands in direct conflict with that need.

    The primary obstacle presented by Utopia itself is the lack of introductory appeal towards new players. As I and others have commented in other threads, a visually-appealing and well-organized introductory Guide would address much of this.

    Apart from that last item, most every shortcoming of Utopia lies with the players and not the game itself.
    The only people who never make mistakes are those who never try to accomplish anything.

  3. #3
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzerland View Post
    Do you enjoy the race/personality options available?
    Yes. For the first time in a while, I don't think there's a race that isn't good in at least some aspect. Personalities still need to be worked on, but at least they ARE being worked on. Faeries are back, so I'm happy :)

    Do you believe these combo's could be changed to become more unique?
    Sure, but I don't really have any good ideas on how to do that. Making things unique and keeping them balanced is a tough job.

    Do hostile or war situations occur in a manner that allows for good political involvement?
    Nope. Most kds completely ignore the war forums. With a large majority of hostile/wars follow one of two setups:
    1. Kd A waves Kd B. Kd B offers a CF (without communicating or anything) as a sign that they're not interested.
    2. Kd A waves Kd B. Kd B declares war. One side wins and the other surrenders. (Again, with no communication)

    The funny thing is, when I'm trying to work out a CF with some of the ghettos and I'm actually talking to them, they seem VERY skeptical, like I'm trying to pull something over on them. Idk, just seems like a sad state of affairs.

    Do hostile situations escalate at a quick enough level?
    A lot of people think hostile situations should be slowed down. I'm not among them. I think it works just fine.

    Do you think the protection standards of the game against hostiles are fair? Why/Why not?
    Yes. It gives smaller kds the advantage, but not so much of an advantage that a sucky kd is going to be able to topple a good one. I like the better kd will come out on top.

    What do you believe could be done to alter the pace and dynamic nature of the game for the better?
    Weaken attacking. Attacking > Thieving = Maging. I've been saying they need to do a global nerfing of gains for a while now.

    Have there been any major gameplay changes since Sean and Brian took over? If so, what?
    http://wiki.utopia-game.com/index.php?title=Changelog
    That page details the gameplay changes outside of the usual race/pers balancing. Some are more important than others.

    Do you think an easier, but equally more aggressive version of the game would catch on better?
    Clones are clones and will always be clones. People want the real thing.

  4. #4
    Needs to get out more VT2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    10,880
    There are too many races and personalities. Bake redundant ones together (undead, orc), or work on making them useful. Shepherd? Really? Add the bonuses to cleric, instead.

    Wars and politics are the same as they always were, but you're gonna be dealing with the very same players every single age, because there's a tiny influx of new blood.
    Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.

    Step one: replace everything that works.
    Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
    Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
    Step four: thank you for your patience.

  5. #5
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,409
    @Twyla: Most of your post addresses the utopian society. I'm more curious about the game play itself. Underlying features of the game have changed dramatically over the years, and then changes dwindled off into oblivion as the game got to its point of sale. A fresh age and fresh changes with new dynamics to consider was a revolving aspect of utopia. The society within it will always have a separate role than the game itself, just as the developers have yet another role.



    @Palem: Balance is good, but so is diversity. This is what I'm really inquiring about is the division between these two things. There is more to balancing races than making their stats appear relatively equal, they must also target different aspects of the game and must therefore be balanced again on another level. All information gathered in this thread will be used in a coming suggestion thread I have that will target Sean & Brian directly. You guys sure you wanted me back? xP

    As for politics in hostile situations, do you think that any mechanical changes to the game could offer a higher level of political involvement? Do you recall a time from your past experiences where political involvement in hostile/war scenario's was higher? If so, what has changed -in regards to game mechanics- since then that might have affected this?

    You currently believe that thief power is of an equal strength to mage power? Can you give me a comparison between the two to equate this?

    Thanks for the link. Will check it out and get back on that.

    I'm not talking about a clone. I'm talking about the real deal. If recovery was easier, and you could do more damage to a province, do you think the game would be funner at a faster, and plausibly higher level?



    @VT2: That is precisely what I'm trying to draw out of the community. I agree there are too many and therefore they are not diverse enough.

    Wars and Politics have changed dramatically over the years. Both mechanically and no a peer to peer level. I definitely disagree with you here.

  6. #6
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzerland View Post
    Balance is good, but so is diversity. This is what I'm really inquiring about is the division between these two things. There is more to balancing races than making their stats appear relatively equal, they must also target different aspects of the game and must therefore be balanced again on another level. All information gathered in this thread will be used in a coming suggestion thread I have that will target Sean & Brian directly. You guys sure you wanted me back? xP
    I think the uniqueness is pretty well defined. I agree that Orc and Undead could be merged, but for the most part everything is pretty good.

    As for politics in hostile situations, do you think that any mechanical changes to the game could offer a higher level of political involvement? Do you recall a time from your past experiences where political involvement in hostile/war scenario's was higher? If so, what has changed -in regards to game mechanics- since then that might have affected this?
    Idk about any mechanical changes, it just seems like there's VERY little encouragement as far as interacting with people outside your kd. As time has gone on, it seems like that's an aspect of the game that has just escaped the lower ranks.

    You currently believe that thief power is of an equal strength to mage power? Can you give me a comparison between the two to equate this?
    It's hard to give a direct comparison since the two dish out different kinds of damage and function a bit different, but I feel like if there are any unbalanced issues between thieving and maging, it's miniscule to the imbalance to attacking.

    If recovery was easier, and you could do more damage to a province, do you think the game would be funner at a faster, and plausibly higher level?
    A lot has gone into the game to making recovery not such an issue. Quite frankly, wars aren't destructive enough for anyone to complain about war damage. Imo, wars would be more fun with raze being returned to normal =\
    Last edited by Palem; 25-02-2012 at 23:01. Reason: whoops...

  7. #7
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,409
    I foresee an edit of your above post coming xP Quote fail!

    There are currently 8 races. By dropping 1 and merging Orc into undead, do you truly believe that each race has an entirely different dynamic that makes them unique AND balanced? If yes, then we're on the right track. How about personalities? They are being worked on, but are they all unique?

    Thief/Mage abilities should offer different types of play. If the imbalances between them truly are miniscule, then I appreciate Sean & Brians efforts in that direction, as that type of balance is difficult in itself. I guess when I start playing again I'll have to delve into this further myself, but in the meantime I'll wait for further insight from others. Attacking has been OP since before raze was changed. It's natural that this needs to change xP

  8. #8
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzerland View Post
    There are currently 8 races. By dropping 1 and merging Orc into undead, do you truly believe that each race has an entirely different dynamic that makes them unique AND balanced? If yes, then we're on the right track. How about personalities? They are being worked on, but are they all unique?
    Avians are the speed freaks.
    Faeries are THE TMs
    Elves are the a/m
    Halfers are the a/t (though they got kinda weird this age lol)

    That leaves Orcs and Undead as the tanks and it leaves Humans and Dwarves in kind of a weird place. They're both econ-based, but very differently. They both also have potential as hybrids, with humans as a/t, and dwarves as a/m.

    Personalities are a bit tricky. I think the only one in serious need of addressing is Shepard. I do also think that personalities as a whole need to be overhauled a bit. It's too complicated as it stands. I remember thinking it was crazy when Sage had 4 bonuses, and now most of them are just LOADED with stuff.

  9. #9
    Forum Addict Dolgil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Decatur, IL. USA
    Posts
    1,090
    Being away for two years and having only about one week of experience playing I would say the game has evolved into something overall better. Bullying is harder to do. That's a major thing.

    There is only so much you can vary between races and personalities. Keeping things balanced without type casting the races is extremely difficult. Part of the fun of each new age was trying to figure out if there was an overpowered race or combination. With premium change now, that mat not be such a problem. There is always next age.

    A better guide would be of much more value to new players than trying to simplify the game. The newbie traps were and still are rainbow build strat and low/lack of military/wizards/thieves.

    War is at the heart of Utopia. Always has been. Problem has generally been getting enough activity from smaller ghettos to get to war. Possibly a modifier based on number of provinces in both kds? May be abusable. Don't know here.

    Anyway, hats off to Sean and Brian for taking this on. Jolt certainly failed at it. I just hope things can get profitable enough to bring the game back to its former glory.
    Dolgil Rosethorn
    If it's broke, fix it.
    If it's not, don't.
    If you do not like the results, change your methods.
    Quit making the same old mistakes. Make new ones.

  10. #10
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    I just came back to the game after a hiatus and randomed into a ghetto. YMMV...

    •Do you enjoy the race/personality options available?

    Each race brings its own things to the table, though some are horrible this age (dwarf). There is a lack of interesting mechanics between races, but that is also part of the game's general stagnation and design issues, like being limited to specs, leets, thieves, and wizards for training options. But, for the most part the races are balanced, and there is only one that is crap unlike some ages.
    Personalities are heavily weighted towards Merchant. Seriously, for over 90% of attacker provinces Merch is simply too awesome this age, and was even more ridiculous in the previous age. Warrior sucks. Guess which of the two I picked. ._.

    •Do you believe these combo's could be changed to become more unique?

    Races are different enough that a player should adjust their play significantly... most of the lack of uniqueness comes from limitations in the game's design, which is pretty much the same thing as ever except with less players.
    Personalities really are a seperate deal from races... there are quite a few flat-out worthless race/personality combinations and some that fit real well together, but the best personality pick for each race isn't inherent to the race itself, but your kingdom's objectives. Between the non-crappy race/personality picks there is little variance that can't be compensated for, strictly by comparing one random province to another... even a personality like shep compared to tactician isn't that bad for most races. Still, a shepherd offers little contribution to a kingdom full of tacticians who want to pimp the attack time bonus, or a kingdom of sages who want to sit on their asses and pump science all day.

    •Do hostile or war situations occur in a manner that allows for good political involvement?

    I couldn't say, given my absence.

    •Do hostile situations escalate at a quick enough level?

    Same as above...

    •Do you think the protection standards of the game against hostiles are fair? Why/Why not?

    Same as above...

    •What do you believe could be done to alter the pace and dynamic nature of the game for the better?

    Make the importance of an economic base more apparent, instead of turning into a game about min-maxing OPA and % buildings. Though part of that is due to the mentality of the players, the conscious decision to remove the importance of base economy buildings like homes and mines - even if the latter was pretty worthless, seriously flattened the economic options available to players. I suppose it's better than it was several years ago when everyone was pegged to the same optimal DR and your army options were 5/5, 5/6, 6/5, or 6/6, with no good hybrid race and t/ms being neutered by the power of chain-raze.

    Totally strip fame/honor from the game so that honorwhore play is a thing of the past. It's been an abused mechanic almost from the moment of creation, and promotes a style of play that is completely un-fun to deal with.

  11. #11
    Enthusiast Twyla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    433
    Honor is actually a good thing. The problem is that Honor is so often awarded for dishonorable activities. And, no, I'm not referring to Spells or Thievery Ops - I mean primarily from bottom-feeding Attackers.

    I feel that Honor Gains should be based on both the Honor of the target and the relative size and NW.


    Just as an example, assume that a Traditional March against an even target transfers 1% of the target's total Honor - 20 points if the target has 2000 Honor.

    Attacking a Province that's an 80% target (combined relative size and NW) results in no transfer of Honor whatsoever.

    Attacking a Province that's below this threshold results in a LOSS of Honor for the Attacker - though no Honor is gained by the target - regardless of the outcome. Attacking a Province which is a 70% target, for example, would result in the Attacker losing 1% of their Honor; 2% @ 60%, 4% @ 50%, 8% @ 40%, etc.

    Should an Attacker manage to succeed against a 125% target (again, combined relative size and NW), they'd gain 2% of the target's Honor - capping at 3% against 150% or larger targets.

    These formulas would be independent of the normal Gains Formula, with only the relative size and NW of the involved Provinces being factors - the size and NW of the two Kingdoms are not factored into this equation.

    Though specifically directed towards non-war inter-kingdom targets, a similar (though slightly more lenient) system should apply to war, while the existing system suffices for intra-kingdom attacks.
    The only people who never make mistakes are those who never try to accomplish anything.

  12. #12
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    It is based on relative honor... or was that changed recently? It was when I played last, and it seems to be the case still.

  13. #13
    Enthusiast Twyla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    433
    I'm not sure. The example above was mainly just to illustrate the concept.
    The only people who never make mistakes are those who never try to accomplish anything.

  14. #14
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,409
    It's definitely not based in a manner as Twyla presented. Honor does need to be looked at or removed, though. Twyla's suggestion is definitely an interesting take on it. Though I think it still abuse-able.

  15. #15
    Enthusiast Twyla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    433
    Per the Guide (in virtually every Age):
    It is important to understand, however, that notoriety only comes by taking risks -- and succeeding. You will not gain honor for taking advantage of smaller, weaker enemies.
    Is it unreasonable to expect the game mechanics to actually live up to this promise?



    PS ~
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezzerland View Post
    It's definitely not based in a manner as Twyla presented. Honor does need to be looked at or removed, though. Twyla's suggestion is definitely an interesting take on it. Though I think it still abuse-able.
    I never said that's how it DID work - I suggested that was the way it SHOULD work.
    Last edited by Twyla; 26-02-2012 at 07:58.
    The only people who never make mistakes are those who never try to accomplish anything.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •