Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Othob Rithol]

For anyone that does not like to/does not know how to make tags for colors, links, etc...

I made a copy and paste big red link to this poll. Drop it into any of you threads to draw attention to this new effort.

Code: [Select]

[size=3][color=red]Support the [url=http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=23687.0][u]New Round of Top Suggestions Polls[/u][/url].[/color][/size]

[penguinofhonor]

Just trying to say you'll never know what will be picked as the top choices. Right know more detailed religion has one vote. But it might be the #1 choice of the final poll. What PoH needs is a nifty thread

Thread being made.

Also, I already have a thread on adapting the UI for the expanded window size.

Edit: Thread done!

[Footkerchief]

1. Automatic switching to sparring weapons
2. Improved Resource Management  <== that is a superb set of suggestions
3. Designate "safe area" for civilians to go to during danger

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Improve the morale system

More detailed religion

Interspecies breeding as described in this topic

[Fieari]

Just some comments of i2amroy's suggestions...

1. Editing to damage types open
The ability to edit/create new damage types like BURN and to edit the messages generated from different hits.

How would this work?  The different damage types have different in-game effects... it's not just cosmetic.  Burn damage can actually set things on fire.  Piercing damage can go through multiple organs.  Bludgeoning damage can send someone flying.  And so on.  Any RAW system for damage types would have to have things like this... but that seems like opening up more of the code than is really feasible for RAW.

2. Fixing creatures when smelted or created with itemcorpse
Who here doesn't want to smelt cows? And it would be cool to create some sort of avatar that could raise from a creature on death.

I don't want to smelt cows.  I'd rather that come under magic, really.  On the other hand, ITEMCORPSE creatures would be great for all kinds of reasons.  If you could set a different ITEMCORPSE depending on what damage type killed it as well, that'd be fantastic too... you could have bludgeoning damage drop a lower quality statue for golems, and you could have creatures that spawn copies of themselves unless you kill them with BURN weapons.

3. Ability to buy sand from merchants
A real merchant would sell anything that was profitable to him, (excepting those strange things like body parts) so why can't he sell bags of sand?

No argument.

Anyway, I added your votes regardless, but just wanted to comment on them.

[Fieari]

For everyone who has voted:

When I start the new thread (not for a little longer yet) I want to see what you think of this idea.  Suggestions with 4 or more votes will be added already to the new list, with 1 vote established for those with 4, 2 votes for those with 5, and so on, so these ideas reflect having some momentum.  (The top three would of course be set aside for the top 10 later).

Good idea or bad idea?

[PTTG??]

1 Job Priorities
2 Religion Improvements
3 Farming Improvements

[vanarbulax]

1.Improved Resource Management
2.More detailed religion
3.Farming Improvements

[Dame de la Licorne]

For everyone who has voted:

When I start the new thread (not for a little longer yet) I want to see what you think of this idea.  Suggestions with 4 or more votes will be added already to the new list, with 1 vote established for those with 4, 2 votes for those with 5, and so on, so these ideas reflect having some momentum.  (The top three would of course be set aside for the top 10 later).

Good idea or bad idea?

Seems reasonable.

[Granite26]

For everyone who has voted:

When I start the new thread (not for a little longer yet) I want to see what you think of this idea.  Suggestions with 4 or more votes will be added already to the new list, with 1 vote established for those with 4, 2 votes for those with 5, and so on, so these ideas reflect having some momentum.  (The top three would of course be set aside for the top 10 later).

Good idea or bad idea?

Is there a reason you don't just take the top 10 from this list?

[penguinofhonor]

For everyone who has voted:

When I start the new thread (not for a little longer yet) I want to see what you think of this idea.  Suggestions with 4 or more votes will be added already to the new list, with 1 vote established for those with 4, 2 votes for those with 5, and so on, so these ideas reflect having some momentum.  (The top three would of course be set aside for the top 10 later).

Good idea or bad idea?

Bad idea.

I would prefer the old system of having the top three removed so the other less popular ones can get more votes. The top 3 from the first and second, and the top 4 from the third would be added to the final top 10 list.

If you keep the top voted ones on, then they end up with all the votes in every round and all the other ones get neglected.

[Draco18s]

If you keep the top voted ones on, then they end up with all the votes in every round and all the other ones get neglected.

I have a similar reaction.

[Dame de la Licorne]

If you keep the top voted ones on, then they end up with all the votes in every round and all the other ones get neglected.

I have a similar reaction.

For everyone who has voted:

When I start the new thread (not for a little longer yet) I want to see what you think of this idea.  Suggestions with 4 or more votes will be added already to the new list, with 1 vote established for those with 4, 2 votes for those with 5, and so on, so these ideas reflect having some momentum. (The top three would of course be set aside for the top 10 later).

Good idea or bad idea?

But Fiearl specifically stated that last bolded sentence, which would prevent what you folks are worried about.  At least, I interpreted it as keeping the top three vote-getters out of further polls to determine the new top 10.

[penguinofhonor]

Oh. Well, I don't think that the 4th and onward should be given any extra weight. If they become the top voted suggestions again, then they should be there because everyone voted for them again, not because they managed to beat the other suggestion with more votes due to their 7 meaningless bonus votes.

[Draco18s]

Oh. Well, I don't think that the 4th and onward should be given any extra weight. If they become the top voted suggestions again, then they should be there because everyone voted for them again, not because they managed to beat the other suggestion with more votes due to their 7 meaningless bonus votes.

Exactly, I wasn't worried about the top 3, but the next several.  Besides, if the suggestion isn't as good as one with 3 votes less, then why does it have 3 votes more?