KGB wrote:Negern,I like how they are now where I can manually specify an exact gold total regardless of defender. I typically place better gold sites further from cities so there is an incentive to go there.
If this new way of 'poor, normal, rich' was added but not tied to defender then I'd be OK with that. You can always place extra guards on your 'rich' sites.
You like how it is, to manually have to set -every- site on the map to 0-50 gold if you don't want random? Is that better than having a standard of say 16 on open terrains but still the option to change it to 0-50 and random? Then you see a 16-income one by the side of the road and think" Nah, I don't need to change that", while you could change one in a hard to reach place.
Negern wrote:I still disagree. A gold sack in plain site is FAR less likely to be seen than a ruin. Everyone knows what ruins are. Adding more stuff to the map only complicates the map more than it already is. Besides an actual bag of gold just lying there would have LONG ago been picked up by the local peasants.
If you don't want a ruin I suggest a scenario map. There you can place gold on the ground via the trigger mechanism. Either give it away for free (just stand on the trigger which is equivalent of picking up a bag lying around) or have the player do something else to earn it (conquer a city/rebuild/defeat a guardian etc). That's exactly what triggers are for.
KGB
I don't believe the warbarons players are tards. They will not have problems understanding what function a bag of gold has. It's not complex or hard to understand to place some money on the ground. It could look just like the brown sacks with artifacts in them, to minimize confusion. Perhaps also with a remark: "Only heroes can pick this up".
Pros:
The maker can chose where to put it, both in far of places (giving + to those who scout) and near the roads (speeding up the game a little).
Is in plain view, as long as it's spotted, while gold in ruins can only be seen by studying that specific ruins info screen and it can be done by any player, anywhere on the map, even when it's emptied (only if the player hasn't spotted the emptied ruin).
Can be put in all kinds of terrain, while gold in ruins is restricted to city terrain. Putting 200 in marshes with a wolfrider and some orcs as guards is not possible atm. Or just 56 gold on a nearby mountain, guarded by a crow. Everyone knows they love shiny things.
More freedom for map makers, making maps a little interactive. Can be seen as small quests for those who wish so. "Go into the forest and kill of the troublesome elves". Can also be seen as aesthetical way to make maps more "alive". A razed city not far from a group of giants, guarding the loot, 370 gold. It's not possible with a ruin. + that ruin could ruin the map makers intentions, acting as +wall/+terrain-place for invaders, gryphons would be able to get to "their hood", instead of being easy targets in the hills.
Could give heroes that started far from the fronts in late game something to do. Could even give any hero more to do.
Cons (according to KGB):
Hard for players to keep track of, makes the maps more complicated.
Far less likely to be seen than a ruin.
Local peasants would have picked the gold up long ago.
There are triggers on scenario maps, that's almost the same thing. (Question: but triggers, any kind of unit can use them, correct? Only heroes would be able to pick up the gold. Makes no sense, sure, but who cares, many good things with this game doesn't make sense)
You can add more cons if you wish so.