Victory Conditions

[TheFirstONeill]

What are peoples views on victory conditions?

Would you rather be given a certain amout of freedaom, by just having to control X amount of regions,
Or do you prefer to have to take certain regions/destroy certain factions ?

Up until now I have gone for the former option as I like the player to have as much freedom as possible, rather than forcing them to expand in a predicted direction

I would like to here feedback for the fine tuning of V3

[Borissomeone]

Would you rather be given a certain amount of freedom, by just having to control X amount of regions

I prefer the freedom of only aiming for a certain amount of regions, that way I can direct my rage at whomever makes me angry in game. Had a thought, what about if you lose your main city (capital) possibly the faction could be defeated if this was to happen (despite what cities they had left).

[toluas]

I prefer freedom to choose. Although some "important" settlements to be held make a lot of sense (differing from faction to faction). Under no circumstances something like: hold 30 settlements; followed by a list of 30 settlements! Destroying factions makes sense, too - but some factions seem natural targets for others (Barka/Pale Knights), while others might not have those targets, so it might become a balancing issue...
So some major settlements to be held, coupled with a lot of freedom otherwise.

[Jean=A=Luc]

I'm kinda torn on this.

As you say the player should be free and not funneled into a specific course of conquest.

Then again specific victory conditions could really give flavor to some of the factions' back stories like Privateers having to hold the Vatican and maintain a presence in the New World or Romuli/Uruks having to destroy each other etc.

One thing comes to mind though. Short/long campaigns provide us with two sets of victory conditions so why not keep the long campaign as it is, in free-roam/conquest mode, and change the short campaign into a kind of a "lore/story campaign" with victory conditions that are more in line with factions' backgrounds.

Everybody wins, eh? Except those who want to play a short campaign. But does anyone even do that? Though I have a feeling "story campaigns" would generally be shorter anyway.

[toluas]

I'm kinda torn on this.

As you say the player should be free and not funneled into a specific course of conquest.

Then again specific victory conditions could really give flavor to some of the factions' back stories like Privateers having to hold the Vatican and maintain a presence in the New World or Romuli/Uruks having to destroy each other etc.

One thing comes to mind though. Short/long campaigns provide us with two sets of victory conditions so why not keep the long campaign as it is, in free-roam/conquest mode, and change the short campaign into a kind of a "lore/story campaign" with victory conditions that are more in line with factions' backgrounds.

Everybody wins, eh? Except those who want to play a short campaign. But does anyone even do that?

I like this idea! No, I have never known anybody to play a short campaign; why should anybody?

[Jean=A=Luc]

I've never played a short campaign in my life. Better to start a long one and then ditch it if you get bored.

[TheFirstONeill]

I could rename them from 'Short' and 'Long' campagins to something else, maybe Domination and Extermination.

Domination can be the free roaming campaign (hold x number of regions)

Extermination can be must destroy faction X and Faction Y (maybe one close and one distant), and you must hold the factions own 'spirtual' home (demos for uruks, Glastonbury for Avalon etc)

[QuiQuaeQuodOrNot]

I could rename them from 'Short' and 'Long' campagins to something else, maybe Domination and Extermination.

Domination can be the free roaming campaign (hold x number of regions)

Extermination can be must destroy faction X and Faction Y (maybe one close and one distant), and you must hold the factions own 'spirtual' home (demos for uruks, Glastonbury for Avalon etc)

I totally agree with this idea because I never played any "short" campaigns. At least there was no reason to play a short campaign. If the time passes faster in the short campaigns I would maybe give them a try.

[Jean=A=Luc]

Sounds good. The campaign names are very fitting.

[maximius serbus]

It can be mixed,to hold X amount of regions and to hold certain regions/destroy certain factions.I never folow VC,but I think that AI is better if there is certain regions/destroy certain factions.
I like domination and extermination idea that would be great

[Julianus Flavius]

I think just 30 settlements, but the only compulsory one being your capital and one other city nearby, that should encourage people to establish a strong heartland for their empire.

[Fomalhaut]

Is it possible if you make certain factions play like Crusades Campaign in Kingdoms? As in the need to control a particular region for a certain amount of turns. I'm thinking that this will fit best with the Pale Knights, Barka Sultanate and Vashta Sultanate factions as they are most like the Crusades Campaign.

[mattgoby]

freedom always freedom as my lao che campaign is one of the best ive evercome across and im fighting urks romuli privateers andaztecs it just gives u themore fun

[Ozzmosis]

IMO some factions ought to have "blood enemies" so that they have to defeat their enemy nation: Romuli must defeat uruks (and vice versa), Vashta - Dracule, Lao Che - Tahar, Privateers - Vatican.

[Tyrenia]

I like the idea of the Long/Short campaign with differing victory conditions Give us the best of both worlds!

[TheFirstONeill]

Long and Short campaigns have been renamed Domination and Vengeance

[toluas]

Long and Short campaigns have been renamed Domination and Vengeance

Great!
+rep to you and JAL for implementation and idea

[TheFirstONeill]

JAL PHAH !! what did he do ....

[toluas]

C'mon, he's not that bad...

[TheFirstONeill]

C'mon, he's not that bad...

Of course not, he is a lovely chap



but he did actually just describe the current differnent sets of victory conditions aready contained in the beta