Update #66: Double Whammy

[Grotesque]

I don't like the stronghold. Its too childish

Also those towers need some trapdoors

[Zoma]

Why childish?

[Fashion Mage]

Are you guys ever gonna do updates on the rest of the classes? Or maybe an update on that spell/ability list that was mentioned previously?

[Commander_Dragon]

Thanks for the update.

 

 

About the stronghold, a remark and a question :

- On stronghold, trees are cut on the outside of the wall, that prevent enemy sneaking on the defenders and allows them to shoot incomings nuisances. It would be more "realist" to cut down those trees.

- Is there more advanced states of the stronghold (yes, I like strongholds...)? Like more buildings, bigger, with moats, catapults on the walls, as you transform your little backwater fortress into a fortified city of respectable size (there certainly seem to be space enough within the walls), with trade and all.

Something even more advanced than Neverwinter Night 2, and if possible with more freedom and possibility to manage it (I don't ask for a strategic game, but as well go all the way to a respectable noble lord, that would be fun for those interested).

Asking to be able to build a small army and launch it on a difficult mission or two, to assist us or even alone, would be awesome, but that might be tricky to implement.

[Bli1942]

Are you guys ever gonna do updates on the rest of the classes? Or maybe an update on that spell/ability list that was mentioned previously?

 

In this update it says the big update is coming soon, and part of it will be the backer site. Then it also says, about the site:

 

"On the right there is our “Game” section of the site, where over the coming months more information and art about the various races, classes, characters, critters, and locations of interest in the game can be found."

 

I'm gonna guess when they put the site up there will already be lots of information on it that we haven't seen before about the characters and abilities etc, then more will be added later on

Edited October 30, 2013 by Bli1942

[JFSOCC]

Silly question perhaps. But regarding the before/after pictures of the Stronghold. Why did you cut down the trees next to the amphitheatre? Would it not make more sense to clear the trees outside the walls? Those would have given cover to enemies the walls are protecting from. The ones near the amphitheatre did not obstruct view of the stage. Instead they gave residents of the stronghold some welcome shade while sitting and watching the show.

Save the amphitheatre trees!

*hands out flyers*

nor would I want to be posted as a guard on the gatehouse, those towers offer little protection!

 

Still cool update. what was the backer site URL again?

Edited October 30, 2013 by JFSOCC

[curryinahurry]

Nice update.  Love the maze and other improvements to the stronghold, except the stronghold wall and particularly the battlements.  Please fix these for the final.  It may seem like nitpicking, but that is the sort of thing that will drive people like me nuts.

[Rabain]

I think we tend to over analyse things we are given now because we have the time to.  If you never saw this before release I doubt you would give a second thought to battlements or missing bricks from broken walls.  You would only be concerned with what you were actually doing in the game.  

 

This is a stronghold not a castle intended as a defensive structure for the rulers of the kingdom or whatever.  Personal strongholds are never the strongest, they are just meant to deter people from attacking.  You don't maintain an army, just enough men (and women) to defend what is yours.

 

Anyway I'm fine with how it looks, it does look very Icewind Dale in style without the depressing setting of the north of Faerun.  I don't want them to spend hours adding more rubble or making the walls look even more broken if that only amounts to a few minutes worth of visual eye candy in the game before I pay for to have it fixed and it disappears forever.  There are more important things to be getting on with.

[Bli1942]

 

This is a stronghold not a castle intended as a defensive structure for the rulers of the kingdom or whatever.  Personal strongholds are never the strongest, they are just meant to deter people from attacking.  You don't maintain an army, just enough men (and women) to defend what is yours.

 

I think the Stronghold could look more dilapidated when you arrive than it does in the screenshot, but we don't know if this is the worst it'll look do we? So could be that they have it looking even worse than in the SS.

 

I agree that it doesn't need to be bigger or have better walls though. Armies aren't gonna be invading this place, it's just to give the guards a higher view and stop people being able to just walk in whenever.

[SmutsMuts]

Maybe a very stupid question but this new site, what's the address to that site? Or is it the old one that's going to be updated soon?

[curryinahurry]

I think we tend to over analyse things we are given now because we have the time to.  If you never saw this before release I doubt you would give a second thought to battlements or missing bricks from broken walls.  You would only be concerned with what you were actually doing in the game.  

 

This is a stronghold not a castle intended as a defensive structure for the rulers of the kingdom or whatever.  Personal strongholds are never the strongest, they are just meant to deter people from attacking.  You don't maintain an army, just enough men (and women) to defend what is yours.

 

Anyway I'm fine with how it looks, it does look very Icewind Dale in style without the depressing setting of the north of Faerun.  I don't want them to spend hours adding more rubble or making the walls look even more broken if that only amounts to a few minutes worth of visual eye candy in the game before I pay for to have it fixed and it disappears forever.  There are more important things to be getting on with.

 

Sorry, but many of us will notice a structure that makes no sense in its composition.  You are certainly entitled to your opinion that the design looks acceptable in your eyes, but for anyone with even a passing familiarity with these types of structures of the history of architecture, those battlements are going to stick out like a sore thumb.  Is it a game killer?  Of course not, but to me it was a pretty glaring oddity, and I can't be unique in this fact since others have commented on this as well.

[sesobebo]

splendid. the backer site was looooong overdue. (:

 

a thought about the stronghold though:

the features of it seem to be scattered around rather randomly - the theater right in front of the main entrance, a couple of buildings smack in the middle of the grounds, etc.

wouldn't it be better if some sort of order or thought process dictated the placing and facing of these features? right now it just does not look habitant friendly or functional to me...

 

 

anyhoo, cant wait for the big-one!

Edited October 30, 2013 by sesobebo

[Osvir]

Brilliant stuff! I'm at work so this will be short.
 

One of Hector's work in progress areas, the player's stronghold, in a ruined and restored state.

I really like this concept :D but I am wondering, is there a chance that... instead of restoring the west building simply into what is shown in the screenshot, could we replace the building with something else? (Stables, Tower/Outpost, Library etc. etc.) choices~ "What do you want to build?"-ish

[Keyrock]

I'm really ashamed of myself that I didn't think of posting this earlier, but better late than never:

 

[J.E. Sawyer]

Brilliant stuff!   I'm at work so this will be short.

I really like this concept :D but I am wondering, is there a chance that... instead of restoring the west building simply into what is shown in the screenshot, could we replace the building with something else? (Stables, Tower/Outpost, Library etc. etc.) choices~ "What do you want to build?"-ish

 

Unfortunately, no.  Swapping sections of the rendered 2D image is trickier than it may seem.

[J.E. Sawyer]

splendid. the backer site was looooong overdue. (:

 

a thought about the stronghold though:

the features of it seem to be scattered around rather randomly - the theater right in front of the main entrance, a couple of buildings smack in the middle of the grounds, etc.

wouldn't it be better if some sort of order or thought process dictated the placing and facing of these features? right now it just does not look habitant friendly or functional to me...

 

Because of how we have to flip tiles of the 2D image, it's difficult for us to position the elements in a way that feels fully natural.  We recognize that elements like the theatre or individual buildings look strange when viewed from a high camera, but it's one of the trade-offs we've accepted for having a lot of upgrades within the stronghold.

[BAdler]

 

I have a question. Do people like me have the same fullfilment site rights as everyone?

• backed the project via PayPal during the Kickstarter campaign;
• didn't backed the project via Kickstarter;
• not a slacker-backer.

 

 

You will be able to access the fulfillment portion of the site just the same.

[BAdler]

Maybe a very stupid question but this new site, what's the address to that site? Or is it the old one that's going to be updated soon?

When it is ready for release, the current site will be updated.

[RedDagger]

So, I've seen the term being used for some time now and I wonder if you guys could spend a moment to think about it.

 

The backer site seems to be coming along nicely and you probably want it to fulfill it's intended goal.

 

Now imagine this example, a random internet person suddenly stumbles on it, likes what is being shown and starts considering spending money on it, but upon reaching the proper page is addressed as slacker.

 

"Oh, slacker, really?!? Am I the slacker here, for wanting to spend money in an unfinished game? No, thanks." It takes less effort to close a browser than complete a Paypal transaction, especially so if they know some fancy keyboard shortcuts.

 

What I'm trying to say is that I don't see anything that stands to be gained by using this particular wording instead of something more .... PR-ized, like 2nd wave backers or something.

 

Sure enough, they may be slackers compared to us, that jumped on this months ago, but not necessarily on the grand scheme of things.

[Lekian]

Great Update! Really enjoyed it last night before falling asleep.

 

Pleaseeeee do not make next update 4 weeks to come, even if its just little updates along the way to the BIG ONE!! 

 

I am really just so excited about this game, keep up the good job!

[C2B]

So, I've seen the term being used for some time now and I wonder if you guys could spend a moment to think about it.

 

The backer site seems to be coming along nicely and you probably want it to fulfill it's intended goal.

 

Now imagine this example, a random internet person suddenly stumbles on it, likes what is being shown and starts considering spending money on it, but upon reaching the proper page is addressed as slacker.

 

"Oh, slacker, really?!? Am I the slacker here, for wanting to spend money in an unfinished game? No, thanks." It takes less effort to close a browser than complete a Paypal transaction, especially so if they know some fancy keyboard shortcuts.

 

What I'm trying to say is that I don't see anything that stands to be gained by using this particular wording instead of something more .... PR-ized, like 2nd wave backers or something.

 

Sure enough, they may be slackers compared to us, that jumped on this months ago, but not necessarily on the grand scheme of things.

If you can't take a joke.......

 

Making things too pr-ized and dry can be a slippery slope as well.

[Lephys]

Unfortunately, no.  Swapping sections of the rendered 2D image is trickier than it may seem.

Heh. I found myself compelled to ask something very similar (what if we could upgrade certain areas into completely different things, or swap structure locations, etc.), in initial response to the update, and suddenly thought, "Oh, wait... this is all just an elaborate illusion. I forgot about that..."

 

Edited October 30, 2013 by Lephys

[SophosTheWise]

 

So, I've seen the term being used for some time now and I wonder if you guys could spend a moment to think about it.

 

The backer site seems to be coming along nicely and you probably want it to fulfill it's intended goal.

 

Now imagine this example, a random internet person suddenly stumbles on it, likes what is being shown and starts considering spending money on it, but upon reaching the proper page is addressed as slacker.

 

"Oh, slacker, really?!? Am I the slacker here, for wanting to spend money in an unfinished game? No, thanks." It takes less effort to close a browser than complete a Paypal transaction, especially so if they know some fancy keyboard shortcuts.

 

What I'm trying to say is that I don't see anything that stands to be gained by using this particular wording instead of something more .... PR-ized, like 2nd wave backers or something.

 

Sure enough, they may be slackers compared to us, that jumped on this months ago, but not necessarily on the grand scheme of things.

If you can't take a joke.......

 

Making things too pr-ized and dry can be a slippery slope as well.

 

 

Also, slacker backer rhymes.

[AGX-17]

Legitimate post this time: What's in all those crates and barrels?

[Kaldurenik]

I do have a few problems with the stronghold. Sure i like the progress you guys are doing. But well i should still give some feedback.

Also yes i know its a work in progress and yes i know its not the entire stronghold.

 

 

To start with the left screenshot:

*The towers / walls are broken and missing bricks / planks yet there are no bricks / planks under the walls. - Also the stronghold is way to clean. Even if it was falling apart.

*The buildings locations are... strange.

*If you compare the 3 buildings falling apart to the one to the top right its day and night... Why are all the other buildings that broken yet that one is "new" (well a broken door and a few broken windows?)

 

Then we have the right screenshot:

*The trees are not cut outside the walls. You as a defender would not want them to get to close to the walls They should be removed / cut down even some of the trees on the other side of the road.

*Why are the trees cut down at the meeting point? I can understand the forest inside the wall at the lower right...

 

 

Both:

*Why is there no way for the defenders to get ontop of the towers? All the towers are missing the... Well the doors that lead ontop...I dont know the words for them.

*The dirt road leading into the fortress is aligned wrong. At this moment it go under the tower.

 

Other then that... if i understand it correctly we will get stats by building things in the fortress i dont see... why our character should get a point in int for building something inside a castle.

Edited October 30, 2013 by Kaldurenik