Nosferatiel wrote:
http://www.dict.cc/?s=inofficial

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Inofficial

http://dict.leo.org/ende/index_de.html#/search=inofficial&searchLoc=0&resultOrder=basic&multiwordShowSingle=on



I find enough listings of it, even if at least one dictionary lists it as rarely used.

agh... double post I feel bad ^^"



Well inofficial seems to me as misspelled unofficial that gained popularity (mostly due to lazy/uneducated users of the language) that some dictionaries gave up and included it. It is possible that with time it will became acceptable word but IMO it is not at the moment. I'd say the same case would be "irregardless" when those lazy bum Americans mixed two words and refused to admit they are at fault. Their stubbornness are finally yielding some recognition ^^" (To clarify I have nothing against America, American or British people just some individuals idiocy is just striking but that can be said about any nationality).

I don't think it matters if it's Unofficial or Inofficial. We all know what he means by it. lol

Wredniak2003 wrote:
I really need to replay to this comment and hopefully I manage to be polite and not to offend anyone but I am strongly opposed to any faction whose unit major role can be described as "annoy the enemy". I didn't play a lot of MP games as I'm not a big fan of that but there was one notable exception to that rule in form of AoW 2. And boy that game had a lot of ways to annoy your opponents and make their life harder. After some time we knew who was likely to do that and simply refused to play with them. All truly enjoyable MP games I had in AoW 2 involved some kind of gentlemen's agreement that we do not use those kind of tactics even if that sometimes meant making sub-optimal choices. Because things like chasing one unit for X turns over whole map or entering battle with one unit and casting Armageddon although are legitimate strategies (especially in SP) makes MP play frustrating. So idea of entire race based on the concept of "annoying your opponent" seems like worst nightmare for me. And I'm pretty sure I'd never enter any MP game unless all players agreed that this faction is banned.

I admit that due to number of the submission and my busy live I only read few first sentences of most races and skipped to "faction traits" to get a feel of factions and although I remember reading about guerilla faction only this comment got me to react. (And the reaction was rather extreme ^^" but I chose to filter that out)

My idea of guerilla warfare wasn't annoying enemy player <_< My faction idea was built around gameplay concept of them relying on Minor Factions and so the idea was that faction units themselves are weak and can't be really used offensively, but they can be used to support minor faction units. By themselves you can play defensively/stall enemy for little while, but you would invetably lose and their abilities would be better using for support purposes or spying on enemies. Like, getting defensive bonuses in their home terrain, being hidden to enemies in terrains with cover and laying traps that cause effects, sabotage enemy units causing them debuffs and such stuff inspired by guerilla warfare. So basically they start out as really weak so they have to ally with minor factions to make their defense better and when they are allied with enough villages they can switch defensive playstyle to offensive.



Should I make that clearer in original post that by guerilla warfare I don't mean I imagine them to be the most annoying faction to play agaisnt? Or do the mechanics I described in my original post sound like they will be annoying no matter what?

I'll just say I'm german and there's only "inoffiziell" and never "unoffiziell" in my language, so it might be an easy mistake to make should it be the other way round in english, if it is a mistake after all (different dictionaries disagree on that matter). Back to topic, people.

ResonanceMask wrote:
My idea of guerilla warfare wasn't annoying enemy player <_< My faction idea was built around gameplay concept of them relying on Minor Factions and so the idea was that faction units themselves are weak and can't be really used offensively, but they can be used to support minor faction units. By themselves you can play defensively/stall enemy for little while, but you would invetably lose and their abilities would be better using for support purposes or spying on enemies. Like, getting defensive bonuses in their home terrain, being hidden to enemies in terrains with cover and laying traps that cause effects, sabotage enemy units causing them debuffs and such stuff inspired by guerilla warfare. So basically they start out as really weak so they have to ally with minor factions to make their defense better and when they are allied with enough villages they can switch defensive playstyle to offensive.



Should I make that clearer in original post that by guerilla warfare I don't mean I imagine them to be the most annoying faction to play agaisnt? Or do the mechanics I described in my original post sound like they will be annoying no matter what?

I read your idea of units and I'd say I think defensive bonuses for them are good idea. Traps probably could be used as well provided you are not able to spam them so I can't move without getting into one of them. Sabotaging other cities I think may be a problem as you don't really have a good way to counter react that. There is no mechanism at the moment to catch or counter that unit. I think it could be balanced by being extremely squishy. However; my advice would be... do not worry about that. We design units in the 2nd phase of the contest so no point in over thinking it atm. As I said I was responding more to the comment about your faction than to your faction if that makes a sense ^^". My only comment about what potentially I'd find annoying in your faction is the Hidden Village, but as long as I know in which region it is then I think it is fine. Rising 3-4 villages is not a problem. If it was every village of assimilated race it would be different, but it isn't.

Wredniak2003 wrote:
I read your idea of units and I'd say I think defensive bonuses for them are good idea. Traps probably could be used as well provided you are not able to spam them so I can't move without getting into one of them. Sabotaging other cities I think may be a problem as you don't really have a good way to counter react that. There is no mechanism at the moment to catch or counter that unit. I think it could be balanced by being extremely squishy. However; my advice would be... do not worry about that. We design units in the 2nd phase of the contest so no point in over thinking it atm. As I said I was responding more to the comment about your faction than to your faction if that makes a sense ^^". My only comment about what potentially I'd find annoying in your faction is the Hidden Village, but as long as I know in which region it is then I think it is fine. Rising 3-4 villages is not a problem. If it was every village of assimilated race it would be different, but it isn't.

Hmm, yeah, I thought same thing about traps as well <_< It'd be annoying if they could be put without limit to every tile. I didn't make mention of that though since my unit ideas might be completely ignored anyway since part 2 of the contest is the unit design, I just tried to give description of what they could be like to give readers better idea of their gameplay.



I figured out that since they should be weak on their own, they'd be too weak if you know where their capital right away. Plus its location being hidden fits with guerilla theme. I also wanted to compensate for the fact that their "cities" are located on minor faction villages. I'm admittedly not good at balancing since I haven't done this before, so I guess its possible that they wouldn't actually need hidden village. Either way, I think gameplay idea would be interesting to play. I haven't seen any strategy game have guerilla faction either so I'd think it'd be fun to have one.

Wredniak2003 wrote:
I really need to replay to this comment and hopefully I manage to be polite and not to offend anyone but I am strongly opposed to any faction whose unit major role can be described as "annoy the enemy"....

I think I choosed the wrong word. Sorry. Distract the enemy would be better in the context of guerilla warfare. That he has the feeling that there is something that lurks somewhere in the shadows, ready to strike. Even if there is nothing. But there is this paranoia he has when he is in the realm of the enemy.



Edit:

Distract is not the right word either. I don´t know...

To make them feel uncomfortable is better I think.

Does anyone have any concerns or hate anything about my faction? I'm starting to think it may need a rework or something and I'd love to hear what others have to say.

Well, I don't really see how Minor Factions fit in with them, besides the "Possibly uses Minor Faction-only resources" thing EDIT- and toxic diplomacy, which might actually be a cool concept, but might be difficult to implement. But that might just be me not liking the idea of having factions work in too many different ways... -EDIT. Also, I do agree the name should change as it sounds like (and shares a short version with) the Broken Lords.



Also, if you insert a link while having text marked, it should make the selected text into the link, which would make your signature more stylish. Like mine.

RariShyZealot wrote:
Well, I don't really see how Minor Factions fit in with them, besides the "Possibly uses Minor Faction-only resources" thing EDIT- and toxic diplomacy, which might actually be a cool concept, but might be difficult to implement. But that might just be me not liking the idea of having factions work in too many different ways... -EDIT. Also, I do agree the name should change as it sounds like (and shares a short version with) the Broken Lords.



Also, if you insert a link while having text marked, it should make the selected text into the link, which would make your signature more stylish. Like mine.

Yeah I hear you. I've been thinking that having both the Alchemy system and Toxic Diplomacy might be a bit much. Since the theme is Minor factions it's probably the Alchemy bit that might have to go, so I'll need to further build upon their diplomacy bits. Since my original idea was for the player to have to choose whether they wanted the Minor factions units or bonuses, or try and wait for their special cultural gems I'll have to think of another reason to hold off on assimilation until Toxic Diplomacy wears off that doesn't involve alchemy :/



Would you or anyone else have some ideas they'd like to share?

hellstork wrote:
Yeah I hear you. I've been thinking that having both the Alchemy system and Toxic Diplomacy might be a bit much. Since the theme is Minor factions it's probably the Alchemy bit that might have to go, so I'll need to further build upon their diplomacy bits. Since my original idea was for the player to have to choose whether they wanted the Minor factions units or bonuses, or try and wait for their special cultural gems I'll have to think of another reason to hold off on assimilation until Toxic Diplomacy wears off that doesn't involve alchemy :/



Would you or anyone else have some ideas they'd like to share?

Hmm, the alchemy part of the idea does sound cool though... Yeah, I'm not really sure what you should do with the idea. I think the idea is cool, but it might not fit the theme well.

RariShyZealot wrote:
Well, I don't really see how Minor Factions fit in with them, besides the "Possibly uses Minor Faction-only resources" thing EDIT- and toxic diplomacy, which might actually be a cool concept, but might be difficult to implement. But that might just be me not liking the idea of having factions work in too many different ways... -EDIT. Also, I do agree the name should change as it sounds like (and shares a short version with) the Broken Lords.



Also, if you insert a link while having text marked, it should make the selected text into the link, which would make your signature more stylish. Like mine.

By the way will there be some kind of filtering out suggestions that fall outside the theme?



I'm really weighting many ideas but part of the issue is there are gameplay element we can't be sure won't be regular features later (terraformation, for instance?) So faction specific element wouldn't end up being that specific in the end.

People should always keep in mind that this are just rough ideas of races and their actuall implementation of them into the game isent 1:1 so game mechanics (of the alpha) shouldnt someone prevent from liking something. Important is their overall "aura".

I'm not sure if they'll filter out things that don't fit the theme, but it seems likely. Most factions seem to be themed around something, and I think the devs want us to make the faction themed around Minor Factions because they don't have one planned yet. I wish this contest could be about anything so I could have my Alchemists Xenophobic "Rock-Cyborg" Cave People, but it's looking like I'll have to be making some sacrifices

hellstork wrote:
I'm not sure if they'll filter out things that don't fit the theme, but it seems likely. Most factions seem to be themed around something, and I think the devs want us to make the faction themed around Minor Factions because they don't have one planned yet. I wish this contest could be about anything so I could have my Alchemists Xenophobic "Rock-Cyborg" Cave People, but it's looking like I'll have to be making some sacrifices

Before they announced the contest, and reading about the Roving Clans and the raging wizards, I was expecting them to do something about the minor factions. Wasn't expecting them to use players as source of flavor. And as much as I can think of "cool" races with "cool" abilities that also happen to do something with minor factions, a faction designed/focused to play with minors to do "cool" stuff is more likely to fit better.



I'd agree that "about anything" would be sweet but also more difficult to filter/decide.

dont worry be happy

so far i enjoined everything i have read and again all of our ideas are just rough ideas.

well, amplitude is going to trim the total amount of factions down before we get to vote.

Adventurer_Blitz wrote:
well, amplitude is going to trim the total amount of factions down before we get to vote.

I'm wondering whether they'll trim the group, before, or apply restrictions on the feasibility of some concepts, after.

Okay thank you all for the answers, I think I got my idea :> Now time to draw a badass concept pic!

i imagine it is going to be a lot like their votes for the new items in DotE though they may do something differently. perhaps organizing several different but similar ideas into categories, voting for the best one, then pitting the winners against each other in a democratic battle to the death?