With that logic, why should Kickstarter even exist then? If I’m “handing over money” for a candy bar, and get a carrot at the end of it, and I “should expect changes” like that, then why should anyone back a project in the first place?
because that’s not what Kickstarter is for – there are two distinct types of kickstarter, and neither of them is based around a direct transaction where you buy a known product for a known price.
The first type of kickstarter is the one we’re unfortunately seeing it mostly used for – the speculative purchase of an in-progress project. In that model, you pay a known price for an unknown product with an unknown production time (you have an idea about the end product, but no guarantees)
The second/less common type of Kickstarter, but the one it was actually designed around, is a model where the product is basically finished and needs help to launch and ship. In that case, you get a known product, but you’re relying on the Kickstarter being met in order to ensure you actually get that product to you. You get get a reasonable idea about how long it should take to produce and ship, but again, no guarantees.
Kickstarter is a marketplace for ideas, experiments and things which don’t work in the traditional marketplace. Proven products don’t go on kickstarter, they go straight to traditional vendors.
1 Like
thats a recipe for disaster
well technically there isn’t a lot of difference between a free to play game and one thats been through kickstarter. the difference being that you have more input into the games direction. you guys seems to only look at the bad things but I have seen more free games and paid games fail because of one simple reason- they do not listen to their players. to me thats what makes this game such a rare find, to me it doesn’t matter if it takes another 5 years until the game is done because there is nothing else like it, and thats why Riot invested
Excuse me, but, This is not the first time a development thread has been derailed into something else. If I come to this thread I expect to read about the Exploration Prototype, Not about kickstarters, development processes or patience or lack of.
Even though it has been a good and instructive read, this is not the thread to do it. Stat a new thread about it where we could share our experiences with early acceses and developments.
Thanks, Have Fun, Kyth.
7 Likes
So I’ve read through the last 50 posts (yes, you’ve read that right) and all I can write is they are in overall very sad but also very true. Just like life. I think we’ve gone too far into Kickstartersophy and too far from Stonehearth.
What I hate about SH development is the devs marked some of the key engine points as let’s see how it unfolds ones. Honestly, if you want to avoid rewriting tons of code later on you should code some basics right at the beginning:
- World size: current maps seem a bit small, I understand the memory-related concerns but why don’t you let us choose the size when we start with a proper disclaimer if chosen size is larger than now. If we should be able to expand the map at some point, code for adding new portion of a map should also exist from early on.
- Exploring the map: this has finally started going and I think the unexplored/fog of war/revealed system known from e.g. Age of Empires would be the best choice. Some further questions are: should buildings remove FOW (my vote: no) and do we need a minimap (my vote: no). FOW is actually a bit hard in SH because we need to fake entities in FOW so we can task to undeploy a chair in FOW but when FOW is removed we get to know the chair is gone.
- Multiple players per session support: even if we won’t get multiplayer mode we may need it for NPC players. Right now manifests are changed when we change kingdom. What if players were to play different kingdoms?
- Object ownership vs available actions: each command should be enabled on per player status (owner/friend/neutral/enemy) as well as per player basis so different players have different commands available to them. This seems small but is important (current implementation forces all the players to share the command - what if I wanted to add a player-specific toggling command like Archers’ arrow swap?). Another concern is about the idea of ownership - how does the game know whether the chair I tasked to undeploy is my chair being moved to inventory or being stolen from another player if it was placed in the middle of the forest?*
- Multiple towns per player: do we want them? If we do, what should they share and what should be separated?
*My idea: selection bar needs to be modified a bit so it shows the player name (see: Age of Mythology). If an object stays too long outside the player’s territory (e.g. too far from the town banner) its player ID is removed and the bar shows no owner. Objects without player ID show commands from the neutral group to all players.
4 Likes
I tend to agree and it tends to go off track when someone starts explaining to those who may not be properly excited by the development path, how little they understand the process.
1 Like
Yes, great post! I was just thinking that the Scout could upgrade to a Ranger!
1 Like
Since there is no new topic for the DT:EP2 i will just throw this idea into this topic. 
My idea would be that you can create a new group, an “exploration group”, that consists of at least 1 Millitary or 1 Worker Hearthling. So the Millitary will be there for deffencive purpose and the worker will build some tents/sleeping spots for the night and carry a wooden crate with him. You could make a new item 
that every worker would equip when member of an exploration group. The group has an additional option window where you declare the resurces that will be collected and stored inside the inventory. The more workers with this item the more inventory space you have available.
For simplicity i will go with the crate for the next part. 
Tasks and Movement:
This means that you will have different task groups. 1 for all hearthlings that are not inside a exploration group (the same system like we have now) and 1 task group that can only be accesed by heartlings that are member of the exploration groub. This would fix the problem with hearthlings from your town running all the way to the mining outpost to mine/haul and members from your exploration group to run all the way back to the town to collect food, build etc.
Let the player be able to place a flag (like the deffend/hold position flag for Millitary Units) that makes tasks that are inside the zone to be only acessable for hearthlings that are members of the exploration group. 
That means all tasks inside the zone are not available for hearthlings that are not part of the exploration group. Plus hearthlings will only haul items that are within a ceartain range of your town every thing outside the town must be declared to be hauled/looted to prevent heathlings to go miles for a random item that where left behind by the exploration group. Also all members of the group will move to the zone. This also means that you schould be able place more than 1 flag to make the zone larger if needet. If there are no flags placed the exploration group will just return to the town and wait at the townflag. 
Also have the “move to flag” too when you only want to explore and not set up a mine.
Travel:
So when night comes and the group is outside the zone/on a move to task the worker will place the crate and the group will set up a camp with a campfire and a place to sleep. Everyone within the group will take food from the crate and eat at the campfire and in the morning the worker collects the crate and than the group moves on.
Maybe let all members of the exploration group carry 1 food item with them so they can eat during the day until they set up camp for the night or make them eat befor they move on.
When inside the zone or no flag is placed they will look for a bed or just set up a quick tent.
Bonus
When you have an acitve exploration group (and the group is inside the zone) there is a chance of a small raid. 1 - 5 Monsters attacking the camp during the day/night. 
Conclusion
This would enable longer jurneys and also allow for a quick mining outpost setup so you can mine some stuff up and carry it home with the group. You still have your main settlement but several small miningoutpost where you can send hearthlings to gather resources and someone that protects the camp and the workers. You will not focus to much on exploration because it is ment to collect resurces or explore/scout the area for the first time and it would make exploration a part of the experience but not take over all of the gameplay. 
Also i think it would be easier to implement 2 taskgroups, that have acces to different tasks and resources, and switch hearthlings between them, than writing an intelligent decission tree for hearthling to decide where to go or what tasks make sens for a them to do right now or where to get food etc. 
You will have to plan explorations in advance (how much food are you going to take with you, how long is the group exploring for) and you can switch very easy between your town and the outpost/exploration group. It would reduce frustration for players that want some hearthlings to mine at far away place and and not having them run back to town to build something or having a hearthling, that should buld a house, run all the way out there to mine some ore. 
So for everyone who is still with me i say thanks for reading 
2 Likes