What does this mean? That you would be showed a price range that the girl could go for in a proper auction?
- Aug 1, 2017
- 1,565
- 1,697
Not that "you would" but that you already are shown the prize.
If a slave is sold in the market for 200$, you have an idea that her stats are worth more than if she was sold 5$. Moreover, you already can see each stats individually with a color code.
All in all, a general "rank" doesn't mean much if it's different from the slave rank everywhere else (I really think it doesn't equate to potential).
The slave rank being different everywhere else is just due to low obedience and skills. You're meant to correct that issue over time in order to reach the slave's natural potential. The rank shown in auctions is the highest rank achievable without raising the basic attributes.
Figuring out the difference between the price of a C+ slave and a B+ slave would be annoying. Even if you could do that, what difference would it be from just seeing the rank? Also I'm pretty sure that there's a lot of flattening in slave prices. What I mean is that the differences in starting slave price are much more subtle than the differences in slave potential.
What I think should be done is that the Raven's Crown should enable you to see the slave rank during auctions. Otherwise it should be hidden. The Raven's Crown is easy to get, even early on. It would make for a nice springboard to the late game, since it's only after achieving financial stability that you would want to raise leviathans or go after slaves of specific and high ranks. The Raven's Crown is also fairly weak right now, so adding this ability to it would help it stand out.
The timing would also be good. In the very early game you want to go after D+ slaves, who are easier to tell apart from the rest based on price. Currently in the game I find myself not buying D+ slaves that cost more than 40 sparks because I know that I can find those if I wait. If I didn't know they were D+ then I'd be at risk of buying an F- or D- slave, so I'd have to consider things more carefully. So hiding the rank in the early game would wind up making the early game more interesting.
Last edited:
Okay, I didn't expect what I considered to be a gameplay and a logical issues to raise to a game-philosophy discussion, but thanks Qwerty for defending this point of view with much more verve and patience than I could ever produce in an english debate haha
There is a very important point I was not aware of: encourage, threaten and put in place have a reduced effect with time. It should be clearer, because it's absolutely not instinctive. If you use it during a whole week you will obtain exactly the same sentence. I saw it change in the rare case where I was using it during a decade, but I was absolutely not sure it was because of the repetition of the action...
I would like to add that for a "end game" perk, put in place is quite easy to use when starting a "normal" game.
...finally... everything has been said, and well said: I just had an instinctive scepticism about a weird situation.
We can talk for ever about it, but, it was a pretty clear case for me:
"With a stern voice you explain to your slave that your good attitude towards her is not infinite."
The slaver punish her every day. She sleeps on the ground. She eats bad food. She has been forced into slavery.
As a slaver who starts training you NEVER have a good attitude towards her (expect when you over-reward her, etc.)
Does not establishing rules beyond "obey me", "sleep on this harsh bedroll", and "be a good slave" can really spoil her?
For me there is a total gap between the nightmare of the early training, with his load of punishments, and you telling the slave "don't act like a spoiled princess": I think in other circumstances she would have just laugh in your face^^ "you just give me to the crowd, but you think its necessary to tell me that "your good attitude towards me is not infinite." ? haha!"
Oooon the other hand... when she starts to become obedient: you punish her less and less. That's where it should be needed to establish rules, and to be REALLY aware to not spoil her.
I already said it, but currently not spoiling a slave is only ticking the same boxes for every slaves. It's not about being easy or difficult: it's just boring. I do not want having to tell to each slave "don't masturbate", to avoid them to be spoiled. Anyway they have other things in mind than thinking about this, I guess...
Finally, increasing the impact of fear could be a first solution. Make "put in place" a more powerful but one-shot action could also be a solution. Slowly increasing the needed rules could be another solutions which I pretty like (in parallel with taming or awareness, eg.)
There is a very important point I was not aware of: encourage, threaten and put in place have a reduced effect with time. It should be clearer, because it's absolutely not instinctive. If you use it during a whole week you will obtain exactly the same sentence. I saw it change in the rare case where I was using it during a decade, but I was absolutely not sure it was because of the repetition of the action...
I would like to add that for a "end game" perk, put in place is quite easy to use when starting a "normal" game.
True: I forgot about it, but you can't spoil very fast a slave because of this feature.
...finally... everything has been said, and well said: I just had an instinctive scepticism about a weird situation.
We can talk for ever about it, but, it was a pretty clear case for me:
"With a stern voice you explain to your slave that your good attitude towards her is not infinite."
The slaver punish her every day. She sleeps on the ground. She eats bad food. She has been forced into slavery.
As a slaver who starts training you NEVER have a good attitude towards her (expect when you over-reward her, etc.)
Does not establishing rules beyond "obey me", "sleep on this harsh bedroll", and "be a good slave" can really spoil her?
For me there is a total gap between the nightmare of the early training, with his load of punishments, and you telling the slave "don't act like a spoiled princess": I think in other circumstances she would have just laugh in your face^^ "you just give me to the crowd, but you think its necessary to tell me that "your good attitude towards me is not infinite." ? haha!"
Oooon the other hand... when she starts to become obedient: you punish her less and less. That's where it should be needed to establish rules, and to be REALLY aware to not spoil her.
I already said it, but currently not spoiling a slave is only ticking the same boxes for every slaves. It's not about being easy or difficult: it's just boring. I do not want having to tell to each slave "don't masturbate", to avoid them to be spoiled. Anyway they have other things in mind than thinking about this, I guess...
Finally, increasing the impact of fear could be a first solution. Make "put in place" a more powerful but one-shot action could also be a solution. Slowly increasing the needed rules could be another solutions which I pretty like (in parallel with taming or awareness, eg.)
By "late-game perk" I mean the ability to drop spoil by a level without having to end the day. When you use it in the early game (and by early game, I mean with lower master stats - obviously you can start the game with high stats, depending on your chosen start), the effect is much less.
As an example, a normal start with Robespierre, and the following slave stats, with level-one spoil, "put in place" reduced the spoil rate by 2 points (out of 10 required to lower the level):
In the context of the setting, when the slaver could just as easily kill in various ways or tie her up and leave her out on the curb with the trash, continuing to train her is showing "a good attitude towards her" ... even if he's punishing her severely.
There are two different issues here. One is, do we want to punish players for not setting rules early in training? The other is, if we do want to punish that, then is raising spoil the right method of punishment?
It's clear that seeing spoil increase in early training due to a lack of rule-setting does not make sense to you. I can see some logic in it but I agree that it's a stretch. I wouldn't object to removing the spoil effect caused by not setting rules. However, that still leaves us with the questions posed above.
I changed my mind on the impact of fear idea during the debate earlier. I don't think we should make spoil easier to remove than it is now. It's not that hard as-is, and making it easier to remove weakens it as a means of penalizing gameplay that we want to penalize. Like under-punishing or over-rewarding. Imagine how easy it would be if you could give unlimited rewards without penalty.
As for making "put in place" a one-shot, that would effectively eliminate its value a perk. Currently, as a perk, it allows you, for a short period (until the diminishing returns make it useless) to do things like over-reward a slave for several days in a row. That might help you get out of a spiral of depression, or motivate her just a bit more so you can complete a training goal before the next arena event or guild auction. If it was a one-shot, it wouldn't allow you to do things like that. As a one-shot, it becomes more of an "oops" button, for players who were not expecting their slave to get spoiled. Sort of like reloading an earlier saved game...
My bad, I took the example with an higher grade in domination
I don't think so... not doing something worse is not "showing a good attitude", it is just not showing a much worse attitude^^' I really think it doesn't make any sense to tell this to a slave that you don't "actively" spoiled by over-rewarding her! But anyway, if we change the way rules are increasing spoil, it will not be a problem anymore (no more spoil unless you actually spoil her).
Honestly I'm not against this principle: it just doesn't really fit the early training... That's why I proposed to increase the number of required rules in parallel with slave obedience.
+ generally it's later in the training that libido increase
So yeah, we can keep the "put in place" action, I agree with you viewpoint: il would just be nice to specify (why not the second time you use it?*) to add a line to specify it'll be less efficient each time
*like for the "promise a gift/reward" actions... and the same apply for encourage/threatening
- Aug 1, 2017
- 1,565
- 1,697
Specifically for that, I can answer that there's not really a need too. The slaver will find out for himself that it ends up not working. It should be "emergent gameplay" so to speak, something to realize through trials and error.So yeah, we can keep the "put in place" action, I agree with you viewpoint: il would just be nice to specify (why not the second time you use it?*) to add a line to specify it'll be less efficient each time
*like for the "promise a gift/reward" actions... and the same apply for encourage/threatening
Because I'm satisfied with the way "Encourage" works, it works, it works, it works and... now it doesn't anymore, you've abused it. That will serve you in your experience as a slaver to understand psychology and git gud by being able to predict behaviors. You don't need the game to notice you before it even happens.
I see what you mean. It's true that I do like when games are more explanatory, like in the Crusader Kings series, if you now it. You exactly know what will work or not, and why.
This said, I can understand that you prefer for the rules of the game to be discovered (even with some pain^^) by the player. We are note quite used to this with modern games.
This said, I can understand that you prefer for the rules of the game to be discovered (even with some pain^^) by the player. We are note quite used to this with modern games.
- Aug 1, 2017
- 1,565
- 1,697
Hahaha I ragequitted the tutorial because my 8yo brother declared war on me and won
In other words, expect the player to keep track of obedience on a daily basis and possibly increase the rule count when a certain obedience threshold (what threshold?) is achieved, because otherwise we will begin to impose a penalty for a rule count that was previously okay...
Not imperatively obedience, it can also be along slave taming, or awareness. In short, something more "organic" than a strict and a bit wanton "two rules needed".
My point is that introducing a penalty based on a changing stat that the player might not be watching constantly is likely to cause spoiling to catch players by surprise quite often. Is that what we want?
- May 27, 2019
- 10
- 9
Posible Bug Report: Can't milk assistant directly and sometimes even when dropping her in the dungeon to do so
P.D: I'm in the last dev build and attached save file
P.D: I'm in the last dev build and attached save file
Honestly it seems to be increased obedience should if anything require less rules, not more. Why does an obedient slave need to have constrained in more and more aspects to avoid spoiling? The process of learning to follow the rules and accept them is a healthy part of training obedience, and if they get used to following rules without having to worry about them, that's a good thing for the slave.
It feels weird that slaves would start to stealth-spoil as they get better behaved due to their rule requirements raising, and it runs counter to the narrative that they are becoming more obedient and easier to manage as they become a better slave. We're training capable workers, not babysitting projects.
As for removing lack of rules causing spoiling... I dunno, I think training slaves to follow rules is an important part of the process. Even if you just go for the easy ones (not masturbating), the fact remains that when those rules are broken there are consequences. Letting your slave just run around rent-free without even following rules seems like something that should lead to behavior issues, especially early game. I mean, if you really want to take a look at this, maybe some kind of balance pass where really easy rules (no masturbation, cook) count for half or some other form of less could be done?
I do agree the harsher rules don't really see much use, because they're draconian, need to be forced, and impart a lot of mental anguish when much easier options are available. I still think needing rules is important though, especially early on in training at the time they're actually likely to be resisted and thus form something close to a meaningful choice. If setting easy rules every slave is a problem, the solution is to make rule choice more meaningful without easy answers all the time, not to remove the need for rules.
It feels weird that slaves would start to stealth-spoil as they get better behaved due to their rule requirements raising, and it runs counter to the narrative that they are becoming more obedient and easier to manage as they become a better slave. We're training capable workers, not babysitting projects.
As for removing lack of rules causing spoiling... I dunno, I think training slaves to follow rules is an important part of the process. Even if you just go for the easy ones (not masturbating), the fact remains that when those rules are broken there are consequences. Letting your slave just run around rent-free without even following rules seems like something that should lead to behavior issues, especially early game. I mean, if you really want to take a look at this, maybe some kind of balance pass where really easy rules (no masturbation, cook) count for half or some other form of less could be done?
I do agree the harsher rules don't really see much use, because they're draconian, need to be forced, and impart a lot of mental anguish when much easier options are available. I still think needing rules is important though, especially early on in training at the time they're actually likely to be resisted and thus form something close to a meaningful choice. If setting easy rules every slave is a problem, the solution is to make rule choice more meaningful without easy answers all the time, not to remove the need for rules.
I thiiink that we could have find an easy way to let the player know that some more rules are needed to avoid the spoiling of her slave... but the idea seems very impopular so I'll just let it carefully packed in the box of the stillborn ideas
Yeah, but it forces you to choose rules which will be broken every morning: so you know that every morning you'll have a punishment to give... It could be interesting if it was effectively increasing the luck for the slave to respect this precise rule, you see? If by asking her to behave like a pet, and punishing her for not doing it, it was decreasing her reluctuance to respect this rule. But currently (unless I'm mislead?) giving her this rule at day 10 or day 1 will absolutely not change the luck that she observes it at day 15.
If you think that rules should be mandatories, it could also be possible to add new rules, requiring less obedience (and being less rewarding - in terms of training - when followed), but that you could really choose from. And, like you said, make the rule choice meaningful.
- Aug 1, 2017
- 1,565
- 1,697
Are you testing the pre-release of the Original Post, or the alpha version posted earlier on this thread?
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Hi,I'm testing the OP version. Seems like energy can be over 5 for slave and assistant for reasons as well.