Q&A

[Poster]

Outstanding.

On the matter of names, as mentioned earlier, would it be doable to simply name the regions? That may be a decent compromise if sufficient fluff is available.

Additionally, I was really digging some of the ideas mentioned above. This title has excellent mod potential in maps alone, units or more would be icing. Have there been any thoughts about mod tools, supported or otherwise?

[FedericoV]

Some questions to Thoram.

- Why the name "Genesis"? It's a biblical term and it does sound out of place for an ASoIaF game. Many fans were a little bit surprised by that choice (not positively).

- A more difficult question: do you think that Genesis is the strategy game that fans of the book (and the TV series) wanted? Or in other simpler terms: have you communicated with the fanbase before you began to design the game?

- The focus on Multyplayer was a conscious decision or a result of the kind of game you wanted to make?

[Thoram]

Some questions to Thoram.

- Why the name "Genesis"? It's a biblical term and it does sound out of place for an ASoIaF game. Many fans were a little bit surprised by that choice (not positively).

- A more difficult question: do you think that Genesis is the strategy game that fans of the book (and the TV series) wanted? Or in other simpler terms: have you communicated with the fanbase before you began to design the game?

- The focus on Multyplayer was a conscious decision or a result of the kind of game you wanted to make?

1. “Genesis” was used because ORIGINS was already taken by Bioware for Dragon Age
Jokes aside, in this case Genesis means beginning, nothing else.

2. As you have probably heard, there is also a RPG in the works and it is a
We haven’t communicated directly with the fans but we were in touch with GRRM and his team. We all wanted something different and we came to the conclusion that an approach closer to a table top / board game would be something cool to try.

3. It was a conscious decision. This game was built for multiplayer right from the start.

[FedericoV]

Thanks for the kind reply and for being so open about the design of your game. You know, I do not like Genesis that much. At least, not as an ASoIaF game. Or maybe just because of its focus on MP (I prefer single player game). But I really respect the open minded and honest attitude you are showing in that thread. It improves my opinion of Cyanide.

[ezeqiel]

Hey Thoram,

You able to answer or reply to any of the other suggestions floating between this thread & the Suggestions box thread?

I really like the boardgame feel to AGOT:G and I'm also glad that there was a real focus on multiplayer & HvH in terms of the balance & mechanics available - but as you've said they were a key part of development from the start, I can't just can't agree or see the need to strip down the lore & theme from HvH and multiplayer in comparison the campaign.

There's so much flavour available in ASOIF, but HvH and multi taste mostly vanilla!

[masterdinadan]

As a big enthusiast of tabletop games, I have to say this definitely felt like one for me, and I love it! It is cool to see that a tabletop feel is what the developers were striving for and not just a pleasant coincidence.

Anyway, a few simple UI suggestions:

-When I make a pact with another player, please show their minimap units in another color besides red. I rely on the minimap to see when enemies have entered my territory, it would be nice to be able to see at a glance that the intruding unit is probably not a threat because it is my pact-ally. I'd also be able to distinguish between my pact-ally and people who are attacking my pact-ally, instead of just seeing a bunch of indistinguishable red dots in my pact-ally's territory.

-Fields need to be easier to see. Scrolling around examining the terrain is frustrating. If a mouse over the farmer hire button, or I select a farmer, please show the fields on the minimap, as well as some indication of whether it is being worked or not.


Some gameplay suggestions that may not be so simple:

-Immunity while being expelled is annoying. If my envoy is in danger and is in enemy territory, I can beeline for an opponent's town with an envoy in order to get expelled and thus save myself. Expulsion should only "protect" my unit once he gets back into my own borders (or maybe even not at all). At any rate, the invulnerability definitely should not kick in immediately. If I've been stalking that Envoy with my assassin and he just got himself expelled, I should have at least a few moments to finish the job before he is under protection.

-Immunity to Great Lords and heirs while delivering an offer of pact is kind of annoying, but I also see the need since the "target" house could easily kill the diplomat if they chose. What if the Great Lord or heir only had immunity against the other player while they were inside their borders (they must still be carrying a pact of course). If I want to stop Tully from killing my Great Lord, I can try sending a pact, but I would have to actually reach Tully territory before he becomes safe - it is not instant protection. Similiarly, once I reach Tully territory, I may still be vulnerable to some other House if they had units inside Tully territory.

[Stefan]

I like these ideas. However, I have to object to the matter of inuvlnerability of envoys, since it makes sense. Nobody knew the game came before he got expelled, but once he did, it's like an official act, making him persona non grata. So, killing him would be bad. Perhaps one could lose Prestige when you kill expelled people (not much, one or two points suffice).

[Skjuludde]

Oh and you probably should open up an official suggestion thread proper.

Another suggestion. Get a new marketing team.

[Ned Stark]

masterdinadan doesn't seem to have a notion of honor. You shouldn't kill the messenger...

As for your fields issue, I mentioned that as well, but then realized you can click on the little green arrow next to the picture of the peasant (when you have him selected) and he automatically searches for the nearest empty field to work, so you don't need to go looking for them...

I do agree about the color of allies, though. I happen to use the maps a lot as well, to keep track of everything going on in my territory. It would be nice if my allies had my color, or a different one. In the campaign they use the color green for some special people. Maybe that could be used?

[masterdinadan]

If we were expecting Houses to be honorable, there wouldn't be assassins and rogues in the first place. I am fine with envoys having immunity to mercenaries and armies (in fact, it might be better if they always had immunity to mercenaries and armies, up until war begins) but I don't think that an assassin should be prevented from killing an envoy just because he just got expelled, considering there is no issue doing so before the expulsion.
If "honor" is an issue, doing the job with an assassin would seem to avoid that, as thematically the perpetrating house can deny any responsibility for the act. Even if the victim knows who did it, they don't have enough "proof" to defame the other House.