The Master
Posts: 804
3/28/2016
|
Hazel wrote:
Is this why I haven't been drawing "Call in favors in the Flit?" Because I've been waiting on that one a while, and it's starting to be a bit of a pain.
I'm pretty sure this change didn't do anything to that card, I draw that card earlier today anyways and it still had no requirements so it's just RNG messing with you.
edited by The Master on 3/28/2016
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Lolwolfking
A very ruthless and daring doctor of the neath.
No more gift exchanges, im getting too many and I can barely hold these.
He has knowledge of a certain enigma, ask, you will get a clue.
|
|
|
0
link
|
Kirr
Posts: 44
3/28/2016
|
Have to say I hope the undiscardable conflict system doesn't roll out to all conflict cards. Makes perfect sense to have Hell/Church, Criminals/Constables and Widows/Docks undiscardables, but are we going to get Rubbery Men/Constables? Urchins/Hell? Some of those conflicts were something of a stretch to begin with, which was quirky and unobjectionable when they were optional, but not when you're stuck with them for narrative reasons which are thin at best.
edited by Kirr on 3/28/2016
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Parelle
Posts: 1084
3/28/2016
|
I'd like more of the Urchins/Docks style cards anyway as they increase Favours.
--
Parelle, Lady Joseph Marlen. The Singular Librarian. A Midnighter, a Player of the Marvelous.
pages from a dusty bookshop: a badly updated FL changelog | Useful Guidance and Explanations
|
|
|
+2
link
|
Kirr
Posts: 44
3/28/2016
|
Parelle wrote:
I'd like more of the Urchins/Docks style cards anyway as they increase Favours.
For some reason I haven't drawn that card yet - but if I've got the correct impression from various posts, that would indeed be a good format for the less... implacable conflicts. Do you know if it's discardable?
|
|
|
0
link
|
Grenem
Posts: 2067
3/28/2016
|
Kirr wrote:
Parelle wrote:
I'd like more of the Urchins/Docks style cards anyway as they increase Favours.
For some reason I haven't drawn that card yet - but if I've got the correct impression from various posts, that would indeed be a good format for the less... implacable conflicts. Do you know if it's discardable?
It was. Can't say about is, but it was, once, after the patch, so it probably is.
The minor conflicts it makes sense for siding with one faction to pay out in a roughly balanced manner, while in the major ones each faction feels it's your moral imperative to help their side. I also think we should have some mix ones- where one faction is far more invested than the other.
Hell vs. the church, for instance.
--
Married!:http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/takuza
I will accept all social actions that do not consume free evenings- and i will provide patronage to anyone who requests it, though it will be split between all requesters.
On psudeo-hiatus. Will be inactive and active and fluctuate without warning.
Grinding Favors without cards: http://community.failbettergames.com/topic22266-storylet-favors-grinding.aspx
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Kaigen
Posts: 530
3/29/2016
|
Kirr wrote:
Parelle wrote:
I'd like more of the Urchins/Docks style cards anyway as they increase Favours.
For some reason I haven't drawn that card yet - but if I've got the correct impression from various posts, that would indeed be a good format for the less... implacable conflicts. Do you know if it's discardable? The card has a narrow window in which it can be drawn, so that might explain why you haven't drawn it. You can only draw it if you have sufficient Connected: Urchins and no more or less than 3-4 Favours: The Docks.
--
Just a simple doctor with a chess habit. Publisher of The Flit Dispatch.
"One must remember that the impossible is, alas, always possible."
-Jacques Derrida
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Kirr
Posts: 44
3/29/2016
|
Thanks all! That makes me less concerned about the change. I'll do some favour fine-tuning and see if I can draw the minor conflict card in game.
|
|
|
0
link
|
Anne Auclair
Posts: 2215
3/30/2016
|
Anyone else still have their old Connected Tomb Colonists ranking?
--
http://fallenlondon.storynexus.com/Profile/Anne%20Auclair
|
|
|
0
link
|
Munk
Posts: 41
3/30/2016
|
Anne Auclair wrote:
Anyone else still have their old Connected Tomb Colonists ranking?
Aaayup. Came here to ask about it, as it seems my character hasn't actually undergone the changes.
--
London's greatest thief (until further notice).
|
|
|
+1
link
|
Meradine Heidenreich
Posts: 468
3/30/2016
|
Sorry, suffering from neathy confusion...
edited by Meradine Heidenreich on 3/30/2016
edited by Meradine Heidenreich on 3/30/2016
--
https://www.fallenlondon.com/profile/Meradine%20Heidenreich
The Starveling kit
Gobbled up the bit
of cheese on my tray ..
"O Weh!"
No plant battles, please.
|
|
|
0
link
|
dov
Posts: 2580
3/30/2016
|
The old "Connected" quality remains for a while, until FBG are sure the transition was smooth.
You should see your relevant Favours and Renown qualities in your 'Myself' tab under Contacts.
If none are listed there then you have no Renown or Favours with that faction. Either your original Connected quality was too low, or maybe you did receive some Favours and have already spent them (or there was an error and you should submit a bug report).
--
 Want a sip of Hesperidean Cider? Send me a request in-game. Here's an_ocelot's guide how.
(Most social actions are welcome. Please no requests to Loiter Suspiciously and no investigations of the Affluent Photographer)
|
|
|
0
link
|
Munk
Posts: 41
3/30/2016
|
dov wrote:
The old "Connected" quality remains for a while, until FBG are sure the transition was smooth.
You should see your relevant Favours and Renown qualities in your 'Myself' tab under Contacts.
If none are listed there then you have no Renown or Favours with that faction. Either your original Connected quality was too low, or maybe you did receive some Favours and have already spent them (or there was an error and you should submit a bug report).
Makes sense, as my connections to the colonists sits at 13. I guess the old quality will disappear soon then.
--
London's greatest thief (until further notice).
|
|
|
0
link
|