You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

AoW3: General Discussion & suggestions
Moderated by Swolte, Enginerd, ChowGuy

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.41 replies
Age of Wonders 2 Heaven » Forums » AoW3: General Discussion & suggestions » The list of things that need a fixing
Bottom
Topic Subject:The list of things that need a fixing
nyarlathotep
Member
posted 04-04-14 08:55 AM EDT (US)         
So, this is not intended as a big basher thread, more as pointer to the things we really would like to see fixed so that we can enjoy the game in in its fullest.
Feel free to post your own suggestions.

* The mouse config & reaction:

The biggest gripe I have is with how you can involuntarily put your units in grave danger because this rather strange set-up. Especially units who rely on ranged attacks have had to bite the dust a lot due to this problem.

When you left-click the ranged attack of your choice and hover over the intended target, you have to right-click to actually fire upon the enemy. Now, the symbol that says you have aquired a lock is smallish and rather generic. In the first 2 seconds, you get a nice break-down of how much & what sort of damage you'ld do, but it's gone very soon and if there's a possible target right next to them, it does not always give you that info. Now, if you would be off a hex from the target and pointing on a blank space and you don't keep a hawks eye on the pointer, the unit immediately runs to that empty hex.
While a developped hero or some sturdy range-attacking unit might survive that missclick, there's enough ranged units who are so bad at melee combat that you'ld loose them surely.

In a tactical combat game, such a situation should really be avoided. As the fields of battle are more cramped in Aow3 as to SM, the field becomes cluttered pretty soon. Visibility goes down and that misfated missclick is bound to happen.

* Standardized battlefields

While not exactly a true error, I find that battlefields look exactly the same per structure. In SM, there was a certain amount in randomness of how obstacles were placed, but here in AoW3 everything is fixed.
If you fight in a goldmine, you get the same lay-out for every other goldmine, down to the last stone. A bit of randomized placing of obstacles would be good to fight back the repetitive nature of the tactical combats.

Proud mapmaker for the UPatch team
One gas to rule them all, One gas to find them
One gas to bring them all and with the Spice we bind them
Creator of the following maps: RenaissanceEarth, RoadToHell, YeOfLittleFaith, FrostbiteDelirium, Stormy Seas
Co-creator for: CityDwellers
together with TravisII
AuthorReplies:
ChowGuy
HG Cherub
posted 04-04-14 09:07 AM EDT (US)     1 / 41       
While not exactly a true error, I find that battlefields look exactly the same per structure. In SM, there was a certain amount in randomness of how obstacles were placed, but here in AoW3 everything is fixed.
If you fight in a goldmine, you get the same lay-out for every other goldmine, down to the last stone.
It was that way in AoW1 as well. Even towns had fixed layouts based on their (immutable) size; other then walls there were no buildable structures. Like the combat leaders, this is in many ways a return to the series roots.
darkelvesrule
Member
posted 04-04-14 11:04 AM EDT (US)     2 / 41       
I disagree. I'm liking the tactical combat more, the more time I spend playing it. The pop-ups do go away if you move the mouse around, but just move it back to the target and it pops up again. If you're dying too quickly, then maybe you should change your tactics, and not use ones that worked previously (the uselessness of archers in AoWSM was pretty annoying). It's all about the flanking.

For example, figure out the computers movement range, then move back to outside of it the first round. Cast a spell, arrange your guys, get ready to flank.

Or, this almost seems like an exploit... attacking a city without walls (just obstacles), the computer AI is stupid and sometimes its ranged guys hang back a hex (instead of right behind the obstacle) and try and fire through the obstacle (they do almost no damage). This lets you move up on your first turn. Then you send in a melee guy to knock down the obstacle, put your ranged guy right behind him and blammo, and your hero is still protected.
nyarlathotep
Member
posted 04-04-14 12:05 PM EDT (US)     3 / 41       
Archers weren't useless in SM... they just did cost you a lot in terms of upkeep.

Proud mapmaker for the UPatch team
One gas to rule them all, One gas to find them
One gas to bring them all and with the Spice we bind them
Creator of the following maps: RenaissanceEarth, RoadToHell, YeOfLittleFaith, FrostbiteDelirium, Stormy Seas
Co-creator for: CityDwellers
together with TravisII
TravisII
Member
posted 04-04-14 07:04 PM EDT (US)     4 / 41       
My only true complaint are the mouse controls. Yes they can be gotten used, but since I am actively playing AoWSM still (for PBEM games) I keep messing up.

It would be nice if the tactical maps had some variations.

As a minor complaint, Emperor AI don't seem to be as challenging as they should be!

#7373DE for Humans #EFB573 for Azracs #4AA58C for Lizard Men #9CC6E7 for Frostlings |SM|> #E4ED38 #EBEBEB #CC2D29 #CC29D5
#6BB54A for Elves #EFE773 for Halflings #D6AD8C for Dwarves #EFEFDE for High Men |SM|> #DE8EA4 #F09245 #D2BE92 #BDBDE8 #558CDD
#B563BD for Dark Elves #F74242 for Orcs #BD7352 for Goblins #947B73 for The Undead |SM|> #1DDB38 #83795A #2CAAA4 #AC762A
Colors for AoW1 and AoWSM **A Proud Member of the Unofficial Patch Team!** ~2010 AoWSM PBEM Singles Champion~ http://blog.noblemaster.com/
you3
Member
posted 04-05-14 09:02 AM EDT (US)     5 / 41       
I have two complaints:

the mouse #1 (but I've already mentioned this numerous times)

I would like to see wounded troupes suffer lost of attack when severely wounded. Being able to hit with full strength with 5% hit points left is not very pleasing (to myself).
-
Minor thing is I would like to see bigger and more complex battle maps and such - but I think this will come eventually.
TravisII
Member
posted 04-05-14 03:04 PM EDT (US)     6 / 41       
I agree with the wounded troops thing. It's really odd. I think I would almost prefer all units to still be alive, then when they are killed, they all fall over dead. That wouldn't make much sense, but I think it would make more sense than the current formula. Earlier some Archer that was nearly dead (last man standing) flanked one of my weak units and completely killed them. The unit he killed had more than 3 "bodies" so it was quite humorous to see him shoot 3 arrows and kill them all. Mad skills!

#7373DE for Humans #EFB573 for Azracs #4AA58C for Lizard Men #9CC6E7 for Frostlings |SM|> #E4ED38 #EBEBEB #CC2D29 #CC29D5
#6BB54A for Elves #EFE773 for Halflings #D6AD8C for Dwarves #EFEFDE for High Men |SM|> #DE8EA4 #F09245 #D2BE92 #BDBDE8 #558CDD
#B563BD for Dark Elves #F74242 for Orcs #BD7352 for Goblins #947B73 for The Undead |SM|> #1DDB38 #83795A #2CAAA4 #AC762A
Colors for AoW1 and AoWSM **A Proud Member of the Unofficial Patch Team!** ~2010 AoWSM PBEM Singles Champion~ http://blog.noblemaster.com/
morgul666
Member
posted 04-06-14 03:14 AM EDT (US)     7 / 41       
I think this topic was and obvousily is one of the most controversial issues of the game and I would also vote for an adaptation of the damage formula in direct connection with the stack size of the attacking stack.
E.g. apply a congruency between damage and stack size.

actual damage range = max damage range * actual stack HP divided by max stack HP

this would mean if a stack is decimated down to e.g. 70% of it´s HP it´s damage range of e.g. 10-20 would be reduced to 7-14.

Author of the following maps for AOWSM:
Version 1.4: DEMONWARS II (Transcendence & Immortalis)
Version 1.3: (also playable in 1.4) Gates to another World 1.4
><-><-><- Planning replaces coincidence by error. -><-><-><-
nyarlathotep
Member
posted 04-06-14 04:08 AM EDT (US)     8 / 41       
Let's just hope that - if the devs do that change- you get to do at least a minimum of 1 damage with the extra powers of the unit (like cripling shot for a ...veteran?... archer unit).
Non-optimal range gives already quite some negative bonuses, but we all know lots of people here have MoM in mind, where your squad became weaker the more men you lost

Proud mapmaker for the UPatch team
One gas to rule them all, One gas to find them
One gas to bring them all and with the Spice we bind them
Creator of the following maps: RenaissanceEarth, RoadToHell, YeOfLittleFaith, FrostbiteDelirium, Stormy Seas
Co-creator for: CityDwellers
together with TravisII
darkelvesrule
Member
posted 04-06-14 08:44 AM EDT (US)     9 / 41       
I can't imagine them changing the wounded troops and amount of damage they cause. It's a little weird, but that would be a huge balance change at this point, and everything would have to be reanalyzed.
you3
Member
posted 04-06-14 10:25 AM EDT (US)     10 / 41       
I'm not sure I totally agree on the balance issue as it would impact each side equally.
ArkhanTheBlack
Member
posted 04-06-14 10:35 AM EDT (US)     11 / 41       
I think they should change it to at least damage per squad member. There were simply too much complaints about it and it was a major point of criticism in most reviews I've read. It's simply not intuitive the way it is now.
Currently they have to rebalance the game anyway because the research is too fast, T4 spamming, etc. Steam also allows beta branches which allows for a major rebalancing without disturbing the end users.
Otherwise the complaints will continue for the whole life-time of AOW3. Besser deal with it now when the game is still new and rough around the edges anyway.
It also makes things more balanced since it's possible to weaken killer squads of doom before they wipe out everything that comes into melee or archery range.
They can compensate the squads by giving them more health points. This will also allow those units to act more as tar pits that soak up damage and make them more distinct to single model monsters.
Triumph Studios claim that AOW3 has its main focus on combat, and so they should deal with major complaints like this.
ChowGuy
HG Cherub
posted 04-06-14 11:48 AM EDT (US)     12 / 41       
{mod hat OFF]

Since this thread is rapidly devolving into a single topic, I might as well weigh in on it.
I think they should change it to at least damage per squad member. There were simply too much complaints about it and it was a major point of criticism in most reviews I've read. It's simply not intuitive the way it is now.
While this might seem more "intuitive" to do it by "squad member" based on the graphic rendition, it's no more so in terms of combat effectiveness of the unit/company/battalion as a whole. I've argued for years that damage done should be proportional at least in part to the remaining HP versus Max HP. That should apply to large and powerful mobs represented as single units as well as groups of smaller units. Think about it - a heavily wounded dragon should effectiveness also. Basing damage solely on the visual representation (which for some units will be reduced as their HP decreases but not the more powerful ones favors the latter, and only reinforces the tendency to go for killer stacks as soon as possible. In the RW, grunts are still the backbone of any army but in the current gaming model this is lost.

Yes, there will be balance problems though, not because it affcts sides unequally, but because it affects the power vs cost of individual units. I trust Triumph to been able to handle that during development, but I don't know. Now it may be too late
ArkhanTheBlack
Member
posted 04-06-14 12:30 PM EDT (US)     13 / 41       
I think the all or nothing approach would also work if they don't want to rebalance everything now.
Currently the visual feedback gives the false impression of a weaker damage output. The main problem would therefore be solved with that approach.

The Master of Magic way had a lot more consequences than just damage scaling. Half of the fun was that it had a huge impact on unit leveling.
Single models units usually didn't get much health on level upgrades, but multi member units usually got a health point for each squad member.
Elite squads could therefore end up with huge amounts of health, especially with Warlord trait.
Though, if Triumph would want to go that far it might be better to delay the whole thing for an expansion.

Still, it's a complaint on a high level. The battle engine is fantastic otherwise. I always wanted a quick fight system with a semi-realistic army look like in a Total War game. It just looks so epic.
Furthermore, in a HoMM battle system, I can't figure out an army strength before reading all the number counts of the units, while in AOW3 I just need one look on the battle field to get an immediate impression of the army strength.
So I just want the current system to ascend to 'great' instead of just staying on 'very good'.

[This message has been edited by ArkhanTheBlack (edited 04-06-2014 @ 12:31 PM).]

COCONUTKNIGHT
Member
posted 04-06-14 12:32 PM EDT (US)     14 / 41       
Yeah the balancing issue would be that things like archers weuld be the obvious choice.

Weakening a unit before you get to fight it would be a complete no brainer.

Also, abilities like heal would be even more broken than they already are.

There are ways to solve this but it would require a complete rethink of the game model.

I think a system whereby the unit effectiveness tails off at 75% hp and then at 50% hp would be alright, because otherwise, once you weaken t1 units (using a sliding scale) to 20% effectiveness, you might as well get rid of them, and the current thinking is of ways to make t1 units more useful, not less.

Take an old, dirty, hungry, mangy, sick and wet dog and feed him and wash him and nurse him back to health, and he will never turn on you and bite you.

This is how man and dog differ.
Sunicle
Member
posted 04-06-14 01:10 PM EDT (US)     15 / 41       
It's mainly a cosmetic issue. Units are now graphically represented by several units, but we need to remember they are still count as one unit. We cannot do things like splitting them up or letting a Draconian hatchling grow into eight separate dragons...
Nothing's too different here from some other games. Personally I've played Civ 5 a lot, followed their forums intensively and I've never come across a sound of discontent over this in their game. Okay, there's a slight reduction of damage you do when you're wounded in Civ 5, but it's very marginal. Yes, I've seen people say that Japan is too weak, as their special ability is that wounded units deal the same damage as when they still were at full health, and that of course makes very little difference in the game, but even after concluding that people didn't turn against the damage calculation system for wounded units as a whole.

AoW seems to be judged by very different standards. I do agree in there's a discrepancy between graphics and mechanics now when it comes to unit strength, but I don't find it such a big deal. Triumph probably just wanted the battles to play out as quickly as possible, so they made small battle maps, restricted the army size to 6, decided attacks would never miss, and they avoided damage reductions for wounded units.
I hope Triumph will introduce some strength reduction to wounded units, but just a small one will do for me.

A bigger issue I have with the XP awarding system. There's no fixed amount of XP per enemy unit, instead more attacks = more XP. So now we can consider fighting inefficiently for XP grinding.
It's ironic that Triumph have done this in a game where they wanted the battles to play out quickly...

The mouse configuration I find very good, now that I've seen what they've done.
Left button gives info, right button gives action, this is done very consistently. It's not the muddled system where left-click sometimes gives info, but sometimes performs your action as well and so miss-clicks are bound to happen. With AoW III no unit will do anything until you deliberately right-click for action. This system seems very fool-proof, I'm hoping more games will follow suit.
ChowGuy
HG Cherub
posted 04-06-14 03:34 PM EDT (US)     16 / 41       
A bigger issue I have with the XP awarding system. There's no fixed amount of XP per enemy unit, instead more attacks = more XP. So now we can consider fighting inefficiently for XP grinding.
Agreed, and I've seen this "exploiting for more XP" issue raised elsewhere. Another of my pet peeves has always been the "last blow gets all the XP" rule, which I've always felt favored the creation of uber heroes at the expense of balancing an army, and this "XP per blow" is perhaps Triumph's answer to that, but it's badly broken to the point that it's even worse.

A better way perhaps and one I suggested before would be awarding a fixed total XP, rationed per attack based on hit dmg as a percent of max HP, with any modulo and/or a bonus to the last blow. But this was rejected because it was considered "too easy to exploit" by letting units escape or be healed, and also because most players wanted to farm damaged units out to their heroes for faster leveling, and thought the XP [not] gained by higher medal units would be "wasted." Seems the new system has all the same disadvantages and then some.

Again though, a major change in mechanics, so not something we're likely to see in a patch.
The mouse configuration I find very good, now that I've seen what they've done.
Yeah, I don't see any problem with it either, but then I've used a two-inch track ball for mumble years, with left/right reversed so that LMB is always under my ring finger, and RMB my thumb, so it just feels natural that way. YMMV

[This message has been edited by ChowGuy (edited 04-06-2014 @ 03:43 PM).]

Marilith77
Member
posted 04-06-14 03:47 PM EDT (US)     17 / 41       
Another thing which needs fixing: Disjunction

In the moment it is much too simple: You use the spell, and the other spell is disjunct.

As a consequence, the AI spams it. They want to change it in the patch, so the AI waits a time before using Disjunct.

This makes no sense! Why would I a use a world spell (either beneficial to me or bad for an opponent) if it can be dispelled immediately?

It becomes worse: I used a city spell on one of my cities (2. Map in campaign, elven side), it was dispelled next turn. Yet - the city was very far away from every other opponent. This makes no sense at all. If everybody can stop every spell everywhere, it makes no sense to use them at all.

So to stop the AI to dispel every round and limit it to do so every nth (n = 3..10 or so) round is at best a work around.

In AOW-SM you could specify an amount of mana, an received a chance to be successful! So to disjunct a spell was limited by the amount of mana necessary and the turns you needed for this amount.

This should be changed, I think.

M.
darkelvesrule
Member
posted 04-06-14 04:42 PM EDT (US)     18 / 41       
Marilith77, you're right. The AI spams disjunction and under the current system it's probably the smart thing to do.
COCONUTKNIGHT
Member
posted 04-07-14 04:56 AM EDT (US)     19 / 41       
Just remember that if they're disjuncting your spells, it means they aren't casting their own spells .

I think the current 'workaround' will do the job nicely, and make the ai feel more 'human'.

Take an old, dirty, hungry, mangy, sick and wet dog and feed him and wash him and nurse him back to health, and he will never turn on you and bite you.

This is how man and dog differ.
Marilith77
Member
posted 04-07-14 06:19 AM EDT (US)     20 / 41       
Just remember that if they're disjuncting your spells, it means they aren't casting their own spells .

I think the current 'workaround' will do the job nicely, and make the ai feel more 'human'.


I think it is wrong to have a 'sure success' spell in this case. There are other powerful spells with no sure success.

In a MP game this would be a problem too, since a human player is not bound by a 'do it only every 5th turn' rule. You can easily destroy the game with it.

IMHO we need a chance here, how it is calculated the developers should decide. AOW-SM worked quite well with the same spell.

At this time (before the patch) I do not use global or city spells. It makes no sense to waste time and mana when the spell is broken before it has time to give you the benefit...
kokemohr
Member
posted 04-07-14 11:27 AM EDT (US)     21 / 41       
My biggest concern is the xp system as well. To be honest, for me it's game breaking.

Some people on the official forums have argued that experience is not that important and that you can always win against a higher-level-hero, but first of all it's still unfair, and for me it's just not fun anymore.
I enjoy trying to find the most effective strategy - with the current xp system the most effective strategy is both obvious and awkward. Just get a bunch of units with entangle / web / paralyze and keep spamming these skills. Every 5 rounds you will have to deal a little damage or the combat ends, but if you use up your movement points before and move behind cover you can easily find a spot where you deal no more than 1-3 damage.


Concerning the "lower-damage-from-low-health-units"-issue:
While it does make sense to lower the damage output from a role playing perspective I think we should mainly look at the game play and choose the graphics accordingly, not the other way.
The player that manages to land the first attack is at an advantage already - if dealing damage would lower the abilities of the target unit this effect would become even worse.
Also it would become even easier to give experience to vulnerable units. In AoW2 there was quite a challenge involved in getting the right units to get the experience points. Now the killing blow is not really important anymore - if damaged troops were not even dealing a dangerous amount of damage it would become ridiculous.
Das123
Member
posted 04-08-14 03:44 AM EDT (US)     22 / 41       
I like the game but unfortunately don't love it. I loved the previous versions.

Things I like in AoW3:
- The 6 unit per army limit works well.
- The balance between the strengths and defences of units.
- The tactical battles are awesome - especially with the flanking mechanics
- The game looks great.
- Having flying units land between tactical turns is good.

Things I'm disappointed with in AoW3:
- The strategic locations are not that important. Getting an extra 10 gold for example does not make much difference for a city.
- City specialisation is not important.
- City spam is the key to victory - and keeping the cities as close and tight as possible rather than spreading them out. The AI doesn't make use of this.
- The races now have practically no differentiating abilities. In the previous games your decisions around the races of the same alignment was critical.
- You are not rewarded with having combined arms. The goal with this game is to just make stacks of the same tier 4 units.
- The happiness mechanic doesn't have a big enough impact on the actual game.
- Losing your leader for the three turns really doesn't do too much damage to your empire.
- The strategic component of the game feels like it has been dumbed down to a large degree.
- I would like to be able to drag and drop the order of the perks. For example being able to drag the ranged attack of a unit ahead of the melee attack so that it would default to that mode.
- I would like the ability to specify where in the tactical battle grid the units would start (archers in back for example).

Cheers

Das123 aka Das24680 on YouTube
kokemohr
Member
posted 04-08-14 09:07 AM EDT (US)     23 / 41       
I would add:
Things I like about AoW3:
- the idea to use the flanking mechanic to give players a reason to use the defend-command is brilliant. I can't remember when I ever used a defend-command in a turn based strategy game because I wanted to defend and not because there simply wasn't anything else to do.

Things I dislike about AoW3:
- It looks like mod support will be a lot worse than in AoW2. In AoW2 you had a drop down menu in the installer that allowed you to enable a mod and the editor was able to load modded resources and edit them. I haven't found anything like that in AoW3.
I seriously hope that I am wrong about this, because it would be really bad. AoW2 had it's shortcomings but they were mostly eliminated by some fantastic mods. AoW3 has at least as many things I would like to see modded, so I am a bit worried there might not be that many mods.
Marilith77
Member
posted 04-08-14 01:12 PM EDT (US)     24 / 41       
Here are more things which I found after 3 Campaign maps:

Edit: After some more playing and after the first patch, I had to edit several paragraphs.

First the positive or neutral things:

1) Fortress: Is a nice thing, could be better supported, but i adds to the immersion into the game. Additionally you can a fortress make into a city, including the walls!! This means, built a fortress, man it, and then use a settler on this hex, and you have a new outpost with wood or stone walls. Nice!!
2) 3D: Is nice to look at, but the interface is suboptimal. Why can the strategic map not be turned, btw.? I can turn it about 10 degrees - if it is 3D you should be able to turn it top down.
In combat more is possible, but not much. And to exchange the mouse buttons was just ... evil :-) (I have to think about it, but this left button interrupts thing will get much more time to become used to...)
To the camera interface: I propose, in combat mode the camera should turn around the selected unit, not around itself.
3) Combat: New combat with special attacks is nice and interesting.
4) AI was reworked, can now build cities. But often the cities are not placed well, even silly (leaving out lots of resources). Also it sometimes builds cities and then hangs (does not continue its advance).
I do not think AI builds towers and fortresses. Pity. But it is a bit better now. Much better...
5) Leaders do not sit in a tower: It works for me, but just barely. In terms of game mechanics it works well. In terms of immersion, fantasy and logic rather not. This guy fights, travels around and - studies magic spells, works city or world magic, and so on? A really busy guy. IMHO it would have been better to style the leader as a non combat unit, which must be protected like the king in a chess game.
But the longer I play, the more I appreciate it: It is simply a different game.
6) 6 units in a stack instead of 8: Shrug. Works for me, is neither worse nor better.

Now what should be changed/reworked:

Resource balance:
Gold is a limiting factor as it should be. Mana is not. There is so much Mana, and no use for it. Only very few summoning spells, no usable world or city spells (I cannot be bothered to wait 1-4 turns for a city/world spell and it is disjunct by the AI just so, long before any benefit can be seen, and I cannot be bothered to disjunct every turn. Also: City spells can be dispelled without seeing the city. (Edit: Not sure about that, but I had a case - before the patch - where one of my city spells was dispelled immediately).
No permanent unit spells - I think they ripped these out of the game, but did not re-balance the mana, because unit enchantments always cost a lot. (Not sure, but it looks that way, there is always more mana than I can use, even if I summon a lot)

Resources on the map (mines and so) have not enough influence. In AOW-SM you had to have enough mines to support a city and the units which protected it.
A city should have resources as a condition. At the moment you found a city, resources or no, there is not much difference. (Edit: Morale makes some difference, if the city race does not like their surroundings, but the only thing to do about it is using the terraforming spell).
Edit: Remark about mana nodes deleted. It is a different game, all man nodes seem to deliver the same amount?

Economics: A city under siege (last city on the map which does not belong to me!) continues to produce T4 units, but after the patch this is much better.
Edit: Remark deleted. Enemy units do desert, and sometimes even try to join my side for a price. Balancing since the patch is far better.

Units: Everybody has the same units, they look slightly different, but that is all. OK. Total balance for MP (which only less than 10 percent of the buyers really do, I heard), but no fun. In AOW-SM it was nice to get a city of another race, just for the units you could have. Every unit had its strengths and weaknesses. I know, there were and are endless discussions which unit is 'better'. This matters in MP, but not in SP. Was mentioned several times, I still hope future addons/patches will change this at least a bit. Still - game is a lot of fun...

Classes: The new concept works, but I do not really like it: I take a city, and have buildings in it, which my leader cannot use. It says 'Wrong Class'. Uhm. The disadvantage of this system is, that I need to have a certain class to produce units, even if the building is here.
Furthermore: The AOW-SM map designer could decide if a map contained Draconians, and if a player could get access to dragons, for example. Now I need the right class, or I am gifted the unit, or there is sort of a special city (like in map 2). Hum. I always loved the concept: Take a city of a certain race, make them friendly and you have their support.
But all the units are equal anyway. I can live with that, but somehow I find it sad. Maybe they should change it, that you cannot build the building, but if it exists in a city you take, then you can use it regardless of your class?
Edit: This is sort of a regret, that there are so many units, and you as a player have only access to a part of it, based on your class. This is only true for big maps, small maps are too short to have it all.

Manual: I can only say ARGH. Really. This IG manual is cheap, but very clunky. And why must I start a game and a map (without a map only a small part is accessible), graphic card drawing lots of power - just to read the damn manual? (Edit: It really is true - if no map is loaded, you cannot use the manual in full. Is this necessary, or just an oversight?)
And please invest the time to make this into a PDF, or something. I can remember studying the AOW-SM manual (in paper) with pleasure...

Races: Ripped out too much, but I could live with that. There are a lot of different units, but to have them in a game you need to have different classes, which is impossible. In older games you only needed different cities. I hope, other races will come back (Undead, as the boogy man, Frostlings (there seems to be no race which likes arctic at the moment, and so on)

New alignment system: Edit: I still have problems to imagine Elves, Goblins and Orcs working together. But well...
Morale system seems to be based on environment, and has not too much influence, at least there a no units deserting because too low morale. Please make this count again, in one of the future patches or addons.

Transportation and teleport: I just have to see if there is any transport besides ships.
Edit:
I suspect, that many MP fans did not like transport, because of abuse. I do not care - I am missing it. Dwarves (in AOW-SM) where quite slow even on roads. But if you were rich enough and your city was far enough developed, you could build transportation (Steam Tank). On big maps this was really fine. I know, the AI never used it well. The same goes to other methods of transportation. I will miss this, and I hope MP fans are now happy - I am not...
But after some play (especially the nice map with the Isles (Elven Court #4 I think) ships make more sense. I still have to find a use for ships one builds in a harbor, but the instant built of a ship has its uses, even if a bit non intuitive...
I strongly suspect that city gates are missing too now. I hope, MP are now happy - I am not *sigh*. This was really good to have on XL maps. It is quite boring to move a unit a long way even if it is 'balanced'.

Unit placement in combat: Edit: I think, it will be re-done. If you have 3 or 4 stacks attacking, it ends up in a very long line, and most of your turns are wasted to move the units into place. The same goes for the defenders. Again something changed for MP, since placing of your units was boring for other players not involved, I think...
What really should be changed: A Settler unit flees combat (on the combat map), you see it flee every turn. And in the end you have to chase it for 3 or 4 turns to kill it. Please change this. (It can have advantages too, if you have a healer you can meanwhile heal several units, while one unit does the chasing, but this also is boring and could be seen as abuse? MP again...)

Summary: Edit: I think there will be a lot of smaller changes, since it is a very complex game. Several things are sacrificed to please MP, but I think, that in SP some of these things should be possible. For example City Teleportation Gates could be easily disabled for a MP map and still be in the game, the same goes for transportation. Allow the map designer to decide if he wants things or disallows them. AFAIK the Item Forge still exists, but is disabled for the campaign.
But it is a new game, quite different to AOW-SM, and this is no bad in itself. It is very much fun to play, and play it I will (as I play AOW-SM until today and will continue to do so).

This games gives much value for a small price: If I compare the cost of a good CRPG (say Skyrim, Fallout 3, or similar) and the time I can have fun with it, this game wins hands down!

M.

[This message has been edited by Marilith77 (edited 04-14-2014 @ 10:51 AM).]

Fubarno
Member
posted 04-08-14 06:36 PM EDT (US)     25 / 41       
Overall having a good time with the game. Still trying to figure out how alignment and happiness effect my forces and races. I'll post more when I have more time to play and learn.

Something I miss is the unit enchantments no longer seem to stay with the units after battles and can only be cast in battles. I'm ok with only being able to enchant units in the battles, but the enchantment should stay unless no mana or dispelled.

Another quibble is when you click on a stack and see movement points for each unit, you can no longer see what movement bonuses the units had. In the other AoW games the units would for example have a symbol of movement bonuses like forestry, mountaineering, water walking, etc. This no longer shows up on the unit when you click on a stack.

Keep the company of those who seek the truth, and run from those who have found it. - Vaclav Havel
Download these maps I have made...
Destiny of Rivals
Valley of Turmoil
High Passes
Minions of Gruumsh
TravisII
Member
posted 04-08-14 08:06 PM EDT (US)     26 / 41       
I believe water walking/swimming shows up on the icon, but indeed, Forestry and Mountaineering do not.

#7373DE for Humans #EFB573 for Azracs #4AA58C for Lizard Men #9CC6E7 for Frostlings |SM|> #E4ED38 #EBEBEB #CC2D29 #CC29D5
#6BB54A for Elves #EFE773 for Halflings #D6AD8C for Dwarves #EFEFDE for High Men |SM|> #DE8EA4 #F09245 #D2BE92 #BDBDE8 #558CDD
#B563BD for Dark Elves #F74242 for Orcs #BD7352 for Goblins #947B73 for The Undead |SM|> #1DDB38 #83795A #2CAAA4 #AC762A
Colors for AoW1 and AoWSM **A Proud Member of the Unofficial Patch Team!** ~2010 AoWSM PBEM Singles Champion~ http://blog.noblemaster.com/
Draxynnic
Member
posted 04-09-14 09:40 AM EDT (US)     27 / 41       
A couple of quick points on things Marilith brought up, although I don't have the time right now to address everything:

First, on nodes: If you're specialised in one of the spheres, you get extra mana from nodes of that sphere. This, a character with Air Mastery and Creation Adept, for instance, would get bonuses with air and creation nodes. Mechanically, it's an empire upgrade that you always start with if you have the appropriate specialisations.

Second, on ships - Shipboard travel costs movement points to represent that moving on a ship still takes time. Yes, the troops themselves remain well-rested when the ship is doing the moving, but you're still not going to get much more traveling done by foot in the rest of the day if it's three hours past sundown before you even get off the boat.
ChowGuy
HG Cherub
posted 04-09-14 09:52 AM EDT (US)     28 / 41       
Second, on ships - Shipboard travel costs movement points to represent that moving on a ship still takes time.
Which only makes sense, really, in a turn-based game. The ship-to-ship relay led to some major exploits - with some fast transports and Air Mastery under AoW1, you can cross the entire map in a single turn and still be ready to fight.

Let's not even get into the famous Free Moving Dragon Ship. Think "steam tank that flies."

[This message has been edited by ChowGuy (edited 04-09-2014 @ 10:06 AM).]

darkelvesrule
Member
posted 04-09-14 10:24 AM EDT (US)     29 / 41       
Needs fixing: If you're in the item forge, and a diplomatic popup comes up (i.e. meet a new player and they declare war), then the game locks up hard, you have to go to windows and force it to quit. This is a huge bug, I can't believe they didn't catch it.
Marilith77
Member
posted 04-09-14 03:13 PM EDT (US)     30 / 41       
First, on nodes: If you're specialised in one of the spheres, you get extra mana from nodes of that sphere. This, a character with Air Mastery and Creation Adept, for instance, would get bonuses with air and creation nodes. Mechanically, it's an empire upgrade that you always start with if you have the appropriate specialisations.
I know this from AOW-SM. In AOW3 somehow I never know, which Node is the 'best' node for my leader. But maybe I did not read something somewhere...
Which only makes sense, really, in a turn-based game. The ship-to-ship relay led to some major exploits - with some fast transports and Air Mastery under AoW1, you can cross the entire map in a single turn and still be ready to fight.
Let's not even get into the famous Free Moving Dragon Ship. Think "steam tank that flies."
If this is an AOW1 thing, I would not know it (its a very long time since I played AOW1). The major exploit is a MP thing, and I understand the problem. If you want SP, it does not matter too much. I like the problem to have a ship ready at the right location and the right time.

I had the following situation in AOW3: I had a 'real' ship, from a city. 4 units entered it directly from the shore. One other unit entered it from 4 tiles away (using its move points). When the ship drove away, the unit which entered from 4 tiles away did NOT hinder movement, but in the NEW TURN it suddenly had less movement points than its maximum value (in contrast to the other units on the ship) and so hindered the entire ship and all the others. This is a bit far fetched, I think...

But - the game begins to grow on me

I still play it (too much), now with the new patch.

I think it simply is different - not bad. Yet some of my points above should be addressed, and will, I think.

M.
taijitu
Member
posted 04-09-14 10:57 PM EDT (US)     31 / 41       
Bug: half of the times that I am choosing leaders near the end of customizing a random map, the list of Custom leaders is incomplete - missing leaders that normally do show up in the list when viewed from the "Edit Leaders" button. Backing out to the main intro screen and re-customizing the random map resolves this issue sometimes, but not always.

Oh, and for what it's worth, my personal score of the game - 93.5: outstanding! You folks have done an amazing job, thank you so much for all your hard work! As someone who has been gaming for 3 decades, and easily put hundreds of hours into AoW1, this is another milestone on the video game time-line. The next decade looks much brighter now with this gem to curl up to in the evenings.
tumult
Member
posted 05-02-14 11:58 AM EDT (US)     32 / 41       
I see that the devs are considering changing the squad deaths, so the squad will graphically stay intact until all HP are gone, and then all members will fall.
Could we make the health bar bigger?
It's rather small and quite hard to quickly gauge the unit's health at the zoom-level needed to have a decent tactical overview.
The_Stranger
Member
posted 05-03-14 03:26 AM EDT (US)     33 / 41       
Unless I'm mistaken, melee units can embark on the water where they gain a shoot ballista ability???? That makes no sense....
taijitu
Member
posted 06-16-14 00:55 AM EDT (US)     34 / 41       
I have to have a last name? Whenever I leave the Last Name field empty it is automatically filled with whatever the original character that I customized had for a last name. I want just Ceasar and just Cleopatra. =D
Little help? TY
Sunicle
Member
posted 06-19-14 05:58 AM EDT (US)     35 / 41       
I never had this, Taijitu, only thing I had is filling in a custom name, going back a page because I want to change class or something, and then automatically seeing the name flipping back.

But I assume the solution is simple: if you start up the game you see a little icon in the top-right corner with your log-in name. Choose 'Edit Leaders' from there and start to 'randomise new'. That way you start with a blank page when editing a leader.

Since I'm posting anyway, I'll post what I have as a major gripe with the game (I've posted this already in Triumph's forum). Look at this picture of a random continents map:



Way too much underground for my liking. In this map the problem is exaggerated, it's usually more balanced, but to have an underground that far exceeds the surface in size is default with randomly generated continents/island maps, and the issues this gives in my opinion are these;
* Most races don’t fare well in the underground, with especially slow movement being a problem;
* Areas are typically very locked down in the underground, cavern walls restricting where you can go, also leading to path-finding problems for the AI;
* Less goodies in the underground, as most of it is solid rock/dirt walls;
* Visually the underground is monotonous, as most of the eye candy has been made for the surface.

I like the underground to be an addition to the surface, not the other way around. Playing the map pictured above as the elves wouldn’t have been much fun, but my complaint is a general one: the game hasn’t been designed for having so much underground, and despite random maps coming with lots of customisable settings, there’s nothing we can do to give us less underground!

Another point is that the game needs more heroes. There are some 49 or 50 in there. Especially if you're particular about race and/or class the options are thin; with 36 race - class combinations (6 x 6) most race - class combinations will only be represented by one hero.
The thing I'd like most to happen is that the game could draw from your custom made leaders pool. Or otherwise, make an 'Edit Heroes' function besides the 'Edit Leaders' pool. Whatever is easiest to do for the developers.
To have these great character customisation options in the game but unavailable to heroes is sad.
alja
Member
posted 06-23-14 11:42 AM EDT (US)     36 / 41       
I played now two compaigns scenarios
(not sure if this qualifies me to post:-))

What I missed (or have not found yet)

1) tactical minimap in manual combat (I want to see top strategic view as well, also to make sure I use all units)

2) Hero/Unit enchants. In SM I spend most mana in boosting key units or adjusting skills and abilities, damage output, etc.
Is this not possible any more? All I do now is casting units..

3) Efficient handling to go through all units on longer paths with existing walk commands before moving rest of the units manually. How are you doing it?

4) I also notice that superior units/heros can easily take so much damage from lower tier units....(maybe because previously used enchants like iron skin, enchant weapon, dont exist any more). 70HP fade like nothing. They feel just so vulnerable.

5) related to 4), often my heros when I want to level them go unconscious so fast, while I prepared 2 kills (low enemy units) for them. I cant heal them either when being unconscious. Need to check if this can be disabled. But if disabled, auto combat might not be possible any longer.

beside that, I like the game so far..

[This message has been edited by alja (edited 06-23-2014 @ 11:43 AM).]

COCONUTKNIGHT
Member
posted 07-24-14 05:08 PM EDT (US)     37 / 41       
I played now two compaigns scenarios
(not sure if this qualifies me to post:-))

What I missed (or have not found yet)

1) tactical minimap in manual combat (I want to see top strategic view as well, also to make sure I use all units)


There is none. There may be one coming I hear.

2) Hero/Unit enchants. In SM I spend most mana in boosting key units or adjusting skills and abilities, damage output, etc.
Is this not possible any more? All I do now is casting units..


Not possible, and by design, relates to point 4.

3) Efficient handling to go through all units on longer paths with existing walk commands before moving rest of the units manually. How are you doing it?


I'm not sure what you mean...


4) I also notice that superior units/heros can easily take so much damage from lower tier units....(maybe because previously used enchants like iron skin, enchant weapon, dont exist any more). 70HP fade like nothing. They feel just so vulnerable.

By design. The stack of doom has been destroyed. Your heroes and your t4s can be destroyed by someone using a bit of thought and preparation. Heroes can get horrifically strong though, but it is nothing like it was in the previous games.

5) related to 4), often my heros when I want to level them go unconscious so fast, while I prepared 2 kills (low enemy units) for them. I cant heal them either when being unconscious. Need to check if this can be disabled. But if disabled, auto combat might not be possible any longer.


By design. Heroes are generals much more than super soldiers now...

beside that, I like the game so far...



By design!

Take an old, dirty, hungry, mangy, sick and wet dog and feed him and wash him and nurse him back to health, and he will never turn on you and bite you.

This is how man and dog differ.
alja
Member
posted 07-25-14 09:25 AM EDT (US)     38 / 41       
thank you...regarding 3) I use now keyboard for smooth playing. Looked them up in the options, as there is no manual. (N, Space, M(ove), etc).

With only mouse it was a lot of clicking. With keyboard, play flow is smooth.
Queen Jenny the Mediocre
Member
(id: neo222)
posted 07-26-14 04:03 AM EDT (US)     39 / 41       
One thing I'd like to see is more incentive to mix your army up.

I basically just go for tier 4 units, supplemented by summoned units, and I may add a few cavalry units because they only take one turn to produce in a well-developed city so I can get a few of them quickly.

They should make tier 4 units a lot rarer, increasing their upkeep a lot or even setting a limit on the number you can have at one time. When you stacks of 5 or 6 tier 4 units, tier 1 units because mostly pointless. They're so powerful that you don't really need anything else.

Also, most of the combat spells I don't even use as I have a limited number of casting points in a battle, so I'm not going to waste them by giving my army +2 resistance, so some of them should be able to be used in the strategic map ala AoW2. I tend to have lots of mana anyway towards the end of a level, so I may as well use it for something. Unless you're playing as a druid, even summoning won't use up that much. It may also make tier 1 units more useful.

I could move to a small town, and become a waitress...
COCONUTKNIGHT
Member
posted 07-26-14 04:52 PM EDT (US)     40 / 41       
@ Insincere, I believe there are several things being considered on a game level that will affect everything you just talked about, including ways to adjust the availability and stackability of lower tier units.

I am also fairly certain that every single buff spell is being tinkered with, with a view to making them more attractive.

Take an old, dirty, hungry, mangy, sick and wet dog and feed him and wash him and nurse him back to health, and he will never turn on you and bite you.

This is how man and dog differ.
taijitu
Member
posted 08-22-14 08:13 AM EDT (US)     41 / 41       
Thank you for the tip Sunicle, I'll try that next time I load up the game.

Also, I agree with you that the underground is a bit wanting visually.
Personally I've found that turning walls (and sometimes water) up all the way under the Geography tab gives me just the right amount of underground; have you tried this?
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Wonders 2 Heaven | HeavenGames