DerekPaxton DerekPaxton

What's next?

What's next?

 

First off, thanks to everyone who has played the beta and provided feedback.  You are probably wondering what we are going to do next.

From a high level there are several types of gamers, different experience levels, different amounts of hours that they will spend with FE.  Someone playing their first game will appreciate and need different things than someone playing their 10th.  We need to appeal to both groups.  Because of that we will spend resources improving things that don't matter much to the sorts of hard core players that do things like read this post.

For example we are cleaning up the choose sovereign screen and making the sovereigns more archetypical.  Procipinee is clearly designated as a summoner, her summons start at higher level and she gets a free spell that puts that ability to use.  The sovereign backstory isn’t on the screen anymore to make room for more art and a general open clean feel instead of the prior lists of stats.

Imbuement has been removed from the game.  I loved the flavor of it, but players didnt realize they could be casting spells with their champions.  And it makes the champions less unique if the thing that distinguishes them most (their access to spells) is missed.  It was a bit of complexity that could be dropped without losing any good gameplay.  Most notably since all the champions can cast from the start when you find enemy champions in the wilds they start lobbing spells at you.  For those of us that are accustomed to attacking lone champions in the wild, seeing them starting combat by throwing fireballs at us is a bit of a shock.

So one of our focuses right now is in making the game more approachable.

But we have some asset and balance work to do too.  Not game changers, we aren’t throwing out any systems.  We have a good system in place, we need to focus on the sections that are weak and take advantage of the sections that are working well.

For example, I like the ability to recruit monsters.  But it’s too hard to get and not rewarding enough when you do.  So the Bonding Ceremony and Mercenaries techs are gone.  Instead the ability to create those improvements comes on other techs that were already worth getting (higher level improvements that allow you to recruit things like dragons and ogres are still special techs).  Most importantly when you train a monster like a Drake or Troll in your cities they will start at the normal level for that monster type, not level 1.  So your drake will start as a level 6 drake and capable of doing some damage.

The magic tree had some exciting things hidden in it but it needed some work to bring it out.  So we created a few new craftable items like magical staves, enchanted robes, etc.  Along with this came 30 new unit’s designs, 3 for each faction.  These include trainable Mages (units with magical staves that shoot fire or ice), mid-level warriors with magical weapons and end game units that have the best enchanted weapons, armor, traits and mounts the game has to offer.  If you see these marching over from the AI player you may be in trouble.

Champions aren't being nerfed as much as things are being balanced around them.  The most significant direct change to champions is that injuries matter more.  If you have a champion with 6-7 injuries on him he will be severely handicapped, it may be time to hand his equipment over to a promising newcomer without the battle scars.  XP is divided by the members of group to make it less rewarding to steamroll the map with your stack of super heroes.

But the big changes are in dramatically decreasing the tech costs.  There were always good units to make, but if your champions were level 7-8 by the time you got to them then it didn't matter.  Now your trained units are better, come earlier and mean more.

Quests are another area that need some attention.  Specifically we want more interesting rewards on them.  If you give the potion of restoration to the butcherman he will join you.  If you take the noblemans daughter back to his estate you will get a choice of rewards to pick from.  And of course any quests with bugs need to be fixed.

Add that in with a bundle of stability and performance improvements, bug fixes, new art and sounds and you have our hit list for the next patch.  I will release more details as it gets closer, we have lots to do and I'm excited to see what you guys think when you have a chance to play it.

 

342,577 views 144 replies
Reply #126 Top

Even worse, this means I 'll have to play my MMO again to get some gaming fix. Meh.

Reply #127 Top

This sounds really promising.  I was a little worried about some of the "no big changes" posts in past couple weeks -- flashbacks to wom beta -- but this post and Brad's recent posts gives me a lot more confidence that this time around you guys also see the remaining rough spots and have the plan to fix them.  

Reply #128 Top

Quoting smakemupagus, reply 127
This sounds really promising.  I was a little worried about some of the "no big changes" posts in past couple weeks -- flashbacks to wom beta -- but this post and Brad's recent posts gives me a lot more confidence that this time around you guys also see the remaining rough spots and have the plan to fix them.  

I think the biggest thing we run into with regards to "no big changes" is that what we consider a big change and what someone else considers a big change are often different things.

To us, a big change would be getting rid of a tech tree (or adding a tech tree). 

Reply #129 Top

Any hints about "big" changes to the improvement system? 

Reply #130 Top


 

From a high level there are several types of gamers, different experience levels, different amounts of hours that they will spend with FE.  Someone playing their first game will appreciate and need different things than someone playing their 10th.  We need to appeal to both groups.  Because of that we will spend resources improving things that don't matter much to the sorts of hard core players that do things like read this post.

For example we are cleaning up the choose sovereign screen and making the sovereigns more archetypical.  Procipinee is clearly designated as a summoner, her summons start at higher level and she gets a free spell that puts that ability to use.  The sovereign backstory isn’t on the screen anymore to make room for more art and a general open clean feel instead of the prior lists of stats.

So one of our focuses right now is in making the game more approachable.

 

My initial feedback thus far is that the game is currently leaps and bounds ahead of War of Magic in regards to noob friendliess.  The tutorial, with videos, is a very welcome feature.  As a result of these videos and tutorial in-general, I learned more about the two games' mechanics in fifteen minutes than I did in four hours of playing WoM on my own.

I noticed many small notifications, such as the "Zzzzz" above my city when it wasn't building an improvement.  These are greatly enhancing FE so far, so please keep this up.

Suggestion: I would add a tutorial video or mini-explanation about the notification windows in the upper-right corner (city notification, sovereign notification, etc.).  It took me a minute to remember how they worked this time around, and I remember feeling very confused when I first jumped into WoM.

 

Reply #131 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 128

Quoting smakemupagus, reply 127This sounds really promising.  I was a little worried about some of the "no big changes" posts in past couple weeks -- flashbacks to wom beta -- but this post and Brad's recent posts gives me a lot more confidence that this time around you guys also see the remaining rough spots and have the plan to fix them.  

I think the biggest thing we run into with regards to "no big changes" is that what we consider a big change and what someone else considers a big change are often different things.

To us, a big change would be getting rid of a tech tree (or adding a tech tree). 

Of the currently suggested changes, what are some examples of changes that are too big, so we can get an idea of what you mean?  For example, changing the way stats work so that Constitution determines weight capacity and Strength not being a "no-brainer" stat?  Dodge raising per level like accuracy does?  Percentage decreases in certain stats (and not just initiative) for encumbrance, not just linear decreases that are easy to shrug off?  Horses not giving a big (or any) bonus to encumbrance?  Magic resistance providing a damage reduction from all damage spells for all units?  Variable mana maintenance costs (possibly including fractions) for different strategic spells, variable cost (in any resource/s, including mana) based on power of spells (no. of shards, etc.), intelligence being used to determine power of spells and unbalanced Evoker traits being scrapped?

It would be good if we had a better idea of what you think constitutes a big change.  I think a lot of us think now that pretty much anything is a big change from your point of view.

Reply #132 Top

That's really up to Derek to determine.  I can only really speak towards things that are programatically difficult.

Reply #133 Top

But Derek doesn't post as much as you do. ;-)  Question is, based on what you know, are any of the above changes possible before release of FE?

Reply #134 Top

Quoting StevenAus, reply 133
But Derek doesn't post as much as you do.   Question is, based on what you know, are any of the above changes possible before release of FE?

I'm not familiar enough with some of the issues mentioned.  I don't have the same appreciation of balance as Derek does. Programmatically, what you mention is straight forward. Whether it makes good balance sense is a different thing all together.

Reply #135 Top

One thing that has been pointed out is that strength is the most important stat. It just matters more than anything else. Putting all available points into strength will grant a hero extreme power. This is not the case with any other stat. The question of balance would be to allow this to continue and limit the availability of strength upgrades or to make sure other stats are equally desirable. I am sure Derek will choose one or the other. As long as beta testers give voice to the problem. 

Reply #136 Top

On strength, I think you've got two options:

 

buff other stats, which would buff heroes and hurt regular units

or nerf the benefits of huge strength, which would hurt melee and help mages

 

 

 

One crazier idea: Strength bonuses to damage and dex bonuses to initiative are weapon based.  May lead to a different sort of problem though.

 

 

Reply #137 Top

I don't think it would be "hurting" melee units as such, just making them less all-powerful for one type of stat investment.  What about using Constitution for carrying capacity, ie. "Endurance" rather than Brute "Strength", perhaps add some percentage decreases to certain stats for different levels of encumbrance and horses not adding much (any?) extra encumbrance?

Reply #138 Top

You could also make Encumbrance a stat of its own. Then certain classes would be able to get a bonus to this from levelup. This, combined with making Dexterity either add damage to ranged attacks, or be generally more potent would be one way to balance things. 

The question I keep asking myself is which stats should a warrior be choosing compared to a mage? Which stats are the best for archers? What kinds of abilities can I get to augment these classes?

Reply #139 Top

I like the idea of Encumbrance being a stat too (if it's not too difficult programming-wise), and of Dexterity adding more damage to ranged attacks or some other good bonus/es.  Anyway, it's good to know that these sort of things aren't complex programming wise, and they can be implemented if Derek decides they would help balance the game better.  I think a lot of us thought that these sorts of things were in the category of "big fundamental changes" and not "possible balance changes".  I think that helps out a lot of us in lots of ways. =)

Reply #140 Top

Making new stats is easy. It is actually how Heavenfall showed me to make mutually exclusive traits and buildings. I think I have around 20 new stats in Ivory Towers right now that only pertain to building choices. This is probably the hardest part of the game to balance because it has to work well with some very different classes and then trained units and creatures. It is essentially the periodic table of elements. 

Reply #141 Top

If I understand it well, now all champs can wear heavy armor, weild a 2hd battle axe, and cast spells...

I am all in favor of approachability, but maybe champs could be more characterized by something other than the choice they make as they level up? Maybe introduce a mana cost penalty when casting spells in heavy armor, if not a moe severe limit?

Reply #142 Top

Yes I agree the sovereign dieing thinng would be a great idea; im not the person who reloads when something goes slightly wrong or someone important dies i enjoy the challenge of trying to keep afloat despite things being bad. But i know A lot of people dont like people dieing they like immortal champions and immortal evertying which is so yawwnnn to me which is why it should be still an option. However i do like the injury system and would like it to be 2+ injuries or so till a champion might die and 4+ for sovereign as this helps to keep the game flowing without everyone losing too much to quickly. I love elemental and I love the way much of fallen enchantress is going but I really dont enjoy my units being none dieing all the time and keep coming back :).

Actually thinking back about people suggesting the retire option would also work well; the longer you keep risking your champions the less chance you will get to retire him as somebody who can help your city which would all combine into awesomeness :). Anyway this is just my feedback / suggestions and even if it didnt happen im sure a modder can make something liek that i hope :).

Reply #143 Top

Well, straight up front - great job Stardock! Everything looks like you are living up to your promise of delivering the goods (and presumably WILL ultimately live up to it on premiere day! :D), kickin' ass and takin' numbers. Well, more like crunching numbers just now, but still, hey, it's the least buggy beta I have ever seen. And one thing I'm really happy to see is - you don't take anything for granted this time.

Now, I - like many of us - OF COURSE have a few superb ideas which just absolutely cannot justify not telling you! Ah... that is, my five cents' worth of opinion. So here goes...:

1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that there is a finite number of heroes to get on map. And they die off/invalid themselves (sorry, the politically correct version would be - achieve a state of disability...) during the course of the game. My opinion is - a game which potentially gets to the point of "no heroes in faction/on map" is not so much fun. Thus, a suggestion - if the number of heroes in a faction drops down to a number equal to mapsize (1 being smallest), then after turn 100 random level 1 heroes start slowly showing up in your territory. If you're not interested in their services, they eventually leave paving the way for new ones. Or alternatively - if you have less than a certain number of heroes, every big battle can result with a "man from the ranks" showing exceptional skill and being promoted to hero.

Actually any idea guaranteeing that neither I nor my computer opponents ever permanently run out of heroes will work for me. :)

 

2. Again, correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the snakelike cities are still waiting for a suitable fix. Preferably not one limiting them to being a single generic spot on the map... My idea would be - limit the ability to add buildings much outside the "core" of the city.

Let us assume that we have the city centre established. It takes up 4 small squares (1 big square) and has 12 immediately adjacent small squares. It is a level 1 city at this point of course. So we allow placement of new buildings within 1 square (number = city level) of the core, which is the city centre. If we happen to fill all 12 of those adjacent squares, or rather all of them which are not filled by default (forest, water, resources etc.) then our core expands and we can start settling the new outer neighborhood. Again, within the 1 small square limit from the core.

If, on the other hand, sometime during our happy expansion our city levels up to level 2, then we get the opportunity to place new buildings 2 squares away from the core if we so wish (provided continuousness as it is now). Level 3 city would be 3 squares away max, etc. With this method the cities would develop "logically", not "snakelike", and still each city could be different from a round blob on the map.

An expansion to this idea would include each resource within city range being a small "core" on its own. Small = half the placement range of city centre, rounded down. So if you had a level 4 city and a gold mine linked by buildings (continuousness) to your city centre, then you could place new buildings 4 small squares away from city centre OR 2 small squares away from the core created by the gold mine, if you so wish. With this method the cities could - again - develop "naturally" and meaningfully, just like real cities (which usually are not snakelike but often expand around nearby points of interest like factories or theme parks for example).

 

3. Think about adding more random events and event sequences. And don't forget to decide about those events a few turns in advance so a simple spell of game reload won't fix the bad ones or generate good ones. :P Speaking of event sequences, an example of my thinking:

Turn 33 - Thieves! A guild of daring thieves has been established in our capital of Frog Pond and raided our treasury for a total loss of 23 gildar!

Turn 46 - The thieves guild continues its nefarious practices in our capital of Frog Pond! Our people are scared (temporary malus for city growth and cash). What are your orders, my King?

Player's choice:

a) Not in my city, you won't! Dedicate men and funds to the hunt! [invest a small amount of gold, lower health of all garrisoning units by 50% to simulate detaching them for police duty, get increased prestige and a chance to get money and items from busting the thieves hideout sometime later. There is still a chance of the thieves evading capture and continuing their practices with vengeance or them moving to a different city]

b) It's all a matter of perspective... Try to enlist them to our cause! [invest gold, lose prestige, get a chance of a random event later giving you a "rogue" hero or establishing a thieves guild in another faction of your choice. There is a chance of the thieves spurning your advances and operating as before, thus leaving you with both lost gold and prestige and continuing the event sequence]

c) Bah! Let the city authorities sort it out by themselves! [effect - will get random negative events like this for the city until the thieves guild is disbanded or caught by a separate random event]

Let's assume we went with b)...

Turn 49 - Contact has been established with a frontman of the thieves guild in our capital of Frog Pond. They are amenable to our diplomatic overtures, but require further funds as a token of our good faith. What are your orders, my King?

a) In for a copper, in for a gildar... pay the rascals! [lose some money, big chance for positive event soon, small chance for further extortion, small chance of thieves breaking "negotiations" and going back to negative events]

b) Is this a joke? Give the frontman a beating up the front, maybe they'll get the message I'm not to be trifled with! [small chance for positive event soon, small chance for further extortion, big chance of breaking negotiations]

c) Imprison the frontman and torture information out of him! [break negotiations and get back to negative events without chance to negotiate ever again with this group; a chance of catching thieves and busting their hideout for money and items]

Let's assume we went with a)...

Turn 51 - The leader of thieves guild in our capital of Frog Pond decided to accept our offer of association and cooperation! Should we retain his services in our Kingdom or send him on a mission to a rival faction?

a) His services are needed here. [gain a "rogue" hero with some items and perhaps one squad of "thieves"; thieves guild sequence ends for Frog Pond]

b) Send him to Pariden. [thieves guild sequence ends for Frog Pond and starts for the biggest city in Pariden]

c) Send him to Kraxis. [-//-]

d) Let me teach you a thing or two about taxes... starting with basic racketeering! [lose all caravans from Frog Pond, gain extra income in the city and a chance for getting random items once in a while; extra "thief" unit in the city militia; temporarily lose some prestige; thieves guild sequence ends for Frog Pond]

e) Good, finally! Let me introduce him to the headsman! [gain money and items from the thieves hideout, get a random positive or negative amount of prestige temporarily; a chance of some aggresssive thieves bands appearing at faction borders; thieves guild sequence ends for Frog Pond]

 

That's it for today, hope I didn't bore you. :P

+1 Loading…
Reply #144 Top

Nice. It would take a lot of thought and balance to pull it off, but given enough time and resources (and maybe the modding community), that would be pretty cool. Basically making decisions that impact game play and add immersion. Seems like something that would help the campaign as well as the sandbox.