{0.8}some toughts after steam rolling 3 games

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2410

Heh. this sound exactly like the conversation I had with Kael today.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

kwm1800

Join Date 03/2008

+26

Seriously Brad, heroes are quite useless in... Legendary Heroes (despite the name).

Even if exp split is removed, the hero trait tree is so long and tiresome, desperately needs to be condensed.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Kael is going to come up with some new nasty ideas now!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Oh i am happy, that you are working on the problem!

Successfully updated karma reason!

One of the nastier side effects of the split general/specialization trees currently is that there's very little incentive to split the few perks gained from levelups over the trees; Realistically your faction leader channeler is likely to end up levels 9-12 by the end of the game unless he's engaged in a lot of combat on a huge map or invest heavily in the XP perks (in which case he also needs to gain significantly more levels to reach the same number of perks invested in anything else than the xp perks), and that's just not enough to invest heavily in both one school of magic and deep enough in the specialization tree to pick up something truly useful or with a good synergy.

Add to that, that most of the schools of magic provide either utility (useful regardless of specialization perks, and the best utility spells are level 1 or 2) or damage (which is low without specialization), while specialization generally provides either good utility or damage, but only if you invest deep in specialization and pick up a high number of filler perks, and we've got the weird current situation where even dedicated channeler mage faction leaders like Procipinee or Magnar are better off skipping their schools of magic except for any extra levels they can gain via soul-eating the champions they recruit and go all-in on their specialization, using lowlevel spells and those opened up by their specialization. (With going all in on the general perks to pick up spellbooks for utility and ignoring mage perks for most of the game a reasonable alternative, though less effective for damage or summoning)

And as for picking up some level 7 or 9 mage-hero with low spell-paths and thematic but poorly-chosen for either damage or utility spell paths... Let's just say that it is a sad day for a game entitled "legendary heroes" where the primary use for the combat heroes when fighting against the AI is to cannibalize them for magic or set them as permanent -5% unrest reducers. (And don't get me started on heroes that, very thematically, have been designed with a split into some non-spellbook general perks and some specialization perks. Yes, it is very thematic, but it makes them so very, very, weak overall.)

One obvious way to address at least some of these issues would be to go to a "pick one general and one specialization" perk per levelup rather than making it a choice between them. That would also allow the placement of a few more general-purpose perks in the general tree with at least some chance that they'll actually be used, and it'll make thematically designed heroes recruited through fame at higher levels much more interesting and useful, as they'll be able to have both a somewhat useful specialization and (if their theme requires it) the magic to back it up. No more "this level 9 mage hero starts out as an apprentice in his art".

Thinking off the top of my head, some obvious examples for adding perks in the general tree if this idea was even partially followed:

Anti-Swarm I->Anti-Swarm II -> Anti-Swarm III (Counts n fewer stacks for being swarmed. In effect, Anti-Swarm III makes it nearly impossible to be swarmed if the hero is part of a defensive line, while II is enough if the hero is in the centre of an anchored line and only attacked from either front or rear - point being, the player will notice a significant different regardless of investment level... I realize this is impinging on defender territory, but really, swarming and heroes as currently implemented is devastating to heroes. The defender "immune to swarm" could profitably be changed to "the hero and adjacent friendly units have swarming damage halved" in that case (or the even wider "army takes half swarming damage")

Strength (+2 attack) -> Adventurer's Boon (+8 hp) -> Adventurer's Grace (+25 fire, cold, lightning, poison, and spell resistance)

Tinker (extra accessory) -> Tailor (+10% defense) -> Soldier (+10% attack)

Successfully updated karma reason!

I agree with KWM1800's general comment about the heroes being not as good in legendary heroes. I was able to develop more powerful heroes in FE and could get to lvl 20 plus even if I had two heroes in 1 army. The random traits in FE used to let me pick all the good ones and skip ones I found tiresome. Now with the new trees I have no choice but to pick too many of the tiresome ones just to get to the higher levels of the tree. At least before, even with the randomness of it I could just skip the ones I had no interest in. I wont get into details because the traits I refer to vary by path but the point is I cannot make heroes that are nearly as good in this beta as I could in FE. And in FE I could at least still have two heroes in a stack and still have a reasonable chance of developing them both to higher levels. At the moment in the beta I need up with more heroes than I want and also have little choice but to build out an army for each. Then my trained units end up being far more powerful than the heroes in their stack. I know there is more balancing to do and I am confident that these general issues will get addressed but something needs to be done to at least allow us to more easily develop high level heroes and also maybe let it be viable to have more than one in a stack. There is a lot I like about the beta (paths, graphics, more items and quests, better tactical battles) but from my perspective it is not as much fun to play as FE from a heroes perspective.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Too true. At least it appears Kael and Frogboy know about it.

(I don't agree at all with the people wanting to get rid of XP splitting for heroes though, the old way without XP splitting meant there was no sensible choice but to have ALL your heroes in one stack, anything else meant you were throwing XP away. The current scheme means that so long as you have one or more heroes in each stack you don't waste any XP).

Successfully updated karma reason!

It's really a question of balance. Heroes level too slowly. Units do too much damage and everyone needs a hp boost.

There are too many traits and leveling is a slog. Many of the meatier skills are hidden behind meaningless ones. So not only do you have to struggle to level, the reward for leveling is frankly pathetic.

If I were in charge I would change leveling so that it's a rare and wonderful effect. A champ or sov at level 10 would be uber powerful and have access to lots of endgame skills and spells.I would make each level offer one choice in general and one in the special. I would get rid of meta game skills like the +xp garbage. And combine multiple traits together.

At each level your champ or sov would be gifted such new capabilities as to make his former self seem puny and pathetic. Instead of making leveling a tiresome slog up the ladder, I would try to give the player a "kid in the candy store" feeling. So many awesome options it's hard to pick just one.

Anyways, as I said, I think much of the frustration could be solved just by fixing the balance for xp gain and hp per level. But I think LH needs to do more to make champs legendary out of the gate, not just at the end of the game

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Peter Ebbesen,

reply 5

One obvious way to address at least some of these issues would be to go to a "pick one general and one specialization" perk per levelup rather than making it a choice between them.

I was thinking the same thing. I would like to see a racial and profession specialization trees added to flesh out the general tab more. Then give the hero one trait for general and one for specialization on level up.

This is especially frustrating when your specialization is Mage, because now your Mage spells are completely disconnected from your spheres.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting ,

quoting post

Last game: 6x5 middle map, 4 ridiculous AI, playing with Pariden

Fact: My heroes used only general traits !! (this is a serious problem)

- my sovereign and 1st. heroe are mages so at 1st lvl i pick mage than 3 potential and knowledge and than the spells. When i start picking spell demage i already steam rolling the map so does not matter what i pick. I barely touched the fancy trait tree

-with 3. and 4. heroes i tried the other 3 professions but, heroes are useless cause of the swarm tactic you cant go in and fight couse you will be dead.

-i used only leather armor, on heroes cause i never reached the plate mail trait, (i was already steam rolling the map). On units because it is expensive, because swarm negates any armor, and because it makes low init.

- i created only 1 type unit the "rusher" :

+3attack +3move trait, +2init trait, +3 attack if init is higher trait,

(after watchtower in the fortress again +3attack and +3move witch is a joke)

weapon basic pike and upgrade if i have metal

horse (because you have plenty of them in every game)

-The "rusher" is the OP unit now, because you can finish the fight in the 1st turn, avoiding swarm.

- My only usable tactical spell was the slow and haste, because the casting times are so high (1 and 2 turn) for the fany magic, and the battles usually ends in the 1.-2. turn. (i never reached the savant trait because the game was over...)

I think the balance is completly off now, the new gameplay elements are not in the right place, i miss encumbarance, and i miss my 20$ right now.

This is also my experience and opinion about the current state of LH. It is not much fun playing and it doesn't have much promise. Hero development and tactical combat are a mess. I'd say FE is a much better game and you should go back to that and add the hero system to that basic game. Sorry but almost all the changes you've made are not better than what we had before. I suppose that can be taken as a compliment to the strength of the design of FE since it is so hard to improve on it.

Most of the changes to trained troops have made them a lot stronger versus combat champions, while the changes to champions (combat types, not mages) have made them weaker and less. The swarm tactic is far too powerful and together with the crushing blow and impale weapon effects just murder any hero stupid enough to fight a group of units in melee.

The new hero system is slow paced and too predictable, getting another hero at 3 Fame, 50, 100, 200, 400 and so on is boring. There is not enough experience in the game to reach high enough levels to make the heroes interesting or competative in the middle game with a unit of 5 trained lancers with charge. Low and middle ranked heroes are not particularly powerful or interesting only useful for casting haste or other utility spells in combat. It takes too long and too many levels ploughing through weak unfulfilling promotions to get something that feels useful and worth the trouble. Fame needs other ideas for use as a strategic resource, perhaps spending it for lessening global unrest or even buying experience for the heroes we have rather than just getting more heroes to sit idle.

Mages; both the summoner and damage dealing types are useful and interesting either as support to trained troops or as main damage dealers, so the ideas introduced there are working fine. It would be fun if the AI could be programmed to use mage sovereigns and heroes properly. They would provide a magical dimension to the game that it is lacking.

But Combat heroes are too weak and vulnerable. They don't inflict enough damage until very high level (20 and above) and they don't add worthwhile bonusses to the stack like they did in FE. A unit of armoured lancers is a better use of the stack slot than a combat hero and a good Fortress can produce a unit of 5 lancers once every 2 turns. Trying to make the Governor a combat hero (instead of a mage type) has further diluted the stock of useful promotions combat heroes (assassin, defender and warrior ) can have. Combat heroes should either fight in the front rank and deal or absorb damage or inspire the trained troops to fight harder. We need more stack enhancing promotions like Shieldwall and Obsidian Guard and they need to be easier to gain for a defender, hiding them at end of a long line of irrelevant promotions is not the solution. Shieldwall is useful in the early game before much armour is available, it's nearly useless on turn 300 when everyone in the stack already has 30 defence, that's why the old random promotion system in FE seemed so much better. One very useful promotion we had in FE that has been dropped is the +10% exp bonus to stack experience, that should be restored as way for heroes to be of benefit to the stack.

I'm sad to say that I am disappointed in the current state of LH, but I know you can and will deliver a fun game, so don't dispair

JJ

Successfully updated karma reason!

One problem is that hero acquisition is essentially mandatory. You have no choice but to select one of the 2 and you cannot defer the decision. In one game I was going broke due to wages paid to heroes.

I like the idea of having a pool of heroes determined by your fame but you have to pay a bonus to hire them, but they are available all the time.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Someone created a mod that allows you to delay your selection of a new hero until your are ready to do it. Just do a quick search of the forums, its a really good mod.

Successfully updated karma reason!

My recent experience (.8 build) is that I also miss encumbrance. It looks like it was taken out, but everything that it was previously balancing didn't get properly balanced with the change (especially traits that used to give the encumbrance and mounts).

I can get with the change to remove encumbrance, but a lot more of the game needs to be balanced.

As per heros - I think all heros should automatically gain an anti-swarm bonus. It'd make them more 'heroic' right off the bat.

The XP from taking out cities is horrible compared to killing a single darking group. This is especially painful for starts where your only choice is to attack enemy AIs without having the wilderness units to farm for XP.

IE - right now it makes more sense to leave a darking camp alone and only kill the spawned armies near it, rather than taking out the actual camp. That's a tonne of XP being generated and it's easy to level heros with it. Go kill an AI army? why bother.

The AI also isn't dealing with the changes very well either. I'm wiping them out on Ridiculous (.8 build) more efficiently than I did before that point, or in FE. They love that spell of Mastery tech too much to bother getting to Cooperation.

Oh, and the tarth trait sucks. I refuse to hire tarths. Bonus for being in a group of 3 units or less? Hope you have a lot of Iru Elixers ready 'cause you're going to die over and over again for trying that.

Quoting Peter Ebbesen,

reply 5

Tinker (extra accessory) -> Tailor (+10% defense) -> Soldier (+10% attack)

I see what you did there

Successfully updated karma reason!

mqpiffle

Join Date 10/2010

+44

The xp split for heroes isn't the problem, the amount of xp being gained is.

Often now the most interesting and difficult battles are conducted with AI factions.

In a recent game I (as Altar) fought an epic mid-game battle against Kraxis. The AI army was well-composed, and that +8 defense when under 50% hp is sick! I had to use a lot of tactical maneuvering, moving units in and out of melee, healing, using all of my available abilities. And the AI did the same.

I won the battle with Relias and maybe one other unit down to almost nothing, and got about 10 xp for a battle that literally took me about 15 real time minutes. Needless to say I was disappointed and frustrated.

The other issue are the level-up perks. Derek, I know you can do better than that. We need epic and legendary, not long, boring chains of unrelated skills that make your champions less useful with every level - because your trained troops are outpacing them just by gaining hit points and accuracy.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I am sorry, but I am just not seeing how champions are useless. I feel like they are working better than ever.

Yes, they can no longer be an army unto themselves and need troops to support them. Sure, if you try to roll around with just a sov/champ crew like in FE, you are going to get stomped.

However, having 1-2 champs in an army makes an incredible impact. Sure, some spell lines/traits are more potent than others, but the level of support, utility, buffs/debuffs, etc. that a champion brings to a standing army is absolutely huge. It's one of the reasons I like the current set up now, as even my Commander/Defender sorts can take one or two upgrades to their elemental spell type and bring some serious options to the table so long as I have the mana to support them.

Remember, heroes were broken in FE and the swarm mechanic fixes this problem. Having heroes be immune to swarm is a bad idea that will result in the game going in to a balance backslide. Mixing champions and armies is a huge part of what the game is about.

Most of the steamrolling problem I see are a matter of fully implementing LH mechanics in to the AI, which is still very much a work in progress from what I understand (AI just now started using weapon abilities).

Expanding on the current system would be great (i.e. more interactive/significant upgrades, less "+1 damage" baby steps), but the basic idea now is solid.

Successfully updated karma reason!

How about allowing one point in the general tree as well as one point in the class tree per level up? The general tree would then probably need more flexibility though, maybe with some survivability traits (anti-swarm is an excellent idea btw). This would help make heroes more viable in mid game and make those high tier skills more attainable.

Btw, I don't like the concept of the "potential" trait at all. I would scrap it completely. Is it fun to skill your first three levels into something that feels utterly pointless for the direct progression of the character? Is it even a strategic decision if you have no idea how long the game will last? To me it's a boring gamble at best. I only take it because I'm a compulsive minmaxer nerd and the thought of not pushing my hero to his limit is reason enough for me to restart the game.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Ashbery76

Join Date 02/2002

+36

People got used to heroes being a one man army and now they are part of the army which is their typical role in these types of games.Army units should be the mainstay of the game and the hero is a support role.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Ashbery76,

reply 17

People got used to heroes being a one man army and now they are part of the army which is their typical role in these types of games.Army units should be the mainstay of the game and the hero is a support role.

This. Testers need to keep in mind that this is not FE anymore. Heroes are not meant to be able to destroy everything that crosses their path. They are meant to support and lead an army into battle and fill in otherwise unavailable aspects that the army cannot fully cover.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting sweatyboatman,

reply 8

There are too many traits and leveling is a slog. Many of the meatier skills are hidden behind meaningless ones. So not only do you have to struggle to level, the reward for leveling is frankly pathetic.

If I were in charge I would change leveling so that it's a rare and wonderful effect. A champ or sov at level 10 would be uber powerful and have access to lots of endgame skills and spells.I would make each level offer one choice in general and one in the special. I would get rid of meta game skills like the +xp garbage. And combine multiple traits together.

That is exaclty my opinion, too.

Quoting GFireflyE,

reply 18

Testers need to keep in mind that this is not FE anymore. Heroes are not meant to be able to destroy everything that crosses their path. They are meant to support and lead an army into battle and fill in otherwise unavailable aspects that the army cannot fully cover.

Yep, but the heroes should be able to survive a few hits from enemy units in all stages of the game and they should be able to kill enemy units in all stages of the game, too.

Please do NOT increase the hit points of heroes, because this would lead to more balance problems (poison is too weak, healing is too weak, ...). There should be a healing spell that scales with the number of units in a group by the way.

Please do NOT remove the swarm mechanic, because it makes the tactical battles fun.

Successfully updated karma reason!

WRONG!

The problem is not this: "the heroes cant beat an army alone anymore". The problem is, the warrior, defender and assasin heroes are useless, you cant support with them, only stand in the back. There is not enough armor or dodge for them, to survive 1 turn in the middle of the fight, because of swarm.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Moving all the boring skills to automatic gain at level up could help solving both problems (heroes feeling weak, too long and boring trees). For example a Warrior may gain +1 attack every level, and leave the choice of skill to juicy ones.

One step furter would maybe set a path for these automatic skills. For example, have one Assassin gaining +accuracy per level, and another one gaining +dodge.

Additional note. To help develop heroes without the copy-paste template feeling, you could add some exclusive talents. I pick -10% mana cost for spells OR -1 casting time? This would promote specialization and make heroes uniques even amongst the same class.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Heroes are whatever the devs decide that they are. This is hardly a matter of principle. Heroes should be fun though and in a title dubbed "legendary heroes" a consumer would at least expect them to have more bearing in the game than being dead weight with an awkward leveling system, which they currently are. This is either a design or a marketing problem

Successfully updated karma reason!

I agree that the issue is not "the heroes cant beat an army alone anymore". I don't necessarily want a single hero to be able to defeat entire armies on their own. I think they should be able to wipe the floor with any army that is behind them in tech and level but if they encounter the units at a comparable tech\equipment level they should be in some trouble if on their own. What I have a problem with is that anytime you get into a battle the hero(s) should at least be considered the most dangerous unit on the field. I am not saying in the overpowering unstoppable way but the heroes should at least be a dangerous target you need to try and counter. I also think it should at least be viable to have a couple of different types of heroes in an army so you can balance what they bring to the table just like you would when you mix different type of trained troops into an army to get a better rounded mix of abilities.

+1

Successfully updated karma reason!

Agree with much of what is said.

XP needs to be looked at

Traits need to be looked at - too long to get to fun stuff.

Probably increase picks - 1 general, 1 skilled - or 2 total from wherever

Also agree to remove the potential picks - i always pick them, so 4 on a mage - and THEN it seems i can do some leveling

Traits are generally underpowered - +1 attack. whee. + 10% attack... maybe.

I do agree the random aspect was better - I might get stun at level 7 (no idea really) - now its like at level 20.

Multi-use traits would work - just compress the existing trees.

Multiple target skills are great - i.e. the attack 5 in a line. Should also have "mass" affects of various spells. i.e. something large on the mage tree, certain spells get 'mass', i.e. mass haste, mass slow, a la mass curse.

And I definitely agree the Tarth skill is for the birds, will never hire a Tarth unless I want to steal his equipment and consume him.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Quoting Lokitako,

reply 21

dditional note. To help develop heroes without the copy-paste template feeling, you could add some exclusive talents. I pick -10% mana cost for spells OR -1 casting time? This would promote specialization and make heroes uniques even amongst the same class.

I think you're on to something here. Exclusive talents like that certainly do add something to the uniqueness of a given hero. Having to choose between -10% mana cost and -1 casting time, I would probably go for casting time at every chance, but the point is there. Somebody back Lokitako up on the excellent idea of exclusive abilities.

Successfully updated karma reason!