agree its still too easy right now but i suppose its partially set this way to help beta testing everything would be hard to test if you takes 4 hours to discover the new tech also dont forget ai is primitive, i suppose in a normal game youll get attacked way more and so youll need to defend and counteratttack more whilel right now you can research in peace full time
[quote who="novagenesis" reply="131" id="2687563"]Just one thought... If retaliation costs AP, it will actually be a bad thing to counter-attack. If this mechanic is in place, I'll bring an extra dozen or two sacrificial peasants. 3-gold to wipe out an action point of a powerful opponent? I could take 1 hero and a bunch of peasants to kill anything. I'd keep attacking every turn until they are out of action poin
[quote who="Slainangel52" reply="128" id="2687556"] It makes no sense at all for two opposing armies to meet in a random formation outside of an ambush type scenario. Even then the attacker would still organize their formations before the assault. It either needs to automatically set it up intelligently or give the player the option to set up the formations for their side. [/quote] well it make no sense you have to research a shie
[quote who="Annatar11" reply="120" id="2687348"] Another thing that has been mentioned here is the "General" or "tactics" ability that lets you place units before battle. AoW didn't have this and it was maybe the only drawback of the TC in those games. It should be in, in one way or another. I disagree. This system adds little value if the game already smartly positions ranged units in the back and melee in front. This feature could be "cool" in some higher end battles, but not in t
baby dragons? can we breed eggs and grow our own dragons ? [e digicons]:|[/e]
[quote who="GoaGalneGbilski" reply="3" id="2686289"] Well that was unecessary. No one has mentioned an abiility called Maul for bears, yet in the OP says he wants the dragons to breathe fire, he also say how they could be improved in case SD doesn't have the time to think of that for every enemy, or if they forget something. They will naturally have thought of that dragons should breathe fire but now they see that people are actually interested in that..[/quote] </
guys whats the point of these threads? dont you see how many things are missing? useless to start arguing about things that are irrelevant right now, breath will be a bit in the status of dragon, who cares if they do it now or not
[quote who="Peace Phoenix" reply="70" id="2686053"] i don t get how that could happen Maybe some unit designed with full armor plate and heavy weapon [/quote] i imagine that stats on items are very temporary and will change following the development of combat system :P
[quote who="Peace Phoenix" reply="59" id="2686007"] There is a problem if your CS is lower than 1: you won't be able to have any action points for attacking. [/quote] i don t get how that could happen
[quote who="LDiCesare" reply="46" id="2685968"] This is a fine system, but how do you show the points to the player? To a12 year old who is bad at dividing numbers?[/quote] i dont get the question it will be displayed like every other stat [quote] I think the math is good, but it can't be presented this way. Even for us good at math, you don't want to have to do a lot of multiplications/divisions in order
[quote who="Gorstagg" reply="43" id="2685955"] The reason why I think these should have different values, and thus be different is. That strategic level movement is an abstraction of actual distance travelled. While tactical combat is a smaller arena, and has different mechanics.[/quote] yes on a general principle you are right but in a fantasy world a horse is faster than a footman both on a strategic and a tactical pov
[quote who="Gorstagg" reply="10" id="2685893"] Quoting Icepick, reply 5 On a side note: I would prefer to have my entire tactical spellbook available in battle, not just the spells I add to favorites. Hope this helps... To me it should be a no brainer, once a tactical spell is learned it should automatically go into the battle spell book tab. With the option of removing it being in the big version, instead of vice versa.[/quote]</p
[quote who="sjwt" reply="19" id="2685624"]I always liked the idea that conter attack was an option you had to select, and it used one point from *that* turn , not the next.[/quote] you cant really have a xcom like combat cause xcom was all based on guns and hidden enemies etc etc
[quote who="NullAshton" reply="17" id="2685605"]Here's one idea I had that would give more flexibility. Action points = Move Number of action points it takes to move one tactical tile = 1 Number of action points it takes to attack once/cast a spell once = Action Points/Combat Speed[/quote] this is also good with this cavalry move fast on both maps but cant attacck too much cause of combat speed hug
[quote who="SuperTimo" reply="34" id="2685908"]Um, why not just use the amount of moves units have on strategic map also in tactical combat, and combat speed as a number of attacks? That way you could get that heavy cavalry with lots of moves and few attacks, or a berserker with less moves but no armor and many attacks. [/quote] yeah after i thought a bit this basically solves most of problems the only problem with this system is that attack speed then bec
[quote who="Gorstagg" reply="35" id="2685927"] The key thing is to differentiate Overland Movement on the big map. And Tactical Movement, on the battle map. And should also be indicated that way, on the character stats page. And then the heart of tactical combat comes into play.[/quote] but there is no good reason to do that mounted units move fast on tactical map AND strategic map footman move slow on both
[quote who="Icepick" reply="10" id="2685527"]Retaliating more than once per turn (or enemy, maybe) should be a buff and/or special ability. A unit surrounded by enemies should not be able to strike back at everyone who swings at it unless they have a high level of skill, magic, or appendages.[/quote] well its not bad, giving the ability "always retaliate" to huge fierce beasts and double retaliate to some minor monster and specialized warrior could be an alternative
[quote who="Dalamor" reply="8" id="2685514"]I like the idea of researching different formations and/or special abbilities that your troops can have in tatical battles. E.G. Charge skills: bonus on the first attach.. mounts give you a charge bonus... that sort of thing. [/quote] yes thats a good idea, also to fill combat research there could be even a research to set troops at start of combat (within a few tiles ofc, not just all over the map) and some re
[quote who="TCores" reply="3" id="2685447"]How do these six things play out in large groups of units? If I have five units with 3 AP each and they're all right next to their foes, does that mean I click Attack a total of 15 times? (5 * 3) Or that I can cast fifteen spells? What about fifteen units? What are the thoughts behind having movement take 2 AP and attacking take 1 AP? While that's realistic, what is the intent of doing things that way? Would conflatin
[quote quoting="post"] When a unit attacks another unit, that units gets to retaliate (if it can) against the unit that attacked it. [/quote] perfect, that s how it work in almost any other game and its working till now [quote] Action Points = 1 + Your Combat Speed. Moving a tile uses 2 action points. Attacking and casting a spell uses 1 action point.[/quote] so with 1 speed you have enough to
[quote who="porternielsen" reply="25" id="2685330"] First off, there is a fix that wouldn't need to let every unit counterattack, yet still be fair. It is tacking combat speed away from actions. You give every unit 2 actions (maybe more as a special ability) 1 action can be used to move, the other action can be used to attack or cast spells. That way if you have a unit with the speed of one, then they can move next to you and attack you. Also if you use the tactic of
[quote who="smakemupagus" reply="5" id="2685301"] * Age of Wonders: The whole system was pretty good -- in particular, I liked the way that the turn was broken up so that you could either attack 3 times, move a lot and not attack, or move a little and attack once or twice * Heroes 3/5; King's Bounty: the strike & counterstrike system is pretty solid, and magic has a nice variety buffs & debuffs, direct damage, aoe's, and traps. In
[quote quoting="post"] By default, the tactical battle is set for 4 units. Sadly, at the beginning of the game, if your sovereign has at least a combat speed of 2, you must fight all battles, especially against spiders which have 25 HP but only a combat speed of 1. You let them come near you. During your turn, you spend 1 action to attack and 1 to move back. That way, you can hurt the spider each turn, without being hit by the spider. So you end the game withou
[quote who="Gorstagg" reply="17" id="2685155"] Were still using a beta tool. Were still probably generations behind where they are for the game overall development.[/quote] i hope not what would be the point for us of testing some broken beta if they have a better beta available? i can understand like in the bast with no tactical they ofc had battles going on but i dont want to believe they make us test
3 4 more tiles at start but speed NEED to be way faster should be like in kings bounty where 90% units goes 2 tiles/turn MIN with a good % having also more than 2 or some occasional speed boost 1 tile moving just kills the fun and gameplay also what would be the point of slowing spells if they already are so slow