A trip through the fantasy worlds I enjoy

Beta 4 

Beta 4 focuses on cities.  But that really means it focuses on the games pace.  Production, economy and research come from your cities.  When we change them we change the game.  First let's talk about a few of the design issues we have been wrestling with:

1.            Lack of city specialization.  Materials and Food are okay, but in general you want to build the same things in every city, or at least the player's preference outweighs the strategic benefit (so it feels like you just want to do the same thing everywhere).

2.            We need more improvements.  We want to double the amount a given city may have.  We want more choices, we want there to be a bigger difference between a city that focuses on infrastructure and one that produces troops.  I want a player focusing on infrastructure to never be able to run out of things to build.  And I want to do it without:

a.            Making improvements take forever to build.

b.            Making cities even larger than they already are (in fact I want to shrink cities).

3.            Basing the economy, research and production directly on population is painful/impossible when cities can grow from 1 from 600 population.  Whatever bonus we give for those resources on a 10 population city become 60 times as high on a 600 population city.  Lesson 1: To control game pace, control your ranges.

4.            City enchantments are a tightrope walk.  To good and you have to place them on every city, it becomes busywork.  Not good enough and you never use them.

 

I wish fixing it was a simple thing, but we needed a few pieces to make it all work.

 

Step 1: Starbases?

Outposts can be upgraded to give bonuses to anything in their Zone of Control.  They can boost allied units attack, reduce the attack of enemies, modify movement costs, scare away monsters, provide bonuses to the attached city, etc.  They are not destroyed when an enemy moves onto them, instead they are flipped to that enemies control and represent your control over the land itself (monsters still destroy outposts, I highly recommend you upgrade them with Wardens to keep the monsters at bay).

Outposts have a limited distance they can be built (or summoned) from each other, so you can't pepper the field with them.  But their ZoC's can intersect (with the right upgrades) and their bonuses are cumulative, allowing you to build strong defenses if you desire.

 

Step 2: Much like a bad Star Trek episode, it's all about the Queue

The production queue is a precious resource.  Everything in Beta4 builds faster, but there is a lot more to build.  As with Beta3 City Improvements and Units train in the queue, but Wild Improvements and Outpost upgrades go into the queue as well.  You can drag items around in your queue if you want to reorder them (and it remembers how much production you had on items you may move back in line).

The biggest change in Beta4 is that even though production is much faster, there are always things you want to build.  You can play as Pariden and drop outposts early on, but you will be making a hard choice to start claiming those resources vs making units or improvements in your cities.

Multiple cities are always good.  If you can defend them and you have the land to claim it's always a good option just because it gives you more queues.  The minimum distance between cities has been reduced in Beta4 to support more cities, closer together.

 

Step 3: Improvement Upgrades

In Beta4 improvements can upgrade.  Your Cleric upgrades to a Shrine which upgrades to a Sacrificial Altar (for Empire players).  Since the old improvement is replaced by the new one, we get a few benefits:

1.            City size stays relatively contained.  We added 40 new improvements and cities are about half the side they are in Beta 3.

2.            Cities look more advanced as they upgrade to higher tier buildings.  A cleric is a modest building, the Shrine is more pronounced, the artists can go all out on what the Sacrificial Altar looks like.  Upgraded buildings don't get lost in the jumble of the same buildings the rest of your cities have, they look more unique and specific to their purpose.

3.            You can't get to the higher tier buildings of particular types unless you have built the earlier versions.  You can't build the Treasury Vault unless you have gone through the economy boosting improvements on the way.  So you have to decide, do you want to build a Study, then School, then College and University?  If you do you won't be getting access to the best economy improvements without spending the time to go through the base one and their upgrades.  You are rewarded for specializing your cities and your cities build lists become very unique from each other.  Build lists also don’t become huge since you only see the highest tier you have access to (you only see the Pier, not the Dock and Harbor it upgrades to).

4.            Faction achievements and World Achievements are at the end of upgrade chains.  You can't build the Ironworks just because you unlocked the tech for it, and you can't build it in every city.  It will only show in a city that has specialized in what it does.

5.            Resource improvements upgrade too.  The first shard shrine only produces 1 mana per turn.  With the correct techs you can upgrade to ones that produce more mana.  The same goes for Crystal and Iron mines.  If you have enough iron mines to train your units maybe you don’t need to tech up the side of the tree to unlock these improvements.  But if you do want to have your iron come in faster, the research options are there for it.  This fixes a big issue for us by allowing us to control the pace of mana and resources as the game goes on, we can trickle it in in the beginning, then ramp it up as the player gets access to more expensive units and more costly spells.

 

Step 4: City Specialization

All cities start as villages.  When the city gets to city level 2 you pick a specialization for that city.  It can be either be a Fort, a Conclave or a Town.

 

Fort- Units trained in forts start at a level higher.  Forts are the only cities that can build walls as well as having access to improvements that improve defenders and improve trained units.

Conclave- Conclaves generate more research than other city types and have access to special magic and research improvements.  They gain additional bonuses from Essence (more about that later).

Town- Towns are the heart of your empire and are the source of your food, growth and money.  They also have a larger ZoC than other city types.  Towns have access to a series of improvements that improve the food production for all cities in your empire and they are cumulative with each other.  So Forts and Conclaves will never be able to reach the highest city levels on their own, they will need towns to support them.

 

The improvements for each city type are generally in that tech tree (Fort=Military, Town=Civilization, Conclave=Magic).  So players that are doing alot of teching in one area will find that they can get more advanced improvements for that sort of city.  If you have researched 90% of your magic tree and 0% of your Military tree you will have more high tier conclave improvements available than you have Fort improvements (in fact you will only have 1st tier Fort improvements available).

Choosing what sort of city you have opens up lots of new improvements to that city as well as determining what sorts of improvements the city can unlock at city level 3, 4 and 5.  The real magic comes in the intersection of the upgradeable improvement chains (which keep players from building everything everywhere) and the city types (which modify the effect of other improvements).  Maybe you want a food boosting town or a fort that creates super soldiers.  Or maybe you want studies in every city because you like studies (even if they are more productive in Conclave cities).

Note that studies are available everywhere.  Our point isn't to lock these city types down.  You can get research and money from non-town cities.  You can train units in Conclave cities.  The point is to open up new ways each type can specialize.

 

Step 5: The Economy

I love the idea of all the economics inputs coming from the population.  At one point I had a design where there were citizen types, unrest controlled how many were rebels, craftsmen produced special things.  It was a beautiful, intricate, stupid design.  Lesson number 2: If it's fun to design, it probably isn't fun to play.

Instead of getting money, research and production from the population, they now come from the city level.  A village (city level 1) produces 1 research a turn, a level 5 city produces 16 research per turn.  Of course these are modified by improvements, enchantments, etc.  But that is the extent of our range.

Because of that change tech costs drop to more normalized values.  A player with a large population isn't researching at 20x the rate of a player with a normal population.  He may be going twice as quickly.

Improvement costs can normalize since we know the ranges for a large production based city.  And they are close enough that they stay reasonable for a production focused city without being laughable for a moderate city.

Gold (*cough*, I mean Gildar) values were normalized since we control the ranges, meaning item costs in shops can come down.  Sell prices stay the same but now that money means more.  A gildar per turn means something to small and large empires alike because to don’t through a growth curve from starving for money to drowning in it.

 

Step 6: Essence

The final step is the addition of a new tile yield, Essence.  Essence appears much like Grain and Materials and is more prevelant around mana shards.  Only about half of the city locations have any essence nearby, and only about half of those have spots with 2 Essence.  3 Essence tiles are extremely rare.

There are chains of improvements that require essence before they become available.  The Cleric/Shrine/Sacrificial Altar chain I mentioned above is only available in cities with Essence.  Conclaves have access to Alchemy Labs and other improvements that give bonuses based on the amount of Essence in that city.  The Guardian Idol improvement requires Essence and is 1 per faction (it starts as a monument, upgraded to a Guardian Statue and then to a Guardian Idol), it is a powerful city defender that can cast any spell your sovereign can cast.

There are two improvements that can increase the amount of Essence in a city.  One is a level up option in Conclave cities.  The other is only available to Pariden.

The biggest advantage of Essence is that a cities Essence determines how many enchantments it can have.  City enchantments no longer have a maintenance cost and there are more of them and they are more powerful than before.  If you found a city on a place with essence the first thing you should do is get some enchantments on it.  Inspiration and Enchanted Hammers are good early ones that exist in Beta 3 (though in Beta4 the amount of their bonus depends on the amount of essence in the city).  Additional City Enchantments like Set in Stone (+100% production but no research), Blood Sigil (Withers all attackers, Berserks all Defenders) and Sovereign's Call (+1 Growth per Essence) allow you an additional decision on how to specialize your cities.  Trust in Glyph of Life to protect your Conclave from attackers, use Pit of Madness to speed the research in your Town.

Essence effectively becomes the most flexible tile yield, doing nothing on its own, but allowing you to reach in and play with the cities configuration.  Maybe you want it focused on gold and growth but dispel those enchantments and switch it into battle mode when enemies come near (enchantment maintenance is gone, but these spells still cost mana to cast so "respecting" your city isn't something you should do lightly).

 

Step 7: Balance

I find myself carefully considering the build options in my cities.  That doesn't mean it will be perfect.  I'm very curious to hear from all of you on what enchantments you use most and which you don't use at all.  Do you focus just on one sort of city type or play with a mix?  Do you chase down improvement chains to the end, or do you pick a variety of improvements in your cities?

In a few weeks you will have a chance to play and I'm excited to get your thoughts.  Until then we have work to do, mostly in making sure all the information is being displayed in an easy to understand way, and generally polishing the entire game to smooth the edges.

 


Comments (Page 13)
14 PagesFirst 11 12 13 14 
on Jul 17, 2012

I really dislike champion mortality, because it gives a much bigger incentive to reload much more often, I do not want to lose what hero I worked really hard to give 20 levels... I have allready said I might even reload if one of my high level champions sustains a greatly annoying injury, just because its half my power that just got an injury that makes him miss all the god damn time.

I do think it would be a nice idea if champions was unable to move, attack or even defend from the city they are located in while recouperating, and they should be in a medical ward for 10 to 20 turns before exit, so death means something, but losing them will make me very sad and just use "consume spirit" much much more.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

on Jul 17, 2012

Kongdej
I really dislike champion mortality, because it gives a much bigger incentive to reload much more often, I do not want to lose what hero I worked really hard to give 20 levels... I have allready said I might even reload if one of my high level champions sustains a greatly annoying injury, just because its half my power that just got an injury that makes him miss all the god damn time.

I do think it would be a nice idea if champions was unable to move, attack or even defend from the city they are located in while recouperating, and they should be in a medical ward for 10 to 20 turns before exit, so death means something, but losing them will make me very sad and just use "consume spirit" much much more.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

Well that is what I'm talking about when I say risk. What is the point of playing the game with no risk. And why cheat by reloading the game? I never understood why people who are playing a stratagy game feel the need to reload if soemthing does not go thier way. Personally I never reload games unless my PC goes out and I have to reload from last save.

 

on Jul 17, 2012

Bellack
And why cheat by reloading the game?

Why is it cheating by reloading a game?
I make tactical errors and I correct them, its my style of playing.
and please at least let me have that in peace.
I do not reload very frequently, but when something is breaking my game, and I mean 1 single mechanic, or 1 single bad decision hurl my game into the sewers, I reload.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

on Jul 17, 2012

Well I support my own view... ... I think going the middle of the road will both satisfy the majority as well as continue to make it fun and entertaining to play.

It is fair to say that champions need to be immortal in order for the AI to continue to be challenging.
It is also fair to say that the death of your champion could easily cause a reload, thus taking enjoyment out of the game.

I believe that limiting the penalty and giving excuses as to your champion's escape is an excellant way to justify an 'immortal' behaviour (unless you read Game of Thrones...everything is fair game there...). Also, the smaller penalty of a lost piece of equipment or ransom won't immediately tempt you to reload... 

Also, the AI doesn't have to be under the same rules as you. Giving these 'excuse' options allows for the AI to follow different rules, depending on the challenge rating of the game. AI could take champion penalty to varying degrees....or even at insane mode, no penalty at all.

on Jul 17, 2012

DsRaider
I don't think the people advocating fro mortal champions understand the consequences.

1. Champions would get pretty scarce once 1 or 2 have died.

2. You could only cope by never risking your champions. Champion levels would decrease significantly.

3. Winning a single battle against someone and killing 1-2 champions would mortally cripple them for the rest of the game. Bye bye magic.

4. The AI couldn't cope. Humans would reload much more.

 

Again the problem is 100% with the AI here. It is a really stupid to throw champions at people repeatedly. Players certainly don't do it. If the AI is fixed this will stop being such a issue. There are already significant penalties for losing a champion.

That's why I suggest the chance of death should start very low, but increase with every defeat. The wounds system is a nice idea, and one or two wounds gives a hero character. It just gets a bit ridiculous if they sustain a dozen or so, and yet still are useful as anything other than a scarecrow. The ability to remove the wounds makes 'death' even more meaningless.

As for the heroes becoming scarce, that could be an issue, but it is also solved pretty easily. You could simply start with more heroes, or have more appear during the game (just showing up at your capital and offering their service, appear on the map, or reintroducing the dynasty system).

To your third concern; that's the point. Otherwise the game just becomes an endless grind of killing the same heroes over and over again.

And for your fourth point; the AI will just have to get better. Other games seem to have an AI that can differentiate between heroic and regular units, why can't FE's?
If players want to reload after loosing a hero that's their choice. Others like to play ironman style. Why make the choice for them?

on Jul 17, 2012

I just hope we get some more terrain in Beta4. Brad requested it but it's Derek's call. We have no official confirmation so far so it's still up in the air.  I would really like to see some arctic poles, lakes, and ruins.

on Jul 17, 2012

ETA?!?!?!?!?

on Jul 17, 2012

DsRaider
I don't think the people advocating fro mortal champions understand the consequences.

1. Champions would get pretty scarce once 1 or 2 have died.

2. You could only cope by never risking your champions. Champion levels would decrease significantly.

3. Winning a single battle against someone and killing 1-2 champions would mortally cripple them for the rest of the game. Bye bye magic.

4. The AI couldn't cope. Humans would reload much more.

 

Again the problem is 100% with the AI here. It is a really stupid to throw champions at people repeatedly. Players certainly don't do it. If the AI is fixed this will stop being such a issue. There are already significant penalties for losing a champion.

 

The reason champions were dying so much was fixed in the last beta.  It was caused because the AI could not see monsters on top of goodie huts. So it would target a goodie hut (with say a dragon on it), get killed. Come back. Go to the goodie hut. Get killed. Come back. Go to goodie hut. Get killed. and so on.

on Jul 17, 2012

Frogboy
The reason champions were dying so much was fixed in the last beta. It was caused because the AI could not see monsters on top of goodie huts. So it would target a goodie hut (with say a dragon on it), get killed. Come back. Go to the goodie hut. Get killed. Come back. Go to goodie hut. Get killed. and so on.

I was referring more to how when you are fighting an AI you end up killing most their champions quite a few times. They don't really worry to much about sending out champions without sufficient support when fighting other players. It's just that human players are unlikely to send out champions to fight another player unless they are pretty confident of a win while the AI will risk champions during war even if the odds are against them. They don't avoid combat in order to keep champions and units alive when fighting other factions.

on Jul 17, 2012

TheProgress
ETA?!?!?!?!?

Frogboy/Draginol/Brad said in another tread that it wont be till early august.

Edit: Because of the Q&A team is working on 'the political machine' for the moment.

on Jul 17, 2012

Aww, pants man. I've a brand new PC I just finished building and I really want to see how the next beta plays out on it.

on Jul 17, 2012

Satrhan

Quoting DsRaider, reply 181I don't think the people advocating fro mortal champions understand the consequences.

1. Champions would get pretty scarce once 1 or 2 have died.

2. You could only cope by never risking your champions. Champion levels would decrease significantly.

3. Winning a single battle against someone and killing 1-2 champions would mortally cripple them for the rest of the game. Bye bye magic.

4. The AI couldn't cope. Humans would reload much more.

 

Again the problem is 100% with the AI here. It is a really stupid to throw champions at people repeatedly. Players certainly don't do it. If the AI is fixed this will stop being such a issue. There are already significant penalties for losing a champion.

That's why I suggest the chance of death should start very low, but increase with every defeat. The wounds system is a nice idea, and one or two wounds gives a hero character. It just gets a bit ridiculous if they sustain a dozen or so, and yet still are useful as anything other than a scarecrow. The ability to remove the wounds makes 'death' even more meaningless.

As for the heroes becoming scarce, that could be an issue, but it is also solved pretty easily. You could simply start with more heroes, or have more appear during the game (just showing up at your capital and offering their service, appear on the map, or reintroducing the dynasty system).

To your third concern; that's the point. Otherwise the game just becomes an endless grind of killing the same heroes over and over again.

And for your fourth point; the AI will just have to get better. Other games seem to have an AI that can differentiate between heroic and regular units, why can't FE's?
If players want to reload after loosing a hero that's their choice. Others like to play ironman style. Why make the choice for them?

 

I think the immortality angle is only in the game because champions are harvested like a resource, leading to potential scarcity.  This is why I never liked this game mechanic.  It would have made more sense for champions to arise from your regular units, sort of like how generals are generated in Total War.  If they would have went with that system, champion scarcity would never have been a problem.

Regardless, I am still in the camp that champion immortality needs to be addressed beyond the wound system.  Whether it is via a small chance of death (I still prefer this, especially if there is a chance of resurrection - something that would tie in nicely with FE's magic system), ransoming, loot drops on defeat...whatever, right now champions are playing it too safe which is making battles less than tense.

on Jul 17, 2012

Kongdej

Quoting Bellack, reply 183 And why cheat by reloading the game?

Why is it cheating by reloading a game?
I make tactical errors and I correct them, its my style of playing.
and please at least let me have that in peace.
I do not reload very frequently, but when something is breaking my game, and I mean 1 single mechanic, or 1 single bad decision hurl my game into the sewers, I reload.

Sincerely
~ Kongdej

I'm not sure how you can't perceive reloading to be cheating. Your basically playing your game with perfect hindsight. You can't make a wrong move, and any you do can be erased. 4x game play hinges on these choices. If there's only one outcome to every choice you make and that outcome is success for you, where's the strategy? Where's the achievement in your choices making your simulated civilisation prosper and survive? Further more how can any AI compete with your ability to rewind time in your favour? There's little point in having clever AI if the human player circumvents any AI victory that's not in the players favour. Your making tactical errors, true enough. Your not correcting them though. Correcting would be altering your strategy and making sure it doesn't happen again in the given game your playing without a reload. What your doing is erasing your mistakes. Even those you didn't consider mistakes till it all went wrong. Chess would be a boring game if you had this ability. Any game would be.

 

Now I'm not saying your wrong to do it. Its a single player game, do what you like. Do know that its as much a cheat as a god mode on a shooter though. Hell I've done it myself once or twice. Mainly when civ 4 (well FFH) ran gen has give me what I consider a bum deal. 99% victory chance Yet losing a leveled hero to a warrior or some other such unit and I've chosen to press the attack with him when I really didn't have too. I've always known I'm cheating doing it, but only myself of the experience I'm supposed to be playing these games for.

 

I suppose cause I'm so used to having mortal champions in FFH, and still managing to keep them alive, without babying them to the point of uselessness or reloading every encounter. I just don't see what the problem is in them being at real mortal risk. In Elemental my entire army is hero's right now bar units garrisoned in my cities. Why? they can't die, units can. Its that simple. In FFH I wouldn't send my prized hero into every encounter for this exact reason. It made me pick and choose when to risk my big guns. Of course hero's in FFH with a few levels under them are monstrous(Chalid Astrakein anyone?) so you could safely send them into most situations anyway cause they are just that tough. However if I see an enemy army with the ability to kill that hero, I have to make a choice whether I need my hero to be heroic and possibly die for my civilisations continuation, hopefully in doing so severely crippling the enemy army or at least slowing them down for me, or send him to safety hope my standing army can deal with the threat or at least weaken it so my hero can mop up. You know tactical choices. Having mechanics that remove these hard choices.. seems well a shame. Especially when the reload ability is already there for those that want or need it. With this mechanic as it stands, those meaningful choices aren't there, nor can I press a button like 'quick load' and have them inserted.

 

I'm not having a go, and hope I haven't come off as though I am. Like I said your entitled to do as you like. I just dislike any game mechanic which takes away meaningful choice. I consider the need to preserve your powerful units as a meaningful choice, and a game play stimulator in itself. If hero's in Elemental could die I highly doubt people would be fielding them as exclusively as they do now. Sure some would reload more but like I said there's no harm in that. I'm not saying remove the reload ability entirely (its not impossible to do), I'm just saying that peoples need or ability to use reload as a tool shouldn't be taken into consideration when forming game mechanics. Its a cheat.

 

The AI inability to stop its hero's from dying is a problem though, I do admit. and support ways to help it out. I think we lose too much risk/reward making all hero's immortal all the time though. Surely there's a good middle ground. I like the so many wounds death idea, or something akin to it.

 

on Jul 17, 2012

RooksBailey

Regardless, I am still in the camp that champion immortality needs to be addressed beyond the wound system.  Whether it is via a small chance of death (I still prefer this, especially if there is a chance of resurrection - something that would tie in nicely with FE's magic system), ransoming, loot drops on defeat ... whatever  ...  

This.

(And for my part, I still find the Ransom angle to be particularly intrigueing ...)

(And, REALLY, something has got to be done about the AI's heros never dying; when coupled with the AI's shabby practice of constantly throwing defeated (ever weakening) champions back at the human player, again and again and again and again ...) 

 

on Jul 17, 2012

Having mechanics that remove these hard choices.. seems well a shame. Especially when the reload ability is already there for those that want or need it. With this mechanic as it stands, those meaningful choices aren't there, nor can I press a button like 'quick load' and have them inserted.

 

This is a good point, but I don't agree that heroes need to be mortal to achieve it. FFH is a vastly different game. In that game throwing a hero at an army was not as big of a deal. In FE doing so can mean losing half of your spellbook and a significant component of tactical battles. With no hero to cast counter spell, you are vulnerable to fireballs and blizzards. You are also throwing away all the equipment on that hero, which can amount to thousands of gildar. Heroes are simply too big of an investment to throw away on a single battle. That is, unless they are immortal. I would argue that the choice you want in the game is only possible when heroes can't die outright. I think the main problem is that injuries do not cripple the hero enough to matter. You can be defeated ten or more times and still have the power of a hero two levels below you. It would be better to have extremely severe injuries over death. Death will break the game. Even if you reload, the AI can't. There is no way to help the AI against death with the current game mechanics, which is why immortality was implemented in the first place. 

Now if the AI would stop abusing immortality, the injuries could be set on a more drastic scale. The middleground needs to be making heroes as-good-as-dead. Something like -75%Hp would effectively force a hero into domestic life, but you would keep the spells he has learned and can trade his equipment to another fresh hero. -10 Initiative would be another apt addition. Basically a useless hero, unless you spend 2500 mana to compensate. Injuries need some more methods of being healed as well. Furthermore, you shouldn't be able to get rid of all of them at once. This area of the game needs some work. There should be at least four ways to rid one's hero of injuries. Buying a shop item, learning a spell, completing a quest, and defeating another hero. Ransom would be an excellent additional game mechanic. But new mechanics take time to develop. It would be optimistic to think that it will make it into the initial release. Still, a great idea for the expansion. I would hate to see it tacked on, without reaching its full potential.

14 PagesFirst 11 12 13 14