|
Fledgling Gulps posted:Have we seen a foraging ability before? Heal some HP when ending a turn on a certain terrain I assume. A whole bunch of goblin units (all of them even?) have wetlands foraging and it does just that.
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
It's a goblin racial ability. +9 HP/turn on wetlands.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Guess I need to play Goblins more often :v
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
They only just added it a couple months ago with the expansion, didn't they? That big patch helped a lot to even out the playing field, making weaker/less interesting stuff more exciting, both units and spells.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
My only concern with the Butchers getting upgraded to T2 is that the T1 era is getting even smaller than it was before; not that I ever built Skewers beforehand, mind, but it's a worrying trend. Not sure how they would solve that problem at this point, short of making T1 units even cheaper than they already are, or making everything else more expensive. Still, the idea is very cool. I hope they promote some T1 units from the other races, too; it could be an interesting way to make them all more varied (Some races have better pikemen, or archers, or infantry), and would even solve the problem of Civic Guardsmen being too weak (By getting rid of them entirely and giving humans Swashbucklers instead  )
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 08:25
|
|
|
Maybe a tech restriction based on total population/number of cities might work: eg 1-2 cities: only tech 1 units can be built. 3-4 cities enable tech 2, 5-6 enable tech 3, and 7+ cities are needed to build tech 4 units. This would promote city building, of course, and means by the time you get T4 you should already have an army of the lower tech levels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 12:10
|
|
|
I'm not so sure this game needs more reasons to expand as rapidly as possible, there are already plenty Then again I'm also not so sure what the impact of adding yet another one to the pile would be
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 12:15
|
|
|
Kirinith posted:My only concern with the Butchers getting upgraded to T2 is that the T1 era is getting even smaller than it was before; not that I ever built Skewers beforehand, mind, but it's a worrying trend. Not sure how they would solve that problem at this point, short of making T1 units even cheaper than they already are, or making everything else more expensive. You don't actually unlock Pikes until Warhall anyways, adding the Butcher doesn't change anything except replacing a weak/cheap unit with a strong/expensive one. I must have a different perspective, because for me Tier 1 units never really go out of style until very late game. Jumping to Warhall is rarely a priority even for my throne, and smaller cities are lucky to even have a barracks. Tier 1 units are what all of my crappy towns pump out until they eventually have better options, and even using Tier 2 units as garrison troops is usually overkill. quote:I'm not so sure this game needs more reasons to expand as rapidly as possible, there are already plenty This. No one sits on their starting city and straight techs to Tier 3 units and then goes on to have a brilliant and successful game. Now, class units are generally better then racial units, and different races emphasize different unit types, which means that what racial units you actually build will vary greatly with Class and Race choice.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 13:40
|
|
|
I tend to mostly ignore tier 1 units outside of archers and the good irregulars, which never become entirely useless. I'll use what's in my starting stack and what I get from bandit camps, but my games are usually paced around tier II units with gradually increasing levels of tier III and then a rare tier IV at the end. II and III are where all the most fun units are anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
Tier 1 Archers and Irregulars are definitely the most useful, but that's half the Tier 1 units right there. Tier 1 swords are almost never optimal to build but they work if you need a quick blocker and don't have anything better available. Pikes are in a weird place. They exist and work quite well as a cheap counter to mass Cav/Flyer strats, and people consequently tend not to go all-in on those unit types. Which means people mostly don't bother with Tier 1 pikes because they aren't hot stuff against mixed armies. The exception is Phalanx, because they are incredibly tough units even outside the units they counter, which they just crush. Butchers also look to be strong enough units to be worth taking over Warg Riders in a lot of situations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
What's the consensus on tier 1 sword units, then? For my money I really like making use of Halfling Nightwatch and Orc Greatswords.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
Sword Units are really cost effective. For barely more gold then an irregular you get a unit that sometimes (Dwarf Axeman) can soak damage better then most Tier 2 units or can hit hard enough (Orc Greatsword) to threaten almost any unit with heavy flanking damage. The only problem with Swords is the multitude of higher-tier replacements that largely do the same thing but better and flashier. Range Units are always in demand but you unlock new melee units with every tier. Personally, I really like Crushers. They manage to toe a nice middle-ground between toughness and offensive with overwhelm and projectile resistance, and fast healing lets you be pretty reckless with them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 14:56
|
|
|
While Axemen are still my favorite infantry, I've gained a lot of respect for Goblin Marauders. They have surprisingly high defense for how little they cost to build; Wetland Foraging and Volunteer are just nice side benefits. They don't deal much damage, but they're quite good at tying down enemy units for your darters and untouchables.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
I think the main thing is that it's very easy to get units as combat rewards and from inns, so you don't really need to actually build units from your throne early except maybe some basic irregulars for bandit defense, until you can start spitting out tier 2 class units. Those tend to invalidate most racial choices, since class units tend to have synergy with your entire lineup of class spells and other units. On medium or small maps by the time you clash with a nearby opponent and perhaps even take their capital you have used zero units from your capital to reinforce your main army, mainly using summons, inns, and quest rewards so you can keep the pressure on. This means the key time for you to build cheap low tier units would be the first 5 turns or so, when you are near your own throne and clearing neutrals and dealing with bandits, etc. It takes longer than that to set up the infrastructure to produce even tier 1 units, though. If you didn't have to stop to build barracks it might be a real choice whether or not to spit out a couple tier 1s early to help give you momentum. As it is now you can't do it until you have cleared the immediate area and are getting inns/quests. Having extra production carry over from turn to turn would help make tier 1s more attractive later in the game as well as making hammers more useful in general. Right now they are pointless unless you have exactly enough to get to the next breakpoint to shave off another turn. It wouldn't make them any more attractive early, but it would help once you have some basic economy. Having the class and racial production structures condensed into one chain would help early, though, since you'll want that building to build class units later anyway. It would give you the option to make some early racials without investing in something you won't care about ten turns later. Having two production chains is kind of redundant anyway, since class units are also locked behind tech.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
madmac posted:Tier 1 Archers and Irregulars are definitely the most useful, but that's half the Tier 1 units right there. Tier 1 swords are almost never optimal to build but they work if you need a quick blocker and don't have anything better available. To be fair, Tier 1 Archers often have similar pricetags to T2 units and are much harder to get 1/turn out of low-development cities. What kind of map setting do you use where you produce an active, dynamic T1 racial phase of the game? PS what is your steam name?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 21:42
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:To be fair, Tier 1 Archers often have similar pricetags to T2 units and are much harder to get 1/turn out of low-development cities. An active, dynamic T1 racial phase might be overselling things. I would say building Tier 1 units in largish numbers is more a campaign thing, where you start out behind and need to have actual units (sometimes) protecting your cities to keep the AI from just rolling over you. Or as garrison fodder in far flung cities you can't afford to build up to produce anything better. In RNG maps Tier 1 units are used a lot less simply because you and your AI opponents are mostly doing your own thing in the early phases of the game. If for some reason (Like cramped map placement) things get heated very early then the usual starting rules don't apply and Tier 1 units become much more useful. Basically, people don't build a lot of Tier 1 Racial units because usually no one is doing any real fighting during the phase of the game where they are most powerful. They exist mostly as creeping and garrison fodder, and really, that's ok. They are already the least varied and interesting units in the game, (Archers excepted, obviously) and with how many more games I start vs games I finish I can honestly say I've had to fight more battles with Tier 1 racials then any other unit type, by far. I'm in the Steam Group, shouldn't be hard to find.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2014 22:26
|
|
|
It isn't just that people aren't attacking each other when tier 1 units would be the most useful, it's that they are still setting up their infrastructure in their first city as well. Also, unlike MoM, you start with a sizeable army. The point at which you would be building those units you have little reason to since you already had them given to you for free! Having a bit more of a speed bump before hitting tier 3 would actually make them a lot more viable. You could gate the tier 3 production structure similar to the palace, requiring basic upgrades in other building chains before you could build it. Of course, that doesn't stop people from getting them from quests or inns, which is where most people get them anyway. Perhaps inn costs could go up a little, or better yet start without units and have them slowly fill up. They already do this once you hire them, just make them start that way so people can't get a tier 3 from them within the first 10-15 turns? Carnalfex fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
The Racial Tier 3 building comes out late enough as it is, I think. Rushing Tier 3 Buildings is a not a viable strategy in most cases because you simply won't have the production and income early on to make it work. Personally I'm really bad about neglecting it entirely, Racial Tier 3 is usually the last thing I get out before T4. You do start with a barracks in your Throne City and pumping out a few extra units for the all-in rush is a semi-viable tactic in some rare situations. Really the main thing that prevents rushing in this game is just the RNG/fog of war factor. If it was played on Starcraft style-maps with set starting positions Goblin Zerg Rushes would totally be a thing. But yes, because you can reasonably not expect to be attacked early 90% of the time there's no reason not to leave your Throne defenseless and queue up a few key buildings while using your starting armies to clear.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
Yeah....production of tier 3 racials from buildings is pretty much ignored because they can be acquired much faster from quests and inns, too. By the time you have one or two the game is coming to a climax in your average small/medium RMG map.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
This game is kicking my rear end so far, even though I'm very familiar with the previous games. Lost the first campaign mission very early on after I captured the first Orc town to the east. I had garrisoned the town with the lizard hero and 7 other units, but a prolonged fight with an army including a shrine of smiting took a serious toll. When another army attacked the following turn, I was in no shape to resist. Reloaded the autosave and sent some reinforcments over, but turns out the AI also had some reinforcements, and I ended up even more outnumbered than before  It's definitely nice to see that the AI is a little smarter in the tactical fights, but it does make attrition a real problem when exploring the map. I'm not sure if aggressive expansion or turtling is the answer, but from trying a couple random maps and the campaign, it seems like a mix of both stretches my resources too thin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
You want aggressive expansion I am a turtler at heart, so I'm having a tough time coming to terms with this, but it is absolutely true. The only limiting factor on how fast you should expand is how fast you run out of resources and units
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 13:15
|
|
|
The first Campaign Mission is a bit deceptive. They give you an early city to teach you how to build units, but the correct way to play it is to basically walk straight forward, pick up a bunch of free units and clear it in an hour or so. Usually I'll build up the starting city and the Fey Dwelling juuuust enough to get a couple bard/assassins and a few fairies to round out my armies, and there's no reason to sit around waiting for them to build. There are times when Turtling works but only when you've already secured a lead rather then playing passively when you're already behind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
http://ageofwonders.com/forums/topic/boar-riders-with-polearms/ " Are you actually fluent in Japanese? I don’t want to be harsh, but you seem to have mis-translated the Kanji – if you indeed tried at all " "You are needlessly prolonging this discussion, because you won’t ever admit you are wrong – indeed that you have no idea what you are talking about." " I frankly think your posts on this thread are troll-ish, given that you are obviously ignorant of medieval military history" This all starts because some people start demanding that units be changed to fit "THE LORE" (they want dwarven cav to get pike abilities because of their art). It is still going full swing and is glorious to behold. My favorite is every post that contains the word "japanese", those are pure gold. Reminds me a lot of fragmaster's video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-uTnqYHZ-I This thread has been the hottest one on the forum for a week or so running. It is clearly the most important topic to the community. Carnalfex fucked around with this message at 04:37 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Carnalfex posted:http://ageofwonders.com/forums/topic/boar-riders-with-polearms/ Reading about stuff like this, along with say FF14 or Guild Wars 2 makes me believe that being a developer or someone like that who reads their own official forums requires a large amount of booze and possibly drugs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
Leal posted:Reading about stuff like this, along with say FF14 or Guild Wars 2 makes me believe that being a developer or someone like that who reads their own official forums requires a large amount of booze and possibly drugs. What a great idea for a package to Gerblyn and Co. What do you think, should we go for quality or sheer quantity given the amount that they'll need?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Leal posted:Reading about stuff like this, along with say FF14 or Guild Wars 2 makes me believe that being a developer or someone like that who reads their own official forums requires a large amount of booze and possibly drugs. In the case of MMOs, they typically deserve the static on the official forums. It took GW2 a year and a half to realise the subforum for trashtalking was full of vitriol that got people bans and passive aggressive smacktalk that qualifies for bans. For more spergy games, it's even worse because you can't tell if they're being serious. The community for Total War complain about romans being shorter than barbarians and ropekid is a saint dealing with the people who demand PoE to have arbitrary X Y Z or it won't be their dream RPG. Carnalfex posted:What a great idea for a package to Gerblyn and Co. What do you think, should we go for quality or sheer quantity given the amount that they'll need? They need a vacation. The whingers go berserk when devs aren't working on the game 24/7 when the game needs a patch right now this instance or all faith is lost. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 11:05
|
|
|
 Gerblyn, just stay here with us. At least we're just assholes and not loving insane.E: Of course its news to no one regarding an offical forums for any videogame but wow. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 11:21
|
|
|
Some guy posted:Regarding seven-foot anticavalry swords – an extra foot in the weapon’s length actually means more than an extra foot in the effective length when set versus a charge. As I explained earlier, the point really needs to be at a minimum height in order to be effective – my choice of 4′ was a guesstimate, but let’s go with that. Using Pythagoras, a 6′ zweihander would have a hypotenuse squared of 36, while the 4′ of vertical height would cost you 16 of that, giving a horizontal reach (from the point the weapon is braced at) of little more than 4′. A 7′ nodachi would have a hypotenuse squared of 49, minus 16 is 33, giving almost 6′ of horizontal reach. An 8′ poleaxe (which appears to be roughly the length of the dwarf weapon) has a hypotenuse squared of 64, minus 16 is 48 – giving you close enough to 7′ of horizontal reach as makes no real difference. A 9′ polearm would have nearly double the horizontal reach used in this way as a 6′ zweihander. Only video games will result in someone seriously using pythagoran theory to whine about the balance of a dwarf unit vs an orc. Autism in its purest form.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
Thyrork posted:
Fortunately other people are in charge of reading the other forums and things, the last time I read anything there was when Carnalfex inadvertantly caused havoc by posting his Zombie video 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
ninjewtsu posted:You want aggressive expansion madmac posted:The first Campaign Mission is a bit deceptive. They give you an early city to teach you how to build units, but the correct way to play it is to basically walk straight forward, pick up a bunch of free units and clear it in an hour or so. Usually I'll build up the starting city and the Fey Dwelling juuuust enough to get a couple bard/assassins and a few fairies to round out my armies, and there's no reason to sit around waiting for them to build. Thanks, yeah I took a much more aggressive approach and cleared the mission without any trouble (except for that shrine, holy crap. Seems like t4 units are even more powerful than in the previous games). Thyrork posted:
And this is why I never register on official forums.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
Fruits of the sea posted:Thanks, yeah I took a much more aggressive approach and cleared the mission without any trouble (except for that shrine, holy crap. Seems like t4 units are even more powerful than in the previous games). The key weakness of Shrines is that they can only do the giant gently caress-off AOE once per battle, so you just bait it out with expendable units and then it's helpless in melee. Also it's damage scales with friendly devout units (Shrines don't count) which means they're impossible to mass effectively. I actually think Tier 4 units in this game are weaker then they've ever been, just flanking and always hitting attacks means that any Tier 4 unit by itself can just be shredded by even garbage units ganging up on it. That said, they also have more pronounced Strengths and Weaknesses, so just knowing how each T4 unit works makes it a lot easier to fight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
+1 for sending Gerblyn & co a booze and drug care package
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
Admit it, you guys brought the Reaper back just so you could drop a song reference. http://ageofwonders.com/dev-journal-dont-fear-the-reaper/ Looking good, looking good. I honestly love the animation for invoke death. madmac fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
I like the sound of the new Invoke Death; a short-ranged ability that is basically a high-damage attack with the potential to instakill. The low-odds, high-stakes design being bandied around before seemed frustrating for both players.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Yeah, I like the new take on the death ability, too. Reapers in SM were Unholy Terrors you'd avoid getting into melee range with at any cost so I think they nailed that feeling pretty drat well. I'm also assuming it'll be a summon, so you at least shouldn't be seeing masses of the things. Necromancer is looking good. The concept art for all of their units is seriously metal. Now about those new race(s)...
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
mitochondritom posted:Only video games will result in someone seriously using pythagoran theory to whine about the balance of a dwarf unit vs an orc. Autism in its purest form. Its also a really weird way to use pythagorus (what the hell do we care what the hypotenuse squared is?). It would be way clearer if they whipped up a diagram in paint or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Yeah and seriously if they wanted to make a convincing argument they'd use the law of cosines anyways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
Throwing around these numbers means nothing if you don't also take into account the optimal ratio of force you can absorb determined by the angle you hold the polearm at (which is further limited because you actually have to aim it properly) and the range covered. Since you also must consider where the weapon is gripped I'm not sure this is trivial. Assuming there is no meaningful loss of force on impact seems reasonable, though and should make matters easier. So yeah, these guys are weird.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
a!n posted:Throwing around these numbers means nothing if you don't also take into account the optimal ratio of force you can absorb determined by the angle you hold the polearm at (which is further limited because you actually have to aim it properly) and the range covered. Since you also must consider where the weapon is gripped I'm not sure this is trivial. Assuming there is no meaningful loss of force on impact seems reasonable, though and should make matters easier. I'm not taking these guys seriously until I see a free body diagram or two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
Gerblyn posted:Fortunately other people are in charge of reading the other forums and things, the last time I read anything there was when Carnalfex inadvertantly caused havoc by posting his Zombie video Hey, I enjoyed that thread. :-P
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 23:51
|
|
