The difficulty of breaching wizard towers mostly has to do with creatures that are unusually strong or weak compared to their monster budget cost. Presumably changing those budget values would even things out.
|
Caster of Magic Release thread : latest version 6.06!
|
|
February 24th, 2016, 17:22
(This post was last modified: February 24th, 2016, 17:31 by Seravy.)
 (February 24th, 2016, 17:13)ChongLi Wrote: Was just talking to a friend about the monsters guarding Wizard's Towers. We noted that the difficulty of breeching them varies a lot. Have you considered making Wizard's Towers more consistently difficult so that the planes remain separate for a longer period of time? I made them intentionally inconsistent so games are more varied. At the very least all of them weak or medium difficulty like the original was not very good. I didn't consider making them all hard but that would make Life and Death a tremendous advantage (other 3 realms have no access to plane shifting at all!) so I don't think that's a good idea. Especially now that the AI can use those abilities, it could easily lead to a one sided invasion with no means to fight back due to unbreakable towers. Although, I need to admit, they break a bit too easily right now. A slight increase might be a good idea. The current setting is 650-3050, but difficulty modifies that to 25/50/75/100/125% per difficulty level. Which actually raises the question, why didn't Kyrub increase this to 50/75/100/125/150 when shifting the difficulty levels? It used to be intro = 25, easy = 50, normal = 75, hard = 100, impossible = 125 instead we have easy = 25, normal = 50, hard = 75, extreme =100, impossible = 125 Even though I adjusted the amounts themselves, this scaling has too large gaps on the more used difficulty levels which is just not good. I think fixing this and adding another 400 to the base amount should be fine. 75/100/125 scales pretty well, 50/75/100 not so much not to mention with the current smart AI, people might even want to use Easy.
Good idea! Yeah, if it rolls under 1000 at extreme difficulty it might be too frustrating.
As for the one-sided invasion, I think that's a lot less threatening than towers that break too early leading to an invasion of powerful Myrran units. At least with the one-sided invasion the AI has to cast buffs on every unit to bring them through (or in the case of Death, only Shadow Demons can get through). (February 24th, 2016, 19:49)ChongLi Wrote: Good idea! Yeah, if it rolls under 1000 at extreme difficulty it might be too frustrating. There is always the possibility of a Myrran wizard casting Astral Gate on their cities and swarming the Arcanus plane with Myrran units that seemingly appear out of nowhere. Although at the moment if the towers can stop the AI wizard playing barbarians on Arcanaus from taking over 75% of the game world in the first 150 turns that's an achievement, they might be too good for AI combat. (February 22nd, 2016, 14:14)Seravy Wrote: I stumbled upon this code by accident, as far as I can tell, it's always the player on the right, AI on the left, no matter which is the defender. Why's that kinda stupid, exactly? Where is it written that the players should change sides? MoM is a one-player game, the human is always on his own side, and the computer player is always on the other. It's a consistent interface and the player always knows where his icons will be. Quote:The defender's name (as well as battlefield enchantments) should be on the left side since that's where the defender's units start. Why? How did you come up with this idea? Quote:It makes no sense to put the attacker's name on the left side and then have the attacking units start on the right. The player's name is always on the same side and the computer is always on the other. It's always the same throughout the game and the player never has to guess which side he's on.
I find the way it originally was built to be satisfactory. The confusion comes from the fact that the game has only one battlefield perspective. Without turning of the perspective there is no gain in moving meta info left and right and I guess that turning the perspective is not trivial. ... other more modern games(like AoW) have done this, but really it's not important.
A more important question came to my mind in my current game.
I'm considering to bring back Armor Pierce to paladins (and restore their attack strength to the original). I could use some opinions before deciding. Additionally, I'm considering to give High Men Priests the Resistance to All +1 ability. The race has some disadvantages now, and I feel the extras they get (pikemen, better magicians) might not be worth enough to keep them an above average race. |