November 28th, 2010, 07:43
(This post was last modified: July 15th, 2011, 02:14 by Catwalk.)
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
Immunities
Make these give a bonus rather than a fixed level, and reduce the bonus. Maybe rename them to resistances? Ie. Fire Resistance instead of Fire Immunity. All would give +20 defense and +5 resistance.
Capturing cities
When razing a city, give the player a whole lot more gold than presently.
Starting conditions
- size 6 town
- an extra unit of spearmen (or a different unit for each race, if possible)
- a unit of settlers
- higher casting skill?
- starting 0 fame hero, random or selected?
November 28th, 2010, 07:45
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
From another thread:
WhiteMage Wrote:Regarding getting higher payoff from raze I am all for this idea. The income from raze should be the payoff you would get from capture and half of the total sale value of all building there. The gold income from capturing enemy cities is perfectly calculated now by the game and is proportional to the population that you take away from the enemy wizard (but it maybe the surviving population, not the initial population before battle, this should be changed). The gold you receive is subtracted from the enemy wizard and there is no waste.
December 8th, 2010, 07:33
Posts: 101
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2010
Catwalk Wrote:Starting conditions
- size 6 town
- an extra unit of spearmen (or a different unit for each race, if possible)
- a unit of settlers
- higher casting skill?
- starting 0 fame hero, random or selected?
I know some of these are radical, please comment.
I think a larger starting town and a settler sound like good ideas. I'd only favor an extra troop if there's going to be a starting settler, otherwise two starting units are enough to defend the homefront, or risk for exploration while the homefront is exposed.
I'm weekly opposed to higher casting skill, and strongly opposed to starting hero. Higher casting cost reduces the early game power base balancing and hurts Archmage. Starting hero hurts famous and charismatic which don't really need to take any hits on effectiveness.
December 8th, 2010, 08:41
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
Agreed about casting skill, dropping that idea. Going to redo the hero suggestion in the thread about retorts
December 8th, 2010, 17:09
Posts: 634
Threads: 13
Joined: Nov 2010
Size 6 town? No
extra unit of spearmen: No. I would even lose the current 2 units, since no police effect.
a unit of settlers: absolutely not!
higher casting skill: no
starting 0 fame hero: only for famous, but a random one
Reasons: these are all taking away choices from the player. You will be forced to play 1 specific way. What if I start on a tiny island? Disband settler? Why extra spearmen? The player should make the choices, not the game. What if I am OK and I donât want to explore now to save on food and gold? This should be a planning game and not a movie to watch. Everybody builds cities, everybody uses spearmen to explore, everybody has high skills. Well, now I have a second city, shall I build road now? How about protection? Bad. Force players to do things over and over again. Second game: I lost my interest. Third game: letâs find another game to play. Size 6 town? Same thing. I donât mind giving all these powerups and accelerators on easy and medium difficulty level, but PLEASE let me make my own decisions on the impossible level without being forced to play one way. I also like the epic journey aspect of the game: start from humble beginning with no spells, no gold, no mana, no skill, no population, and not knowing what spells I will get and end up as the master of the knowable universe â over and over again â play 100 times, each time is a unique challenge. Little bit like a fairy tale, main character always starts from a disadvantageous situation. I am OK with beginning with random hero, but only for famous.
December 9th, 2010, 00:49
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
WhiteMage Wrote:Reasons: these are all taking away choices from the player. You will be forced to play 1 specific way. I agree and disagree. The first 20-30 turns of the game aren't that exciting. Imagine starting with just a settler (no starting town) and a unit of spearmen to defend it with. You'd have more options as you'd be able to plan things out from the beginning, but the game would take even longer to get underway. There's no law of nature saying that the balance in v1.31 is optimal.
Quote:What if I start on a tiny island? Disband settler?
I believe this will never happen in recent versions of Insecticide.
Quote:Why extra spearmen? The player should make the choices, not the game. What if I am OK and I donât want to explore now to save on food and gold?
Then you can go ahead and disband one or more units. You could also keep them for protection, as there are more neutral threats now. Plenty options here still.
Quote:This should be a planning game and not a movie to watch. Everybody builds cities, everybody uses spearmen to explore, everybody has high skills. Well, now I have a second city, shall I build road now? How about protection? Bad. Force players to do things over and over again.
Why should we force players to do the same things over and over again? The game simply isn't interesting this early on. I think most players would have more fun arriving faster at the stage where decisions start really mattering. I actually recall showing this game to more than one friend who was put off by nothing happening for the first 5-10 minutes.
Quote:I donât mind giving all these powerups and accelerators on easy and medium difficulty level, but PLEASE let me make my own decisions on the impossible level without being forced to play one way.
I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to make this a starting option rather than a requirement. I think most would prefer this option, but I have no objections to letting people choose.
December 9th, 2010, 06:20
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
By inspiration from WhiteMage: Remove AI personalities :neenernee
December 9th, 2010, 09:00
Posts: 101
Threads: 6
Joined: Oct 2010
WhiteMage Wrote:Size 6 town? No
a unit of settlers: absolutely not!
I don't see how these are taking choices away from players. How is a size 6 city worse than a size 4 city choice-wise? You'll have to weigh granary vs shrine, for example while in 1.31 it's all granary all the time.
And an extra settler gives you an extra choice of where to expand and how you should split your defensive units.
December 9th, 2010, 09:05
Posts: 141
Threads: 12
Joined: Nov 2010
Catwalk Wrote:I actually recall showing this game to more than one friend who was put off by nothing happening for the first 5-10 minutes. You should show them in this initial pick: Alchemy, Archmage, Conjurer, Sorcery Mastery, Node Mastery, CNSSSS.
You will have a lot to do in the initial game. Explore, Conqure Neutral city, all from turn 1, by magic spirit spam. :neenernee
December 9th, 2010, 09:08
Posts: 6,457
Threads: 134
Joined: Aug 2004
True, but we're planning on weakening overpowered combos data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cea03/cea03f7367eff1fa2741fc17bef993240ab59276" alt="wink wink" That said, I do acknowledge that I had a preference for slower combos at that time.
|