We’ve been combing through the forums looking at ideas people have had for the game. Now if anyone wonders why we’ve extended the beta testing period for this game need wonder no longer: We want time to put in your ideas.
So let’s walk through some of them here.
Creating your sovereign
The idea has come up on the forums and we agree that sovereign creation should get its own screen and that the sovereign is independent of the kingdom/empire you choose. That is, you shouldn’t be “stuck” with a particular “wizard” based on your faction choice.
Main UI and info cards
I had originally planned to link to the individual posts where these were discussed but I realized that would take longer than just taking screenshots and showing what was discussed.
Sovereign Handling
People do not want luck to decide the fate of their sovereign in a battle. Many people don’t like the idea of ones sovereign dying meaning the end of the game.
The sovereign being a unit in the game is key to the game mechanics that will become more apparent later. But we have been convinced by the feedback that there shouldn’t be an “evade” ability.
Instead, we’re now leaning towards if your sovereign is attacked and your side loses, the sovereign flees to the nearest city. However, if you attack with your sovereign and you lose, your sovereign dies and the game ends. So you can control whether your sovereign is in any peril.
Game Performance
Beta 1A has pretty bad performance. This has been fixed internally due largely to a couple of one line type bugs that affected a lot of stuff.
General Bug reports
Kryo has been documenting these. I’m torn between wanting to put up an interim build this week that lets people have the bug fixes sooner and waiting until next week when there’s a lot more features. By waiting until next week, we don’t have to fixate on a build and more will get done so we’re leaning towards that.
Thoughts on Mopping up
Since there is magic in Elemental it frees us from a lot of the usual “mop up” issues found in traditional strategy games. At least, that’s the theory. Over the next several months you guys will have a lot to say on this.
How similar to Master of Magic?
Well, that’s a discussion unto itself. Elemental isn’t designed as a clone. But it is definitely pretty similar in the key elements that, IMO, made MOM special.
I have a few thoughts.
-Soveriegn Handling-
Instead immunity by being on the defensive, how about a 3 strike system. A soveriegn might have only 2 chances to escape battles (and will do so automatically) that it loses. If the soveriegn gets defeated a third time, he/she is dead (out of luck). Truely lucky soveriegns might have another strike or two than most (probally a design option in the design your soveriegn screen).
Alternatively, each soveriegn might get the 3 strikes ranking against each other soveriegn. This would encourage the frequent use of the soveriegns, but the player has to watch out for repeated losses against the same soveriegn (who becomes increasingly determined to catch his prey).
-Elementapedia-
This name could use some work.
Beyond that, I would like to be able to edit some facts in game, or add to the existing content (maybe in the form a notes section). I would also like the ability to add in the descriptions and stuff about my units, my custom soveriegn, my and custom civ.
----
Thats it for now...
I support the "sovereign escapes if within own border" idea.
In regards to Sovereign Handling I would like to see something along the lines of the MoM solution. Sovereign can cast a spell of return if they have enough research or power etc... . Sovereign then can take no actions for x turns while the spell is completed.
I don't like the idea that the Sovereign can somehow evade or not die, at least for a period of time, if attacked and defeated, that seems very out of place, and doesn't make sense to me.
The main problem with the Sovereign being able to escape at will is that it would eliminate the ability to execute a last desperate offensive in the hopes of catching a stronger enemy off guard and killing their Sovereign before they can wipe you off the planet with their superior forces. The idea is interesting, but I'm not sure that there is a good way to handle it. Maybe make use the strike system, but also give the ability to cast a spell to disable the retreat ability for the specific battle? That would allow for assassinations like above, but prevent a rampaging spider from killing a Sovereign.
You could also only make Sovereigns only killable with certain (probably expensive) weapons/methods but unkillable otherwise, which would add more strategy when deciding on an attack group, deciding whether or not you want to try to kill the Sovereign, and where to send the units with that ability. If these are such powerful beings, it would make sense that they couldn't be killed the same way as simple mortals.
Hm, I think everyone has shown pretty rigorously that allowing the sovereign to escape for free unless there is another sovereign is a pretty big problem with an abundance of potential abuses.
I say there should be a recombobulating mechanism that is built in a specific city before hand. When the sovereign dies, the priests/wizards of this mechanism (call it what you may) spend a certain number of resources and begin a lengthy ritual to recombobulate the sovereign. If the mechanism is destroyed before the ritual is complete, the sovereign is gone for good. If the mechanism is destroyed before the sovereign--- and the sovereign is subsequently killed--- then the sovereign is also toast. In addition, if both sovereigns are locked into battle with one another, they have a small chance (depending on how lopsided the victory is or whether you sunk level points into the sovereign specifically for that purpose?) to block the defeated sovereign's essence from escaping back to the mechanism, thus killing him as well. Such a mechanism couldn't be too difficult to program either.
Perhaps additional mechanisms can be built at very high costs, and each civilization might have their own spin on the recombobulation process. For instance, scholarly races might be able to spend extra resources to speed the process along, or fallen civs might sacrifice their offspring to expediate the ritual.
Any takers?
I am more in favor of the incrimental economy system (Do you have access to iron and how much of it do you have in stock) because it lends itself to this type of game and makes trading with the other players much more important. In Civ there was no need to worry about how many tanks you could field in the information age because if you had access to 1 iron resource on the board you could build as many as you like. This way you are limited in your unit creation, but so are your enemies placing more of the focus in battle on strategy than on having hoards of your best unit.
Maybe they could tie in resource node depletion and exploration as well.(so that you have to survey your land for hidden resource caches or go and take known areas from your enemies)
While I'm on my game brainstorm, i think it may be a good idea to allow the creation of "Resource outposts" so you don't have to create a city to exploit a particular resource in your lands. They could even have an upgrade path to allow faster collection/depletion of the resource in question. And on the military side you could create forts/trading outposts (kind of like galciv's starbases) that would be able to stock resources, build units, trade with other empires, or defend your borders.
Just on the research screen could we be given the ability queue research projects? and if that is possible could we then be able to see the queue order from the existing screen?
Dead Sovereign = Game over - Love it and hope it never changes.
When Defending Sovereign doesn't die - I don't dislike it. I hated the 'evade' idea. Any chance this could be changed to 'When Defending a City the Sovereign doesn't die'?
Sammual
Addressing the problem of not having access to resources, the game could have a black market, where a small percentage of all the resources mined wind up in a public auction. Procuring whatever resource you need this way would be more expensive than getting it by collecting it yourself or trading it fairly, but you could still use it if you really wanted to and had the cash.
There has to be some significant penalty for losing your sovereign. Be it essence, mana, a delay, etc.
If you make it so if the Sovereign dies = Game Over, nobody will ever attack with their Soverign 90% of the time (especially in MP games, where it will jump up to 98%). Minus well put the sovereign in a tower in your main castle from the start then. In the HoMMs, you have to buy your generals back, which I never liked much. Having the soverign be "out of commishion" for like a dozen turns, plus some kind of reserection or summoning cost would be my vote.
What if, regardless of attack or defense or territory, your Sovereign flees to the capital city. The catch is that they move one square per turn (being in hiding). You would not be able to cast global spells, or regain mana for such spells, during this period. Once he gets to the city, he begins to heal, starting at 1 HP.
This penalizes for being on offense more than on defense, but doesn't take away the risk of saying "I'll just stick him at that city I just stole from him, and if he dies in battle, no harm no foul."
Generally speaking, I like the idea of being able to assassinate Sovereigns, but I think it should be separate from battles. This could get further into the debate about good civilizations and bad ones. "You killed King Leonard after the battle, we're not trading with you!" to "You killed King Leonard in battle, you're our best friend! Mount & Blade deals with this rather nicely - you defeat your foes in battle, but never kill Lords. More often then not they escape, but occasionally you get an option after the fight to set them free for karma, take them prisoner for spite, or ransoming them for profit.
I am waiting to see those game mechanics
This design decision shouldn't contradict the game mechanics about the sovereign being a unit in the game.
Well, in GC2 (in which there isn't magic), the mop up issues have been reduced by planets switching allegiance and race surrender. I hope that can be something similar in Elemental.
BTW, the fleeing of defending sovereign should be tweaked to ensure that it doesn't add tedious part to the mop up phase: If you choose a military victory, you shouldn't be required to hunt all sovereign into their last city. That would be a very tedious mop up phase.
Yes this made playing against the AI so super fun and games lasted so long!
The only version of Age of Wonders that worked vs the AI was the original. That is because in the original version the soveriegn dying game over thing was an OPTION. I really dont understand why Stardock is being so stubborn about the most controversial issue with the game. Why risk it all sales wise on forcing something on players that half disagree with and why not just give all players the option they want.
Sovereign dies game ends. (Option 1)
Sovereign dies brand new weak heir takes over (or some other way game continues) (Option 2)
This game should be about building empires and long term global strategy not JUST about whack a mole sovereign or chase the sovereign or capture the flag sovereign!
Because it is non negotiable and a core concept.
More, having gameplay option like this requires more coding for the AI, and even for the UI (which heir to choose)
On Sovereign Handling -
When a Sovereign establishes a city you should give them the option of spending an extra point of Essence to place a Relique there. This will act as a sort of home for their soul should their body be destroyed.
So if they are killed in battle they are transported to the nearest Relique instead of dying. They should then have to spend 5 essence to reincarnate themselves before they can move around or cast other spells again When capturing a city you would have the option to destroy any relique present, if you do this while it's occupied then the enemies soul will move on to the next one if they have another if not they're dead.
This makes establishing Relique's and destroying your opponents part of the stratergy.
Um isnt this what the beta is for?
Suggestions and Negotiations and making new Improvements?
MAgic is everywhere. So why not choosing a magical solution to the "esacape free" ?
For instance you could cast a spell that has an upkeep of 10(or more/or less) mana/turn.. It's costly, but it will teleport you back to the nearest city each time you "die".
About caravans : why do they cost money ? And if such, why shoul dthey be automatic ? Will I be obliged to NOT construct roads in order to earn some money each turn ?
About performance : can't you release a "bug-fix only" build ? That would let a lot of us to test further. I can't test the game for many hours because it crashes so often T___T I can't discover late game problems.
About mopping up : there's one problem, the more terrain you control, the easier it is to you to achieve victories other than conquest. So you'll usually have to get the most map, then try other means of victories than a conquest one. Crushing an enemy empire shouldn't always be the best solution to achieve victory.
Similiraties with MoM. Even if I really loved that game a lot, what you are preparing for us is more interesting. Don't try to stay too close to it. In fact some ideas from civ 4 or HoMM or Dominions 3 should be used. Like the sovereign customization of dom3 (probably the best evere seen, with terrain changing effects and like), the easy UI of civ4, the way civ4 handles resources, the battles possibilities of HoMM.
Try to make a "spirit" successor, not just a game "inspired by".
MoM was special due to few things in fact : the way magic could influence the whole world, the fact you could win with the spell of mastery, the way heroes were handled (but I would prefer an even more customizable one) and the mage customization.
Only on negotiable things
But that's not because of bad mechanics but because of bad AI. And knowing Stardock's trackrecord with the GalCiv series we won't have to put up with sucky AI like AoW's AI was. But besides playing against the AI there's gonna be a multiplayer mode too and in AoW the mechanic worked great for MP games IMHO.
Just throwing ideas here.
If the Scape Counter is 0+, then the Sovereign can scape. If it's -1 or lower, he must face his destiny. (Could we get a capture mechanic? Like if I capture your Sovereign I can free him in exchange of a deal in the diplo screen? And if there is no agreement then... Swing! Headshot!)
When scaping, the Sovereign has two options:
Same here. If sovereign gets out of his home, he is at risk and should die, not flee, otherwise he'll just trick people into attacking him (if pillaging is available for instance, he won't need to actually attack).
Many things look promising, but this from the perspective of a person who has still not been able to get past the intro screen without a CTD, so sadly, I have not been able to get my feet wet yet.
One thing, however, does not look promising yet: the way combat is handled. I think this is important because it plays a role in how you want units designed. So far, it appears (again, I can only go on appearances, since I have not seen any other data) that combat is undercomplex; much of it reminds me of the way GalCivII worked. While a very simplistic combat rendering worked satisfactorily for games such as CivIV, that won't work here, because CivIV had unit type templates -- in Elemental however, we won't be having any "knights" or "spearmen" or "archers" to work off, so that some units had advantages and disadvantages over others, allowing for strategic placement and decisions. In Elemental, you will need more than Attack, Defense, Attack Speed, and HP. Armor will need to mitigate damage differently than Defense should (classically, Defense should reduce the chances of you getting hit in melee, and high Defense should be a characteristic found by highly trained but not necessarily highly armored units -- long training time, but not necessarily with recourse to vast quantities of resources). Preferably, because you will be having magic spells, these values should all be based on underlying Unit Attributes, such as Dexterity or Constitution or Willpower, etc., so that these may be buffed or de-buffed, depending on the circumstances -- that would also greatly increase the "RPG" feeling you are trying to instill, especially for the Sovereign. If there was one gripe people voiced repeatedly about GC2, it was about the way combat was handled; let's try not to go down that road.
Thank you!
I have to support the rearranging of UI. I personally don't think Elemental is a game where "minimal UI' is in any way a positive feature. The ability to hide UI to look at the sexy shader engine you're pooring time into... yes. But the UI right now seems minimalistic in a way I'd expect an action game to be. Less is better, sure, but when you try to compact info into a bunch of tabs at the bottom is when you know you have a problem because that isn't less info, just less space.
In terms of the combat screen. I have mixed feelings. The "irrelevant" information is very important, or else how would you judge your chance of winning. In theory, you could put up a percentage that does all the calculations for you, but some players still like to see all the numbers that are factored into it. (see "Fire Emblem" as they actually have 2 options for a screen very much like the one you're presenting here. 1 has 4 factors... HP, chance to hit, amount of damage, and chance of critical. The other has like 8, which are the stats used to calculate the 1st 4 include speed, weapon weight, skill, luck, and other things like that. Also, having all the stats presented when the battle is going to be on a tactical map, rather than auto-resolve, is about the only way I can imagine you'd do it. (I agree "level" doesn't really matter)
In terms of Caravan tech, I'd say that the moment roads exist, people will begin to travel them with goods. So once you have roads, I'd think they would have a economic function. The main thing that sticks out to me is "would they travel it with a cart or wagon? and would it be a sack carried on somebodies back, or a very large wagon hauled by several beasts of burden" I vote they are not unlocked apart from roads, though perhaps they have a tech of their own to advance specifically the ability to move goods, vs. the ability to build more efficient roads.
There was talk somewhere (I believe in a dev journal) that got me hooked on the idea of the developers not telling the player how to play their game. So I was inadvertently sold on the idea of super easy to customize UI with the ability to drag windows to where you want them to appear. So you don't always have the pop-up dialogue on the right side if you don't want it. Maybe you want it along the top, or in the upper left? Maybe you want the text formatted to fit in a square next to a picture, or maybe you want it to run from left to right across the entire top of the screen. maybe you just want it on a second screen ...)
For better or for worse... you, Frogboy, persuaded me long ago that this game UI should be focused on ease of customization. I'd say thats best done with plenty of "advanced interface options" and game windows or screens that can be resized and dragged around the screen, to reappear in the last place I decided to put it, and to be possibly parts of different tabbed info screens that I pieced together. It would be a lot of work, but that is where I as an eager fan of the game based almost entirely on dev journals, would expect/want the UI to be. (I remember there being discussion on "strategic zoom" in the discussion where I was convinced the UI should be as user option oriented as possible)
----------
I feel I made my views on the sovereign death pretty clear in the thread relating to that so there isn't much more for me to say on the matter at this point. However, I would like to jump up and down like a raving fan-boy that the sovereign should totally have his own creation screen. I don't know how this could not be a feature, considering how "core" he apparently is to the game. I'm not about to suggest Sims style customization (well... actually I am. That would be awesome! Shaping different facial features! with many many outfits to pick, and color schemes. It would be grand!) but at least better than MoM's wizard creation screen. You had 14 faces and a custom, which required you to pick one of the 14 faces. I'm not sure if anybody ever didn't pick custom except to say they have picked something other than custom. I'd want a little more customization than 14, mostly generic (or in contrast too over the top) faces. They were fantastic for being ethnically diverse I think, but that isn't enough for me to really value more than like 4-5 of them.
For me,this is the most realistic option...
Penalty for the death of sovereign would be that heir actually dont have essence,have much weaker stats and magic levels,also sovereign being dead could couse civil war and devide your kingdom,if you have strong heir and some strong heroes\generals...this open many possibilities for much more diversity in the game,imho.
You have huge army and many heavily fortified towns,yet you lose the game if your opponent send one or few skilled assassins and kill your sovereign ?
This is one of the few things i didnt like in AoW,if i find AI that is compatibile with my alighment,it was much better for me avoid any battle with him and go hunt and kill his wizard directly and then i could buy all those powerfull armies(since they now become neutral once the wizard is defeated) if i had enough money,saving me production time needed to build those.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
