I've been playing more of FE since I got my new pc,
Graphic wise it's beautiful, I can't complain. A few glitches here and there but on the whole I can't wait for the final version.
In my opinion tactical battles could be so much better.
First off the battle area is way to small. There is no possibility of making any strategy at all. It's always rush rush rush. It takes one turn for my hero to engage the enemy. That's boring.
The way I see it it is imagine playing a game of Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition on a role mat with hexes everywhere. the DM says ok battle time, he gets up and starts making the mat with washable markers. We are in a forest near a crypt. He draws some walls (cover) there is a small river near by (boundaries some large blocks which makes obstacles and provides cover fire from rage attacks.
IN FE you have no such things . The forest all around is just boundary, it provides no cover and no obstacle. If you are facing another hero or channeler you are engage in the first round. All there is to it is, you bash me I bash you and I hope I have more HP than you. VERY boring.
A tactical battle is about tactics but if you have noting to work with what is the point?
Now that was my complaint.
Now a possible solution,
Either make the battle ground bigger and if you can't then make the squares smaller so you have more of them
Then add some obstacles, I think this should be random. This way all battles are somewhat different.
I would think that distance should be revised as well. Being able to attack the enemy normally within 1 turn is not giving much chance to do tactics.
Tactical battles are one of the corner stones of the game for me anyway, The way they are right now I'll just auto resolve there is no point.
I can't go anywhere on the map I can't run away I can't slow the enemy down not really and I can't hide from missile attacks, So it's rush after rush after rush.
Just sharing my thoughts.
Great game in anycase. Keep up the good work.
I think he means that movement should not be allowed. period. while in an enemy's zone of control. I kind of like that idea
It seems you're right. I didn't even see that there were ZoC And I play wargames.How could I missed something like that ? -___-
What I meant by "ZoC to Zoc" is that usually you have to make a check to change of ZoC, because you leave a close combat to another one and that isn't something easy to do. Going from ZoC to Zoc could lead to an "agility" check. Succeeded ? The unit moved. Failed ? The unit move but suffer an attack from the enemy with whom he was in close-combat. Utterly failed ? Attack from the first ZoC and attack from the second ZoC. Or some malus for the next attack or etc.
@vieuxchat,
I remember you from way back. I was moreso talking about people that are just joining us. Are you in the beta yet?
Orthogonal attacks, just as hex based grids are examples of things they can, but won't, implement. They have said as much before.
There is currently no code written to make stat checks. You would really have to sell that to them as a feature, I don't see how all the extra work would make combt any better.
Yep I'm in the beta (I was in the first first first first beta ever thrown to us : "You head north" in 8 bit graphics.)
Hex based grid is really hard to implement. Orthogonal attacks just needs one more "if" well placed, and new capacities for "long weapons" like halberd to attack in diagonal (to bypass the well placed "if").
For stat check, I'm not sure if it would be hard to implement : what would it add ? Lots of new abilities based on stat. Leap and bounds, whirlwind attack, grappling, knocking out without killing and all such cool things as teleporting (you make a "dex" check : if you fail you teleport, but not where you wouldn't want to), or multi cast of fireball (first fireball, then a dex check and a second fireball).
You could add so much.
That would be nice. I have a list of things I want to persuade the devs to add. That is going in the expansion game section.
After playing the beta (just started FE today, huzzah!) I don't think orthogonal or non-orthogonal is even part of the real issue.
While orthogonal only attacks (with non pole-arms) could potentially change the face of tactical combat, until movement is fixed, it won't really matter.
#1. non mounted units should not have 10 movement. Mounted units should not have 10 movement.
#2. 'Good units' and buffed units could have high initiative, even high Dex/Dodge ... but not high movement
#3. Movement needs to be capped at a fairly low number (2 for melee, 4 for mounted)
#4. 'Charge' should be changed. Maybe +1 movement +4 strength as an activated ability, but definitely not +3 movement!
#5. Zones of control should be more powerful. Melee cannot leave a ZoC, mounted get attacks of opportunity while leaving a ZoC
#6. Only melee have ZoC. Mounted and Ranged units do not have ZoC. (maybe Champs shouldn't have ZoC?)
#7. If champs don't have ZoC, units below half health shouldn't have ZoC either.
->#3 and #5 are the most important
I'm not sure we need to place units. I'd be fine if the tactical map logic just recognized 1. am I range or squishy, back row and 2. am I melee, front row. Obviously placing manually would be perfecto but to be honest I'd settle for some common sense placement. Kind of like poker in the front, liquor in the back.
True.
Casters n Archers in the back
Daggers + Dex focused melee in the middle
Meat Shields n Mounted units in the front
the trickiest part is ... if high attack, but no defense, go in the back, but if high attack and high defense, go in the front. High Initiative in front only if Attack is high and defense is not low.
The feel from the battles is very different in MoM and FE indeed (playing the beta made me want to reload MoM, so it is a quite refreshed experience) :
As other have pointed, in MoM, it does take longer to reach the ennemy indeed, unless you are used heroes stacked with + Mv items
MoM does count 1.5 Move for diagonals, unlike FE
MoM has a few terrain features.
FE has Zons of Control, which is cool. I wish they costed more to exit, and did not only force you to stop your move when going from Zoc to Zoc.
MoM had many more spells to cast during combat, so there was more variety and more decisions to take.
Diagonal attacks (I know, they were in MoM too, but that's not a reason to have them in FE) are one of the reason it is so hard to balance heroes vs troops :
If you could only attack the unit facing you, you could use cannon fodder to protect the flanks of your heroes when they do the hard work. Now, with diagonal attacks, it is kind of pointless, as they can still be attacked by 3 units. with diagonal attacks removed (or restricted), you could effectively protect valuable units much better, and there would be more point to the tactical battles, because you would need to flank the opponent to gang up on him.
I strongly agree about movement needing to be toned down, especially with the initiative system allowing a unit to move several times in a row.
Army setup would be nice too indeed, but if units can still zip around the map so quickly, it will be kind of semi pointless.
It'd be pretty awesome if diagonals cost 1.5 move, especially synergistic with other proposed changes (and with better Tactical AI, might not completely bork the AI pathfinding-> or would this simply present an incomprehensible obstacle to good AI pathfinding?)
Orthogonal attacks would certainly make the tactical battles more interesting. Of course, the question is if units can survive that long (with late-game magic in play)
Once again, I love initiative, I just feel that (under normal circumstances) the high movement feels a bit off. However assuming a fireball is gonna kill my entire army in 1 turn, might as well send that army to their front lines before turn 1 is over eh?
(I think its always gonna be hard to balance magic vs melee ... but we could have some really interesting 'mundane battles' if these changes were implemented)
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
