I just saw the new game by Paradox and I have to say it is really a very good version of this kind of games... In facts it is A LOT like this one in particular... In fact it even adds to it all I ever asked for: 1) Hexes 2) A rich and spectacular strategic map (no tactical battles since it works pretty much like a wargame) 3) No stupid teleports (only portals that allow you to travel to different planes: pretty much like doors to different places) 4) Multiplayer not yet avalable but will come with expansions.
It really looks like those guys came to this forum, read just my posts and put everything I said in their game! (Hey I want a %!!)
The only thing they don't have yet, are heroes, but I am sure that will come in the expansions.
Of course I like it a lot and I definitely think the devs of Elemental should take a look at it! Actually I really hope they read this because I think that could be very important for them in order to see how hose guys fixed things and managed resources and stuff.
cheers
What do you mean "going through one another". I might agree or disagree, but I'm not sure what you mean.
Say there is a choke point on the map. I have a unit stationed there for defence. In order for me to move another unit through the choke point, I NEED to move that unit manually, instead of just allowing my own unit, to simply move right through.
That doesn't have anything to do with hexs or squares, I don't think. The worst example of something like this is in Elemental, that I have found. I have been pinned down by caravans and settlers before.
This conversation is remarkedly similar to the one on the Kerberos SotSII forums about Endless Space. In both situations the other game is different enough and caters to a different type of playstayle. There are some players that only want a deeper, more strategic experience and some players that want to be able to play a fun, strategic game that doesn't require a lot of investment to get enjoyment out of. And of course there's those players that want both types of game depending on what they feel like playing (like me). I don't think anybody is going to play one game over the other because one is "better", they're going to enjoy one game (or both) because it's more suited to their playstyle. Warlock is a good game in its own right, it just scratches a different itch than FE.
But there is no stack of doom problems in Warlock and friendly units can move through each other. Unless I'm missing somthing
Well I am glad this thread had a certain success, I just came back and saw most people seems to pretty much disagree with me. Ok, no problem, I certainly hope FE will be deeper than Warlock. But I do like the way those guys managed to balance things out and get them out all polished in a game that works in fact very well.
Of course being a wargamer myself I like to appreciate that aspect of the game, and the squares in Elemental have always been a huge turn off for me. Also I think it will be much easir to make a succesful multiplayer version of Warlock than to make one of Elemental, mostly because of the number of turns needed to finish that game... or even to start seeing some action.
Bottom line for me is, Warlock gameplay works from turn one, there are lots of rare stuff you can build your city next to, and choices to make when you have to build something around any given structure or mineral. The gameplay changes and evolves while you get more cities. I love the tons of quests you get at the beginning of the game when you don't have much to do yet.
The city management is smooth and fast, even in huge games with lots of cities. That is amazing too! And no, I don't think it is simplistic, it is just been conceived to help players to go through micromanagement quickly (!!) ...don't be confused and take that semplicity for granted! Yes the AI needs improvement, diplomacy too, but the concept is great (matter of taste maybe) and the game is fun. My top game of this genre is still AOW Shadow Magic (mostly for its incredibly immersive Multiplayer Experience) But AOWSM was the third game in that series... If Warlock is the first game of a saga, Oh My God, I want to see what comes next!!
Even if you disagree that it is exactly the same kind of game as Elemental, I am sure by studying what works in Warlock some good ideas will come out for FE!
Cheers
This has been my experience.
This is a line I couldn't agree more with.
I really like this game. I don't like Civ much at all, though Civ 5 was interesting because of the 1upt.
Warlock is everything I ever wanted out of a civ game, though it does have some problems. The reason I bring these up is that they are something FE can avoid.
1) Stack of Doom... yes its a problem? While they aren't constrained to 1 tile... I usually just wander around with a group of 2-4 units that are Uber powerful and destroy everything. I give them 5+ enchantments, buy a dozen upgrade perks for them, upgrade them to the highest teir, basically pour thousands of gold into each unit.
The end result is a flying blade masters unit that has 100 - 150 resistance to everything, life stealing, and 180 attack. I was able to run around and single handedly take out an alternate plane.
2) Unit variety is lacking. While different units have different perks and resistances, the gameplay strategy is identical. You can overcome any weaknesses pretty easily with upgrades/spells so whats the point? You can randomly pick any melee unit in the game and any ranged unit in the game and make an army out of it... good composition only matters slightly.
3) Spell Variety is a little lacking. There are many spells, the best of which require worshipping a specific god to unlock. The system overall works great, but too many similar spells that are just re-skins... not enough unique ones.
4) AI is really bad offensively and is really annoying with its demands (every turn in some cases). At least add a mute button.
My Favorite thing about Warlock is the special resources and faction differentiation. The factions really are very different, even economically, not just in a military way. It really pays off to have access to all 3 since each has unique uses of the special resources.
The reviews of Warlock haven't been very positive yet. Has it gotten a single positive review?
It was introduced as a part of the Hex system, where in all previous square system, units can stack ontop of one another. hex system is to prevent this, and thusly prevents unit from sliding through one another.
As for elemental, somewhat... I find it most annoying when a pioneer takes out an outpost >(
If this is the case, then I take it back. I have no problem with Hex per se, only the restricting of friendly unit movement that was tied in with hexes.
Paradox Marketing again planting ads via proxy
You're doing an awesome job at qt3. Love the perspective: you made me go from "meh" to pissed-off about the lowball score from GI. Thanks Brad.
@Replicators: hexes do not implicitly limit the movement of units. That is a game design decision. Many of us old tabletop wargamers find hexes lend themselves better to tactics than squares, given the unnatural feel of moving diagonally on a square grid. I won't belabor the point.
This isn't really a matter of opinion. FE has a much greater selection of spell effects than Warlock. FE has spells that are race-specific; Warlock does not. FE has units you can find and hire; Warlock doesn't. FE has items, common, rare and unique, that can be found in monster lairs. Warlock doesn't. FE has three large tech trees that allow for new armor, weapons, items, as well as buildings and spellbooks. Warlock only has the buildings part. FE has units you can design. Warlock doesn't. FE has a host of choices on a tactical battlefield between a number of units on each side. Warlock has none of this, from tactical battlefields to tactical choices, to multiple units in battle. Warlock does have a number of units that only show up in alternate worlds (which are, sadly, otherwise all alike), but FE has huge unique bosses with specific-themed areas.
In other words, the depth of gameplay elements in FE exceeds that in Warlock, by far. This doesn't make FE better or worse a game than Warlock, but it is significantly deeper. Now, if you were to say you hope FE eventually gains the polish that Warlock has in its finished state, I couldn't agree more. But as FE still has several months in development, I'm inclined to think it will. I'd only suggest this shouldn't be confused with depth of gameplay.
And for the record, I like Warlock, though it is unfinished. The look, feel, organization of screens, and tactical AI are great fun. Once the strategic combat AI and the diplomatic rules set are made competent, and the quest system is in place, it'll be obsessive fun, in my opinion.
I'm going to have to take issue with a few of your points.
While Warlock doesn't have a tactical map, using 1upHex makes the entire world a tactical battefield and, unlike FE, that battlefield uses terrain modifiers or specializations on them. In FE we only battle upon a flat field with some obstacle tiles, otherwise there isn't much to it. In this respect Warlock manages to have more depth than FE.
Warlock also has some more depth in the selection of how spells are cast as you can only use so many spells within a turn. In FE you are only limited to mana.
Additionally, while Warlock doesn't have unit design, it does allow us to customize units as they level up. In FE only champions gain this benefit while units gain their unique traits at the start and cannot adapt as they grow (at least I haven't seen anything except hp boosts from troop level up).
FE does promise more depth overall but it doesn't run away with its victory at this point.
+1 ... Hex grids make sense which is why so many games use them. One thing I dont like about FE is the fact that the tactical battles are essentially run on hex grids (ie can attack diagonally) but utilise squares. A minor mistake but I dont see why anyone would be against hexes - most wargames have this correct IMO.
Ive enjoyed Warlock and will continue to do so, but its a wargame whereas I can see FA develop into an incredibly deep 4x strategy game with awesome AI. Ive only just started with FA but if Stardock get the AI to a GALCIV 2 level and get the balance right, it will be an absolute classic of a game.
Warlock has terrain modifiers, but FE has obstacle tiles, multiple units, dodging, and movement over a (relatively) large field of battle. I'd give this one to FE. Though I'm a fan of hex-based strategic battle games.
I'm not sure I understand how this is a factor of gameplay depth. It is a different way of limiting spells, but Warlock's method is no better nor worse than FE's. FE, on the other hand, adds a lot more spells with much greater diversity of spell effect. And different sides, empire or kingdom, are also limited in terms of certain spellbooks. Warlock doesn't have these.
FE allows customization of units at the start. Warlock doesn't permit this, but provides buildings from which you can purchase armor, etc, for specific units. Arguably FE has something like it in buildings that add levels of skill to new units. -But I see your point, here. Warlock leverages new buildings to affect units you've already got. It's something FE doesn't have at this time, and may not have, in its final release. But I think we're overlooking my main point...
I'd have to disagree with this assessment. Although we can argue the implementation of a few specifics, there are many more gameplay elements already present within FE. That's not opinion. It's simply fact. They're certainly far from finalized--this is still mid-beta--but the statement, "Ok, no problem, I certainly hope FE will be deeper than Warlock," ignores that FE is already has the far more ambitious game design, and the one that takes most of its elements further along than Warlock--when Warlock has similar ones.
See, I'm really not getting how you'd give FE the advantage here. FE has that but so does Warlock, except dodging (or rather its gameplay function of complete avoid) I think, although dodging is random enough that it isn't something to count on. Otherwise? Obstacle tiles (Mountains), check. Multiple Units, Large Battlefield, check. The world map itself is the battlefield. There's a bit more variety when it comes to FE spells but otherwise I think Warlock is stronger in this area as things stand.
Not gameplay itself but tactically, although I suppose the equivalent would be turns in tactical combat, which itself is a point in favor of FE.
The assessment was that FE currently has more depth but it isn't winning the race by a gigantic margin as of now. Are you certain that you disagree with it? I'm only pointing out where I believe you're not fairly assessing both products. If it matters, I haven't actually purchased Warlock (only playing the demo) because I happen to feel it won't provide long-term entertainment, and suffers from the same blandness that I felt from Majesty 2.
The world map is a strategic battlefield in Warlock, where sea monsters roam a few hexes away, and fire elementals are in the other direction, etc. FE is a strategic battlefield on that level, too: a dragon is that way, several black widow spiders to the southwest, etc. But you drop to a much larger tactical battlefield in FE for every single battle, where there is far more space to move about. Movement as a result becomes more of a tactical element, as do obstacles, when you're dealing with units that can move, say, 3 to 8 squares in a turn, and where obstacles take up a proportionately larger space in a tactical sense than in Warlock. The preponderance of spells and items also have a more pronounced effect on battles in FE, where haste, slow, other movement-affecting spells, and item-based initiative effects (missing from Warlock) provide a more complex experience.
Please understand: I'm not claiming that FE has the polish of Warlock, but as I pointed out above, there are more options and effects involved in fighting a battle; techs that have a pronounced effect on the development of items, buildings, alliances, heroes, and combat; more spells structured around races that have distinctions which go beyond a few buildings and a few units. It's hardly perfect, and cities still feel too much alike, for one: FFH and its successors are far better, in this respect. Factions are still being distinguished from one another, as well. But if we just look at Warlock and FE, then the claim the OP made that FE lacks the depth of Warlock when examined shows the reverse to be the case.
+ Unit Traits, allows for unit specialization
- Zero Unit customization
a bit contradictory. when you lvl up units and pick traits (or pay for equipment type traits) you don't have to do it all 1 way.. for the same type of units. there's customisation. might not be as detailed or varied as picking an armband over a pair of gloves (or whatever).. but it's there in some form. well.. ok.. you don't get to pick different looks either... but is that really important?
I like Warlock -it's not too complicated, looks good, has faction diferentiation, a certain MoM-feel and it's fun!
What I really dislike about the game, though, is the lack of mod support and it was specificaly stated that the game will NOT support modding.
I guess they will spam DLCs.
I'm not sure I buy this notion that Warlock is polished. I know it's very stable (I've been playing it for a couple of days while waiting for the patch and it hasn't crashed), and that it's free of glaring bugs, but there's tons of things I wish it was more polished on. For example, playing on really large maps, eventually you'll run into a problem where all your cities you build will be named the same (there's only so many names in the list, and the last name gets repeated adnauseam). I'm not sure you want to call that a late game twist, where I suddenly have to start naming all the cities I make. It's not exactly a big deal, but it's a pretty well known problem for most games of this nature (and there's tons of ways to deal with it), but it seemed to have escape the devs completely. Another thing that bugged me pretty bad was the movement animation... didn't anyone mention that they'd like the option to speed this up in beta? I mean, seriously, no offense to the devs who puts hours of work into making the animations, but it gets old really fast. It's why my combat animation for FE is always 5x speed. Whenever I move in warlock, I have to find a nearby unit to select to skip the super slow moving animations... of course that doesn't help when the AI does it (which makes the turns agonizingly long if you're at peace with one, and they just wander aimlessly back and forth through your territory... instead of "fighting" wars with those units I might add). Then there's the control scheme... click a unit once to select, click it again to deselect... wait, what? Since when was double click a deselect? A lot of time you try to send a unit around the city and you end up going into the city instead. Also, there is something seriously wrong with "sleep" mode, as in, I can't put my units to sleep, so every turn I'd have dozen of units asking for orders and I have to click defend (a shortcut for this would help tons) until a point where I just ignore the unit orders prompt completely and just check my "fronts" (often time forgetting to move scouts as a result).
Don't get me wrong, I like the game, but that doesn't mean that those aren't issues it has, and particularly it's "polish". FE actually has addressed those issues, because we've been playing it tons and bickering about every little thing that bugs us. Maybe in a couple of patches, Warlock will as well. But just because there are still plenty of bugs in FE, I don't think you want to say "I want FE to have Warlock's polish." Because that seems almost backwards in some extent.
I don't know how anyone who has played the two games could ever put Warlock in the same league as FE.
FE is the full blown game, were as Warlock is one small part.
That's not true. The developers have said that modding tools are possible - there was a miscommunication that lead to the erroneous statement by the publisher that modding was not possible; it's something we will hopefully get down the road.
Given the initial price point, I am expecting DLCs though.
You must have a different definition of "tactics" in your dictionary, one that insists on a separate map. Was Elven Legacy tactical? It's the same game with a campaign wrapper. The tactical element of Warlock plays out on the strategy map, and does so in a fashion that is more involved than FE's switch-to-a-different-map battles.
@Kalin - I think you are suffering (along with many of us) from a lack of documentation and a lack of hotkeys. The hotkeys thing is a pretty glaring omission.
To your points: You can skip the movement animations by double clicking the destination - once to order the move, once to skip the animation. Not the best solution; there should be an option to turn these off. For making units sleep - there is an option in the extended unit option menu; you have to click the icon with the double chevron to access it. That should make units sentry unless enemy units come near. It's worked for me without issue.
I saw the sleep option, but if you're at peace with people, apparently they are enemies, or after you wake them up you can't sleep them... or maybe your units are seeing enemies from beyond the portals to other worlds... I'm not sure what it is, but it no longer appears for a vast majority of my units who are just sitting around in my territory (due to stupid quest spawning mobs). That's why I said there's something wrong with it.
As for hotkeys, yes, that would be nice... I went through just about every key and found some shortcuts that helps, but never found defend. For the movement thing, thanks... I'll give it a try when I play it again, the click rules in that game is just odd. Still, I'd like an option to make the AI units move faster... it's pretty stupid waiting around for a couple of minutes every turn for them to explore and re-explore my territory. Then again, maybe it's intentional so that I'll want to kill them all?
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
