So after playing a couple of games I think Fallen Enchantress turned out pretty well, can't wait what it will play like on release.
What I noticed though is that there will always be one AI faction that gets mega strong while all the other AIs tend to fall behind hardcore and end up just as a sort of puffer between you and the super AI. Today I got lucky and had a game where a ) my main hero got a lot of nice stuff early on and b ) there were a lot of settlement tiles nearby so I was able to expand fast since I didn't need to worry too much about military.
I soon stumbled upon the neighbouring AI which turned on me after a couple of turns. With my hero being lvl 4 and having a good combination of items and skills I took settlements without too much trouble. I ended up conquering the whole peninsula on which I started, waiting for the message to pop up that I defeated the AI but wait, there's more. The AI ended up having about 10 settlements and a level 10 main hero (while mine was level 5 after fighting and question a lot). I finally defeated my neighbour but I was a little upset how the AI works in this game to be honest.
I'm not sure this is part of the pacing issues I read about on the forums but there's just no way to play on the same level as the AI in terms of expansion. You spend so much time training and scouting early that you don't even have enough time to get anywhere as much settlements going as the AI. With the settlement titles popping up randomly it's down to luck if you're gonna make it or not, while the AI just knows where to go without building explorers and wasting turns scouting. Adding to that, the majority of tile types reduce your movement and it takes forever to get anywhere, even when riding. In the end, the AI had a belt of settlements that spanned over half of the map.
I know it's common to give the AI an advantage in strategy games (I was playing on the 2nd lowest difficulty setting though) but I feel like in Fallen Enchantress the factions just "snowball" way too quickly with so many early settlements. If you're unlucky and don't start next to the one AI that's supposed to be the super AI then you're in for a bad awakening after a couple hundred turns.
The AI has no advantages on that difficulty. It has to scout just as much as you do. You actually are the one cheating on this difficulty level and still cannot keep up? Perhaps a switch to the lowest possible difficulty is in order? It takes a while to learn the basic strategies for success.
Wait a couple hundred turns? Well yeah I would think the ai would have expanded, I seem to have the oppisite problem I can spread easily and as I scout I'm amazed by all the really good spots still available even when close to the ai
IcantHear, I am afraid that you are just expanding too slowly. I have posted three playthroughs over the last few months. The were all on large maps, at Ridiculous and Insane difficulties and by turn 50-60 I had scouted all the AIs.
In the first two, by turns 100, all the opposite alignment AIs were dead. In the third, I was deliberately not starting any wars, and only expanding by colonization and influence push. By turn 65, the population/city count, according to the "foreign relation" screen were:
My side 664 (9 cities)
Pariden 731(5)
Gilden 916 (6)
Tarth 828 (8)
Kraxis 300 (3)
Altar 566 (2)
Magnar 604 (7)
Yithril 507 (5)
Resoln 150 (1)
As you can see, some AIs spread much faster. In that case, it was because some started in cramped positions, near other players, while others (Tarth, Gilden and Magnar) had started pretty much in a column in the middle of the map, with no one on their West.
You said that you had a nasty surprise by turn "couple of hundreds". Well, you can be way beyond surprises by that time. So just stick with the game, and work on early scouting and land grab.
If you want to look at the playthroughs, they can be found here, here and here. Word of caution. They are each from different releases, and many strategies will no longer work. The one that will still work (better than ever) in .96 is "Self buffing heroes conquering the world"
I felt the same at the beginning and it just takes time to get comfortable, find your play style, and try to get ahead of the AI and stay ahead.
I do hear you about the "feast-or-famine" in terms of settlement tiles. I've been playing on temperate or swamp maps lately because there seem to be more potential settlements for everyone. though some factions will still pull ahead. I suspect that since "balanced" maps mix terrain types, some starting areas will be better than others, like if you start in a desert you might be screwed.
Master scouts on scouts gives the ai enough of an advantage, on pioneers it's insane just reveal the map and watch the Tarth AI, I am just going to assume from now on when someone posts about crazy AI city buildup they are talking about Tarth. And quietly rename the thread please for the love of pete nerf the crud out of master Scouts, make it so all your units get the stealthy trait for free, no monster attacks at all and no wood movement penalty is absurdly powerful in pure turn savings.
You have to expand super fast in Stardock games- that's one of the areas where Brad's AI is consistent from game to game.
I think you forgot something, but if you need advice I should be happy to resupply the advice, although I would much prefer to after I tried beta 5 to see how it impacts the next changes.
Sincerely~ Kongdej
Worst forum software ever.
I was wondering if the Master Scout ability was unique to the premade Tarth character, because I can't seem to find it when creating a custom faction/leader.
Also does anyone else notice that you can't enter all the quest locations spawned by quest maps? Like the location appears on the map,but there's no dialogue like in regular quest locations upon walking on the tile.
It is, isn't it? Be sure to check out the search function. Seems to have been designed to hide information, rather than retrieve it.
Try creating a custom race, rather than a custom leader.
Bug's been pointed out in several beta iterations. Since we're entering the last beta cycle, this is the kind of thing they'll be dealing with.
I've been finding sort of the opposite - Playing on challenging and usually, with the exception of tarth the AI doesnt get going fast enough
played about 4-5 games like this
Try playing against Magnus. I've seen the AI do very well with him.
Thanks - Yes I've run up against him a couple of times with decent expansion, the others not so much
I saw this in earlier builds but recently it's slowed down. Haven't tried on beta 5.
in my recent experiences, i pick 3 pioneers, and use my starting hero (and recruited champ nearby) to expand quickly. within 50 turns i easily have 3-5 settlements.
my custom sovereign has wealth, betrayers and the trait that gives free champ recruiting. my early build: buy pioneer to follow sovereign. build a second pioneer. in 2 turns, rush it and build militia. 2 turns build, then rush. pioneer. 2 turns build, rush. if i can't get early cities, i will get early forts. i tend to ignore items and clean monsters out of my area first.
i am not perfect yet, and the AI still out-techs me - however once i get my 3-5 cities upgraded i can overcome the enemy.
Small map? Because on a large map, ignoring research like this, the AIs will eat you for lunch. It's true of just about every TBS game I've played. Whatever faction, human or otherwise, can ignore research, on a small map, always is favored to win. That's all other things being equal. But on a large map, the factions that couldn't care less about research are the ones that go down hard.
Try a large map with Magnus, Tarth, and another AI. Set the difficulty to challenging or above, and the AI to normal or better. Monsters should be normal, or dense. Then follow exactly the strategy you outlined above--no research. If you luck upon an AI early, you'll probably beat it, but if the AI is further away their chainmail will trump your leather, and their spells will boil your troops' insides.
Actually Thadiana's strategy is very sound. I've used a custom faction like that with pioneer-rush builds and floored ridiculous CPUs easily. Research in this game actually is not that important early on as early regular troops at the moment are not really competitive. Moreover, the CPUs are not aggressive at all either, which makes it too easy to sacrifice research early on in favour of rapid expansion. The gaps between each research tier is HUGE, so you can afford to increase your potential resource base first.
I would actually recommend not playing a custom faction/sovereign as they are way too overpowered to really enjoy the game. Serious nerfing of faction/sovereign points is needed--A good system is like in Master of Magic--if you customise a sovereign you have less custom points to spend when compared to a pre-made one.
I have started only playing standard sovereigns now and it is a hell of a lot more fun. I'm still easily winning challenging but I expect expert and above may actually be a decent challenge now.
1) One of the major points in the game is the cusom faction/sovereign. You can gimp yourself by choosing a sub-optimal (for personal playstyle!), premade selection, but it's just that. I personally would throw this game out of the window if I'd be forced/unable to make custom sovereign/faction.
2) You seem to be mis-informed regarding MoM. In MoM, you get the same amount of picks both with pre-made and custom archmages. In MoM, though, the game was "balanced" in that regard that commiting to a school of magic gave you more spells from that school, and in later numbers (9/10/11) reduced cost, extra starting spells, and 11 books gave you all basic spells and the option to start with the stronger ones. Commiting in such a way hurt you in other places, as the faction powers and spells were connected- you couldn't pick this if you picked that, and such.
Personally I liked the Archmage customization way better than the sovereign/faction, but hopefully it'll be moddable by game release.
I am by no means a expert player, but the expansion outpaces me. The new production changes and increased costs puts me at a slower pace. I think I do fairly well for start locations. I have had some 3 or 4 material sites for the first city. I guess that because I build a bell tower / logging camp I am not exactly rushing pioneers. But they can take 11 turns to build if you don't. -- long story short.. every time I meet an AI they have DOUBLE the number of city/settlements that I do. I know they are pioneer spamming whores who don't care which lairs are next to them.
I am kind of frustrated on this end. To me strategy shouldn't be rush pioneer. rush pioneer. ignore monster. find settleable spot. found city. repeat.
Clearing monsters is something that should be done before settling. AI doesn't do that and is never penalized for it (monsters attacking them the units and the city/outpost. It's one thing for a lair to be at the edge of an empire boundary. What I'm saying is the settling and founding takes place adjacent to lairs more often than not.
Other than suggesting that pioneers/city/outposts are extra tasty to monsters, I don't think that making it cost money is the right answer either. My next thought is too look at greying out settle/outpost buttons if there's a lair within say a 3 tile radius in addition to any other checks. That will literally force player and AI alike to do some clearing instead of rush-ignoring.
I can tell you, as the AI guy, it loses a lot of cities and pioneers and outposts each game.
My suggestion is to look at the traits each AI player has. If they're an expansionist or aggressive, look out. They'll go all over. But others, like isolationists, rarely expand but instead focus on building up.
Meaby the sad thing is people still feel under pressure even though the AI loses cities, I don't mind ATM though They keep off the hero-focus tactic and I can win every game
The problem is that expansion is the only viable strategy.
In most games you can choose between Rush, Boom, and Expand. In FE, rushing is not a viable option. Lets say you get leather armor and spears right away and create 2 groups of spearmen, join it with your sovereign and champion, and take out the nearest AI. What do you end up with? One crappy city with really high unrest, a main city that has little growth or resource production, and soldiers you have to pay wages on when you have little income. At this point you have eliminated one opponent but all the surviving AI's will have a big advantage over you in number cities, buildings, and technology.
Similarly, turtling doesn't work in FE. Cities produce gold and research in huge quantities, and its impossible to defend a bunch of outposts if you only have a couple cities. Having high growth from prestige is useless if you can't research and produce food buildings. You also made it so now you need lots of towns to reach high level cities, which hurts this strategy even more.
In the AI vs AI games I have watched, the AI that expands most wins. Humans are capable of defeating the AI without expanding much but thats a flaw in the AI not a loophole in the system.
So to fully resolve the issue, the game needs rebalancing so that having fewer cities is a viable strategy as well as rushing military.
I agree. The idea of forcefully taking back the land is cool. I'll try my next game w/ more wildlands and monsters.
As an aside, the setup customization screens are brilliant. So much of the "balancing" that we're always demanding can be adjusted to personal taste now.
Point taken. I'll start watching them and looking at their traits too.
Pretty much what I see too, so I like the well-written-ness of this post.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
