Well, I've played the FE beta long enough to believe that I have some decent feedback to give. Almost everything that I'm going to say already has a thread (sometimes three), but I'm hoping I can bring a little bit of my own touch to the discussion. There are some things I want to touch on only briefly, either because they've been talked about so much already or because the devs have indicated that they're in the works:
More important, in my mind, are the basic rules of the game, the foundational elements that make the game Fallen Enchantress rather than, say, GalCiv. The basic rules can be split into two categories: strategic and tactical. Of these two categories, the tactical has the greater number of errors and overlooked details, most of which have been addressed in other threads, while the strategic has the larger individual flaws. I'm going to hit some of the major gameplay issues and propose solutions for each one. Hopefully I'll say something worth hearing. Strategic level:There are several elements of the strategic gameplay that are schizophrenically dualistic, among them
These elements tend to tie into one another, but for the purposes of analytical clarity, I'll do my best to separate them out. TL;DR: by trying to treat the RPG mechanics on a high-gildar scale and the civilization mechanics on a low-gildar scale, we end up with an unpalatable result.
Gildar: The key problem here is the vast disparity between taxation and item sales. A single lucky goodie hut can provide the income for hundreds of game turns, especially early in the game. Compare taxation income at, say, turn 25 against the 700 gildar sale of a very expensive, as-yet-unusable weapon. There is no incentive to raise taxes when we stand to gain such incredible wealth as a matter of course just from wandering around the map. If we do not have to manage our gildar, then why have it at all? Alternatively, if we don't abuse item sales, every single gildar is precious; +1 maintenance per turn on a building is an enormous penalty.
Proposal: Merged with the proposal for "Item purchases and sales", below.
Item purchases and sales: In addition to the problems I've listed above, there are issues of verisimilitude and consistency with the item shops. In a post-apocalyptic world where humanity's an endangered species and I can't scrape together 4 gildar per turn in taxation without inducing 16% of my population to quit their jobs in protest (despite the dangers of inaction), I somehow have access to a merchant with a bottomless purse, a venture capitalist with a vault so vast that he's willing to fund the experiment that is my entire kingdom for decades on the basis of a sale of a single poison-dripping dagger. Moreover, while my people may have just spent a decade researching the secrets of blacksmithing/horsemanship, he's already got a limitless supply of metal/horses to provide to my champions. It doesn't matter that I haven't managed to build a mine or a pasture yet; it doesn't matter that I can't outfit my rank and file; the merchant will meet the needs of my champions no matter what materials would go into this effort, and best of all, he does it in zero time, with zero production loss. To all of this, I say: who is this handsome stranger who is richer than all of the nations of the world combined, and why can't I just seize his limitless purse, his magical mine/pasture/crystal cavern, and his blessed forge where I may smith what I want, when I want, as fast as I want, at no cost? Proposal: Kill the merchant. Entirely. Eliminate it from the game with the most extreme of prejudices. Gildar is gathered painstakingly from your cities or your mines and is used to pay your soldiers' wages and upkeep, not to buy limitless magic items as if this were a post-scarcity universe. There are no more endless pockets of wealth just out of your sovereign's reach. You outfit your champions the same way you outfit your rank and file: with production from the cities, costing materials and time but no gold. Monster drops are folded into production: a wolf pelt allows you, say, 20 production worth of leather in zero time, for a champion or for a unit. Demon horns might produce magic staves or some such. This way, we really get that post-cataclysmic sense, we actually have to raise taxes above "none", and we get rid of the equipment dissonance between units and champions. If I have the crystal, I can make the magic sword for my hero; I don't have to dump 250 years' worth of taxation into some merchant's hand while I'm simultaneously outfitting an entire division of rank-and-file soldiers with the same mass-produced magic sword at no cost beyond a division's worth of crystal. City growth: The game doesn't seem to know whether it wants few cities or many cities. There's a prestige mechanic that increases growth across your entire civilization, but there's also an easy-to-research Inn that allows you to quickly derive a much greater benefit from multiple cities. Add in extremely cheap settlers, subtract any penalties for city founding, and we get the impression that sprawl is the way the game is supposed to be played. The eight-tile hard founding limit and the six-tile soft expansion limit are the only restraining factors. Proposal: Incentivize whichever one is desired, and penalize the others. Having my prestige growth of 1 spread across two cities is not much of a penalty if by having two Inns I can get double the growth. Cities should be harder to found; it should require an influx of gildar and a chunk of time, and/or low population should hemorrhage gildar. Perhaps Normal-level city taxation should only break even upon reaching city level 2. Naturally, this would require bumping up starting gildar; either that, or eliminate the penalty for the capital only. This would also force us to manage taxation while providing an incentive to expand only when our economies can support doing so. You should potentially consider increasing growth slightly, perhaps in a way related to "Food", below. Food: Cities have two immutable stats upon founding, Grain and Production. Grain, however, feels like a throwaway stat. In the real world, food is the main practical driver and limiter of population growth. Where food is abundant, populations expand; where it is scarce, they contract. In FE, for any given city, food acts as a binary check: do I have sufficient food to support the next population point? If so, grow; if not, don't. In the current city-sprawl, low-pop-growth-in-dozens-of-cities based system, food is almost entirely irrelevant for hundreds of seasons. And especially in the late game, where techs provide big food bonuses per grain and I'm only going to be growing a city by .5 to 1 population a turn (due to the number of cities I have), why should I consider the food level of a city location if it's not going to affect my city for another 300 seasons? Food needs to provide immediate feedback; otherwise, it feels like a static and mostly-irrelevant consideration.
Proposal: There are a lot of potential ways to go here.
Strategy wrap-up: Cities or scenery?:
Tactical level:The problems I'm going to talk about on the tactical level are
Initiative: The initiative system, depending so heavily as it does on your units' weapons, results in bizarre and undesirable loadouts, such as sending a spellcasting champion into battle with a dagger. This might work if you're into virgin sacrifice, but what if you just want to carry the traditional staff? In that case, you'll probably end up punished by going from +6 to -6 initiative. Furthermore, there's already an encumbrance system in the game, yet some armor types provide additional penalties to initiative beyond whatever encumbrance applies. A dagger should be able to swing quickly, but it doesn't make me move faster. (I'm pretty sure my parents taught me not to run with knives, actually.) In the real world, there's no difference between wearing fifty pounds of plate and fifty pounds of maille, and neither of them will affect the speed at which I chant a mystical sutra.
Proposal: Start thinking about initiative in a holistic way.
Lethality: The devs are working on equalizing weapons and armor, but there's one matter I haven't seen addressed yet, which is ping damage. To my understanding-- and correct me if I'm wrong-- it doesn't matter how well I've kitted out my squad of 3 heavy knights; they're still green troops, which means that they have 6 hit points between them, for a total of 18, and a unit of 9 clubmen will ping them for 9 damage per action. Two such units-- eighteen hunchbacked, grunting, proto-sapient cavemen-- will club my 3 technologically advanced Glorious Get of the Celestial Axe to death in one turn. Am I understanding this mechanic correctly? If so... Proposal: Apply ping at the end of a unit's attack, not once per member of the unit. In other words, if the entire unit would have its attack reduced to 0 because every member's blow glanced off the opposition's armor, then raise the total damage to 1. Don't raise each single member's minimum damage to 1. Other matters:There are other details that need work: access to the Hiergamenon, tooltips that are useful (I need to be able to see what tactical spell effects on my units mean!), explanation of the Wildlands (I found the Imperium, I believe it's called; I thought I was supposed to be able to claim it, but if so, I'm not seeing a way to do it), but most important to me are the systems that make up the core of the game. Everything else can be tweaked, but you can't change the foundation once it's set. Houses built on sand, and all that. I hope my feedback has been helpful.
A suggestion to encourage having fewer cities: use Faction Prestige to pay maintenance of buildings (and maybe enchantments too). So if you have 5 Faction Prestige, the first 5 gold per season of maintenance is "free". Thus if you grow your Faction Prestige and one city more-or-less at the same speed, you can have a largely maintenance free city. This doesn't help as much with multiple cities, as there are simply that many more things to pay maintenance on.
Yea, if we want to talk about gate keepers you could say there's Kael, the keeper of balance and me the keeper of code.
If the suggestion requires new coding, I tend to raise a red flag.
If the suggestion requires adding a new layer of complexity, Kael tends to raise the red flag.
A lot of great suggestions seem great because they address the smoke but don't put out the fire. What I like about your posts is that you address the fire, not the smoke.
Using prestige to passively reduce maintenance is a great idea. Makes even more sense for the Administrator Path to give prestige.
I haven't read all the threads so I don't know what other complaints people may have had about the merchant but my only problem is that taking Merchant (or Gallows for the same reason) is pretty much a no-brainer in all but a single unit production city which would probably take Training Ground. Gildar is the dominant limiting resource in 0.86 and there are so few ways to produce it early game (other than raising taxes and crippling your research) that I jump at the opportunity to increase it.
I don't have a problem with the merchant giving a fixed amount of a resource, seems fine to me.
On capping military units. How about a soft cap instead of a hard cap, where going over the cap lowers the effectiveness of your troops, maybe lower hp/initiative?
The UI, I think you'd need something new at the top showing the limit, and what the negative effect for going over the cap currently is
As for it being intuitive- it's in the EU games (since EU2) , people realize and understand it fine there.
As for the shops, this idea would require code and AI work so I don't think it's feasible, but allow champions to be "upgraded" at a production cost, but it immobilizes them while it is being built. I almost never buy equipment in shop though.
Another idea would be to tie grain and excess food into an unrest reduction on its own. You don't want this to be too strong though.
I'd like to see some early 1-per faction achievement like Sovereign's Treasury that produces 1 gildar + 10% gildar production.
I did a 1 research + 10% research with the Sage and it felt...good.
On the soft military cap ... maybe lower Unit Maintenance for soldier counts below the soft cap? (and/or higher maintenance in gold from soldiers past the soft cap)
But what would the soft cap come from?
Possibly Population.
Definitely the Capital Building/ Tower of Dominion should increase the soft cap by a static amount.
Should any military buildings increase the soft cap?
How much would this idea bring to the table?
Yes.
Maybe ones for growth and production as well?
That doesn't solve the excess grain doing nothing problem. I do think a oversized military should be a lower quality military, why I suggested what I did.
When you start giving the village idiots spears, they're as likely to stab themselves in the foot as the enemy.
One other idea: going over the cap increases unrest, as you're starving your citizenry to pay for the troops.
We need some weak wonders for cities that don't have anything else to do, or some sort of minor thing for cities to do when they have nothing to do, like make a house +5 population for 50 materials, or something like that.
Here is a video from tonight's playtesting:
http://youtu.be/4trC86bGVnk
Aww, stop, you're making me blush.
I'm the sort of guy who likes to decompose systems into pieces. I do a better job pointing out where the interactions are breaking down than in actually coming up with solutions, but hey, it takes all kinds.
The evening's playtesting has some good stuff. I'm especially glad to hear the Sage really seems to bring something to the table; hopefully, it'll get the go-ahead and we'll see it in a build not too long from now. I also enjoyed seeing "CLINK" in action and watching the weak, conscripted spearmen move as through molasses before getting torn to pieces by the Umbran (Umbral? ooo, Umbrage).
You mentioned that you're not sure if Haste is good enough. If I have the opportunity to cast it at the beginning of a battle, I do so, but once I've gotten Fire 2 it's almost always because if I haste my sovereign I can make a Fire Dart cast right off the bat. As with all initiative considerations, whether or not +2+1/Shard is good in a given circumstance is going to be dependent on the initiative of whatever you're facing. If it's a case of 8 init vs. 8 init (weaksauce spearmen slapfight, I guess?), that +2 will give you a decisive advantage. When initiatives are in the 20s, that +2 is only going to kick in and make a difference after half a dozen rounds or more. Then again, it is just a level one spell, and when my monarch is young and has a full spread of only novice level in every school, I definitely use Haste more than anything else.
You could consider (NB: I don't know the spell schools very well at all; I may very well list things that already exist in the game):
In short, Haste itself probably only needs small changes, if any; it's just a level one spell. It would be cool to see some haste-based upgrades later on down the spell lines, though. The same goes for lots of spell effects. You could flesh out the spellbooks a ton by adding AoE or army-based versions of lower-level buffs and debuffs at higher levels.
There is an army-wide haste, Irane has that spell.
It's casting time makes it useless unless you get Impulse, and then often you have better options.
I like haste being proportional maybe +20%, +10% extra per air shard? Slow should do the same.
In response to FB's question about early city improvements -
There already exist a vast number of city improvements in the game which are depressingly under-utilized: the city level-up bonus improvements.
Currently, every time a city levels up I sigh deeply and almost want to quit the game, because not only do I have to choose one of the basic buildings presented at that time, the buildings I do not choose are irrevocably locked out of the rest of the game. This is infuriating. There are so many great improvements wasting away in that suspect game mechanic, and so few in the traditional system. Frankly, I enjoyed the WoM city level up mechanic much more than I do FE's current implementation.
I would suggest removing the buildings from the city level-up mechanic with the purpose of implementing them into the traditional improvement production system. In exchange you could comsider ideas as varied as free building upgrades, faction bonuses, random events, resource node improvements, outpost improvements, etc upon city level-up.
As a side note I still think buildings should be able to upgrade much like units do.
Thanks for your interest in this discussion Brad.
Well it's nice that frogboy is paying attention to a thread, so I can be assured my comments will be reviewed. A couple things I wanted to point out about your test module:
1. Sell Price: While my original thinking was that items should be valued at 1/10 their worth, this does not work as a blanket change. Some items have wacky values, while others are meant to be used as income supplements. A good example of a wacky item is the sharp longsword worth 1100 gold. Even at a value of 110 this can last several game turns, and isn't necessarily even usable (nor is it significantly better) than other cheaper options.
Purchase Price: There was no mention of the value of purchasing items decreasing, and in fact the value on those items appeared unchanged (in your video). Keep in mind that the disportionate value of purchasing items based on tax rate is also a problem.
My suggestion here is unfortunately a rather time consuming one, in that items need to be individually re-priced. Alternatively it might be possible to say value items at (Attack+Initiative) * 1.1^(attack+initiative) and make the sell price 1/3 of that value. Magical effects add a multiplier to that ammount. +50% strength and backswing might multiply by 1.5 while +100% strength multiplies the final value by 3. A similar system could be used for defensive items, with the final value multiplied by 5. Items that require metal need 1/25 of that resource to purchase. Items that require crystal need 1/50th of that resource.
To throw some numbers out there:
Basic 10 Attack weapon = 25gildar
Basic leather armor = 12 gildar
Two-handed sword = 94 gildar 4 metal
Champion Mail = 130 Base (maybe 3x for con per level?) 390 gildar, 8 crystal
Items that are meant to be used as boosts to income should sell for roughly what they do now, as they serve no other purpose than to boost the economy. 10 is a good value for hides and 15 for spider sacs.
2. Nerfing conscript: So making conscript and weak not as effective was certainly one way to go about limiting the effectiveness of 'zombie' troops, but I fear that you went too far with this. I mean it is easy to make a trait worthless and you certainly did, I just don't see how this makes it viable in any circumstance. Why even have a choice available if it is terrible to take?
My suggestion is to make the conscript penalty less harsh (3 accuracy, 3 initiative), make it affect the build time of the unit (and gear) by 50% and not affect the upkeep cost. Therefore if you want to pump out an army very quickly you can do so, but you don't really have the option of operating with zombie hordes. This would accuratley mirror the nature of conscription. Otherwise this should probably be removed altogether. It doesn't affect production nearly enough to justify the loss in statstics except in a single circumstance.
Weak is fine the way it is (was). It was really only viable because unit upkeep costs with conscript could be reduced to zero.
3. Free buildings: I'm not a big fan of this, nor am I a fan of 1 per faction buildings that are purely for the purpose of raising research or gilar to levels that they should already start at. Making more buildings or options that allow free support encourages running the game on zero taxes and for the most part takes monetary value out of the equation. If it is supposed to have little to no effect it's removal is preferable to reducing the need for it other than standing armies: This would be better solved by having an army limit based on population or technology.
My suggestion is simply to provide that extra research at the start or attach it to a first level technology available for all cities.
Faction gold should be generated at 2/5/8turn on low/normal/high regardless of population, and be unnaffected by tax bonuses, or alternatively increase with civics technology.
A really awesome suggestion made (by henri-haki) in this thread was for prestige to reduce the upkeep costs of buildings by it's modified value, as this would give some opportunity costs to expanding too quickly (assuming bulidings retain their costs).
4. City building distance: I noticed you do something that I always do in my games with the direction cities are built, in that you didn't build that lumbermill because you didn't know what other city locations would be available in that direction. There was a game I played that I went nearly 100 turns not carefully expanding my cities because a square was exactly 8 away that I really wanted to build on but couldn't because a monster was camping it. This micromanagement isn't really player-friendly.
My suggestion: Make cities buildable 8 tiles away from the primary tile. If neccesarry you could talk on the proviso that it must not be more than 6 tiles away from any city tile. At least this way I wouldn't have to worry about every single square until I could colononize the location I was aiming for.
I mimicked his traits and they still work fine. But now you can't use them on the same unit and have it fight with any usefulness. I use one Conscript with Shield Wall and Scout to buff a large early game army. I use weak on my staff warriors on turn one for free city defense and fodder for leveling my Sov and Hero. I really like this change.
My solution is to turn those free buildings into high labor options and give them greater bonuses. I have raised labor costs on buildings all around in my test. It forces the player to choose between 20-30 turns of buildings or training troops during that time. Lumbermill now reduces build time by 25%, as does Mason. So for 2 Gildar per turn, you can really focus a city on construction. Of course you would need a forest nearby to do so. It all plays much better. I especially like that the Warfare Tree does the same thing by reducing unit training times to near null.
When I made this change I really thought it would always be better to crap out pioneers to start and then soldiers, waiting for population to get going first. This is not the case. Getting Workshop right away takes about 30 turns from turn one, but it changes your city into a production powerhouse if you have the Materials to use it. An early wait on pioneers is totally worth +8 Production per material with no upkeep. I am finding that labor costs are much better functions than maintenance. Gold, Metal, Crystal and Mana costs should take hold after my city has had a chance to get on its feet.
I noticed in the videos that city growth is being held hostage in your tests. I am sure you guys are playing by a rule that says no level 5 cities until the late game. I have been testing a capital city growth bonus of 2 and a tower of dominion growth bonus of 3. It creates an interesting choice in the early game. You either start with a 5/3 and build the tower in that city, or you are better off finding better Grain out in the wilds. So you then build a light army and a pioneer and start the game with 2 cities. From there you are basically driven toward rapid expansion or focusing on grabbing all the Prestige and Grain you can for your capital. It still takes me around 150-200 turns to get that one city to level 5, but when I do, I have something great to show for it. The cost of that strategy is of course that your allies and enemies have much more territory. It balances out fairly well. I was able to get Masterwork Armor and Underforge in my current game. Talk about a game changer! I am currently one city that can outproduce mine enemies with the best armor on my troops. And since I am Capitar, I can afford them. The game has quickly turned into a tale of Capitar's roman style conquests.
Allow Prestige to get to 8 in a capital. That is a perfect cure for the lethargic early game everyone is complaining about. It gets the game moving. Of course I also fixed the no quests problem, no monster armies spawning problem, changed every building to be better and cost more, made monsters move at 3 on the Strategic Map, and pushed all monsters out to a spawn radius of 10. I finally have that Act I war against the world. one thing to note is that I also was able to have the same types of monsters lairs spawn next to each other. Really added some flavor to the game.
Another thing about the video version of the game. It looks like you are still working with high wage costs for gear on units. I set my gear costs to very low and made unit size the determining factor for costs. Making good units requires so much of an investment already, no need to add high wages.
Hey guys has the next beta release date been announced yet? I was under the impression it was this week.
Nope, it is due this month (hopefully) - not specifically or necessarily this week.
I would warmly welcome additional ways of getting unique rewards. Especially from quests. Additional faction prestige, as well as unique spells and city improvements should be available as quest rewards.
If I see this correctly Frogboy added a robe to channeling, I wonder what it does. The lack of early game robes for spell casters always struck me as odd.
I have a couple ideas.
For the selling of items, I think you should have a cap on sell price that increases over time. You could either have it be based on game turn (such as max sell price = # of seasons passed), which is to be like how the land is getting richer as everything is rebuilt. This means that you wouldn't be able to sell that sword for 1000 gold until the really late game, when it wont be unbalanced. Another way to limit item sales is to base it off your income instead of seasons. This represents your personal factions wealth determining the availability of wealthy nobles who want to buy your stuff. I am thinking something like selling items for no more than 2x of your total income before expenses. I am not sure how to factor taxes into equation, its probably best to assume the highest tax rate. The only problem with this method is that its not obvious to the user how it is calculated, but if you make a good tooltip then it should be fine. So an example would be that if you are making 50 gildar / turn on the highest tax rate, before expenses, then you can sell that magical sword for 100 gildar, even though its value is 1000. The only fear would be that it encourages hoarding... but at least then they might be more likely to actually use the items... you know... in combat.I think you should try to copy research by having a warfare/civics/magic decision tree in your starting buildings.My suggestion for FE based on watching various videos is to have 3 or 4 starting buildings that let you choose your priority. Also, I like that you gave +10% research to the Sage, I think you should try to make things have both a scaling % bonus as well as a static +X bonus to make them viable in multiple stages of the game. Having a version for money and production makes sense.Finally, if you decide that you need 1 more starting building to spice things up, may I suggest a faction specific building? Maybe even just 4 total in the game, mirrored betwen kingdom and empire.
Penalizing tax raises would make the tax slider more interesting. Let's say for every change upwards in taxes, there is additional temporary unrest (e.g. [sum_of_ city_levels + number_of_cities] * population * well_tweaked_base_divider) that slowly diminishs back to normal values over time.
You had to think about lowering taxes twice that way. While tax cuts still would gain you bonuses at once, you would suffer from a slowly degrading penalty later and it would only pay off if you can keep taxes on the lower levels for at least a particular time. Taking population, city levels and number of cities into calculation would help to balance the mechanic from early to late game.
People get so used to low taxes! Try to roll back tax cuts.
I think one of the current problem is that wages are more or less proportional to production cost : if wages were equal to a fixed amount depending on unit size + another amount depending on units traits and labor cost, it would be much easier to balance (and it would indeed force a decision between recruiting quickly a large conscript force, or taking much more time to recruit a high quality army.
Exactly. The current situation is that we are paying for size and total labor. That is the right idea, I just reduced the factor of labor by quite a bit, so that size is the primary factor in the cost. The difference between chainmail and leather should not be 5 gildar per turn. That punishes chainmail, which takes alot of research and metal to use.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account