Forum Replies Created

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Upcoming gameplay changes, part II: combat #6868

    Naur
    Participant

    About progression:

    If we are going to win technology’s by defeating bosses (something that I think can make the game progression better) maybe we don’t really need a “resource” at all: Maybe when we win a prompt can open up with a technology tree and 2 “free” points that can be used to unlock 2 techs from it.

    If it needs to be more role play-oriented the bosses or final area could hold “ancient tech/magic books” that can be read/spent to win those 2 points.

    That would leave the mana resource for other things, like the ones already implemented (and maybe some future ones like world changing rituals?) and make it clearer, as mana is normally portrayed as magic energy and not always related to research.

    About combat:

    Personally, I like combat systems that are more randomized (with misses or even better: dmg values that vary -like, for example, an ogre who can deal from 3 to 8 dmg-) because they add a little more strategy (do I use the weaker but accurate attack/creature and risk the battle last longer or the stronger one that can 1-hit it?) and the need to adapt to bad (or good) “rolls” and situations. (They are like spice: too much and they ruin your game, but a little gives it flavor)

    But I think the changes go in hand with the “minimalist” approach that you want for the game on the simulation part and can even be balanced on interesting ways. ( for example: melee has more damage, ranged damage depends on arrow quality -making the best real costly-, and magic can be limited by cool-down or even casting time)

    PS: Civ system looks interesting!

    in reply to: Having "won" the game… #6770

    Naur
    Participant

    Thanks for the response! I think that some of the things that I said will be adressed with the upcoming changes that you publicated, so Ill answer the others:

    Do you mean that the gameplay is not good enough or the sharing framework? If the latter, then I do plan to extend it, with ratings, comments, lists of conquerors, etc.

    Yep, I was talking about the sharing framework and how it could be upgraded. But it seems you have it covered šŸ˜€

    Ideas, please

    Sadly making things “complex” normally means hard work, but I think that not fully controllable things (with a drawback) are the best to generate chaos and creative results, there are many in the wiki but I will throw some more:
    – For example a wind spell could put down near fire, but it also could expand fire that’s in the border of its (for example)”cone” shape. It could even interact too with gas clouds and make immune red/green dragons more formidable by moving/expanding fire/gas around them with their breath + “wing flaps”.
    – Other idea is somewhat what I said about treating zombies not as important or controllable creatures, but as a neutral plague delivery system that needs to be “outplayed” to make use of it. (killing enemy healers and then let zombies multiplicate)
    – Hiding could be made into a far more stronger/interesting mechanic that may let people do amazing things like evading a whole dungeon and kill its keeper with an adventurer with some little changes like: 1) monsters only see you while hiding if they are searching for intruders / see invisible things 2) You can maintain hiding if the next tile is hide-able. Some traps/minions can alert others of intruders.

    Do you mean they should be at the top level in the building menu?

    That would be a good solution.

    Great point. I had a plan to add some early game challenges, but that got buried somewhere deep. I would want to make sure that they are not a chore to people who play a lot. A pack of wolves that attack on the first night would work, perhaps. Long time ago there used to be a goat that ate your doors. Iā€™m not sure why I removed it.

    I think that the change to mana acquisition will help a lot with this, but an evil goat that eats your doors may be fun too xD.

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  Naur.
    in reply to: Your creativity is needed now! #6628

    Naur
    Participant

    While I see and agree that the game would totally benefit from having more creatures, I would prefer a not that large amount but with more interesting characteristics / uniqueness. This may or not be on favor of the game design, as it could certainly make the game more “complicated” but at the same time it would allow it for more “unique” experiences and different “story’s” each game.

    There are many ways to do that, but one that I propose is using traits related to both lvls+combat and creature type.

    1. Some traits, “racial traits” would be innate to the creature (like flying for bats). But others (like nocturnal, diurnal, fearless, coward, one eyed, strong etc…) could be gained every X levels in combat (for example: bats can have only 2 traits at lvl 10, and 4 at 20), randomly from a pool of traits logical for that creature. That would make 2 bats or orcs in the same story/game similar but still different, and you could try to increase their trait strengths or diminish their traits weaknesses via equipment. (*)

    2. That leads me to the second point: “racial traits” can be far more diverse, both in positive and negative ways to balance them. For example: Vampires could be really powerful, but be destroyed in sunlight so that day/night cycle matters a lot more. Ghost could cross walls, be immune to physical damage and paralyze opponents, but never be far from where their corpse lingers. Ogres not only are strong and slow, but they eat double of pigs too (and you don’t want angry ogres!). Orcs are warlike and sometimes smash goblins or brawl with other orcs. These kind of things not only bring a lot of personality to the creatures but they also make you think more about how you create your dungeon. I think the game best did this is Dungeon Keeper 1, but majesty 1 had a lot of cool idea too.

    Sorry for the long post and hope it helps!

    (*) and Edit: There should be a limitation on “bad” traits (like 2/3 max) so that no creature is useless to the player

    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  Naur.
    • This reply was modified 1 year, 5 months ago by  Naur.
Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)