[Discussion] Behind the Scenes: Battle Redesign

[DeletedUser651]

Muf-Muf....do I understand this correctly? You are kind of like a central bank inflating the money supply? And it is better to spend your money now before it loses its value? Is that why we are better off using our troops now?

If so, will the inflation be relatively the same? Or will our troops lose relative value? Ooh...or could they gain relative value? I consistently hear people say that fighting is way too hard and that's why they never do it.

I second the suggestion to turn off animations! The game gets so sluggish during the tournaments and that might help. Plus, they are so sloooooowwww! It can be a real chore doing the tournaments for 8 hours straight.

I have to give huge kudos to Inno for giving us advance warning of this change! This will help so much! Katwijk mentioned something about another Inno game having a way to give everyone messages of important changes in game. Can we do that too here? Thank you again for hearing us when we said we like to have notice of the big changes!!

Finally...one suggestion...it would be great if Timon or someone could make a video walking people through the mechanics of a battle. Many people are clueless and have no idea what the hitpoints mean or even how to move or which enemy moves next. They are losing out on so much of this game. We have needed this for a long time, but now would be a great time to put together a fighting video tutorial!

 

[Muf-Muf]

I'm not sure what you mean with most of your above post, @Bobbykitty. I'm sorry. Either way, we will certainly give more information over the coming days. Actually, we just posted the newest post in this series:

Behind the Scenes: Battle Redesign - Combat Pentagon

 

[Dony]

What about special abilities, they stay the same or changed also.
I like some changes especially the ones which makes from usless units a bit more usefull
What about defense stats, will you remove that or it stays as it is, since its one of the most confusing stat when newcomer look on it.
I mean Sorceress now is doing extra damage on 2 types and takes reduced damage from another 2, in your pentagon it shows it will do extra damage on 2 and that other 2 will have extra damage on them, but does sorceress's damage taken reduction from them stays or is removed?
Removing it would be more clear for more people and reduced damage per unit will compensate that extra defenses they had.
If it is not removed then it will be confused for some people, having archer doing 40% more damage on sorceress, and sorceress having 90% damage reduction from them, resulting in only 50% reduction

edit
what about same unit type against each other? archer vs archer had advantage now

 

[DeletedUser1345]

It is perfectly clear. Sword dancers, axe barbarians, cerberus and drone riders are the exact same unit now.

 

[DeletedUser]

The pentagon diagram is helpful.

Will you affix a small version of this onto:

• the unit selection menu, where we're choosing our fighters for the battle
• on the battlefield itself, where we're choosing which fighters attack.

******************
About the Dwarven Bulwark

The 1.12 modified the output at L15 from 51 to 204 units / 3 hours. Now we see that the unit size for first type units increases from 300 to 990.

This puts the actual increase to the Bulwark at formerly, 18 hours for a unit, now apx 15 hours for a full unit. That's L15...ahead of where most players are.

I know that Bulwark owners were asking for an improvement, and I'm wondering if this change is helpful enough?

 

[DeletedUser]

I have a feeling that fighting will become much harder than it is right now. yes, they are balancing the units, so they all have the same amount of strength and weaknesses, but are they rebalancing all the encounters as well? and I am not talking about the size of the squads, but the type of units in each encounter.
Because I know playing as an elven I rarely use treants and archers, mainly because they have too many weaknesses against different type of opponents... I mostly use golems and sorcs with a sword dancer here and there as the sacrificial lamb, because against a mix of different units those are the ones that survive better. My concern is that making all units have 2 weaknesses in a round robin system like this will mean some encounters will be impossible to win, since you'll end up facing a combo of units that will kill you no matter what you use. Considering that we are already in a big disadvantage in terms of number of squads allowed and size of the squads, fighting will become much harder, not easier.

By the way, since you are revamping the fighting system, how about evening out the numbers? Limit the enemies squads to the same number as us like in the tournaments, and keep the size a lot closer as well. That would probably go a long way into getting ppl more excited about fighting, it is disheartening to click on an encounter to find the troops you are facing have more squads and/or more units per squad, sometimes 2 or 3 times more!

 

[DeletedUser1345]

All of us have experienced the same thing. When a new unit appears in the tree, we learn how to integrate them into combat. They occur one at a time. If someone has difficulty understanding how to use it, the dual pentagram system is not going to make things easier.

 

[DeletedUser118]

I have to admit I even thought that it already has been like shown in the pentagram, with some units having advantages fighting others and some not. This whole thing is more confusing than helpful.

 

[DeletedUser1548]

It is and will be confusing and more difficult than it is now...
Habits are in our nature. I needed some time to learn that Golem is good against Treants and Paladins and now I see that it will be reversed? Also was weak against Sword Dancers and Cerberi and now will be their executioner?

I will have to open these diabolic images before every fight to set up an army properly and even though I am a fighter by nature I came here to build a city. That was what I wanted... I am happy no one will raid my pretty houses but still I find in this game to many military aspects and I hoped you will make it simplier rather than more 'sophisticated'.

And what about the Bulwark?
I deleted mine due to it's ineffectiveness and it seems after fighting rebalance it will be useless again?

 

[DeletedUser1095]

What is the unit that looks like a baby doll among the mages and sorceresses? Could it be made a little more ... edgey shall we say? A fighting baby doll is quite creepy

The pentagram presentation is not very helpful to me either, but maybe there are those who will like it. All I really want to know is whether the inter-relations shown are any different than what I've already learned from battle experience. Do I have to relearn things when these changes are introduced?

The pentagram does sort of highlight imbalances (or what feels like imbalances) between elves and humans - but maybe that's another topic.

Will the drone rider be a unit that both humans and elves will have? Or is it sort of an elven equivalent of the wardog? If the latter: It's about time!

 

[CrazyWizard]

I hope another bulwark improvement will be implemented together with it, because it becomes just as poor as it once was yet again.

It finally became a cool building during the last upgrade.

 

[DeletedUser1711]

So, my two cents about this - especially about the post with this image:

It means that all the strengths, that we are now used to will be revised and - with some units - turned aound? I don't like that, simply because I'm a habit-person. Though I don't fight much (because 5 of my units with 300 troop stenght against 7 units with 687 troop strenght?! ), I actually like the fighting system here - it's the right kind of complicated for a casual kind of game for me. I like the complexity of the troops, and that even though humans and elves kind of have the same troops, they still differ.
(Besides the fact, that the images shows, that humans don't have a heavy archer class. With this revising they would only have one unit that would be good against archers and light fighter contrary to the elves with two for each...)

I absolutly apreciate that you revamp the battle system with (hopefully) adjusting the troop strenght of the opposing units - but why change the strenghts and weaknesses of the units? It may be a bit complicated for newcomers at first, but that is partly because there is little explanation or introduction for the units and the battle system...

 

[DeletedUser1095]

It means that all the strengths, that we are now used to will be revised and - with some units - turned around? I don't like that, simply because I'm a habit-person. ... why change the strengths and weaknesses of the units?

I absolutely agree with your dismay and your questions - but congratulations on finding that chart comprehensible, anyway!
Can someone please spell out the upcoming relationships in a linear fashion, a la:
SwordDancers: Strong against Potato Monsters / Vulnerable to Creepy Baby Dolls
Archers: Strong against Tree Ants / Vulnerable to SeaCentaurs
and so on? I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be grateful.

 

[Heymrdiedier]

I absolutly apreciate that you revamp the battle system with (hopefully) adjusting the troup strenght of the opposing units - but why change the strenghts and weaknesses of the units? It may be a bit complicated for newcomers at first, but that is partly because there is little explanation or introduction for the units and the battle system...

i think they are doing is this for several reasons:
* currently heavy melee have it hard, cause almost all enemies have a bonus against them, wich makes the treant rarely usefull, Paladin however is better (is it? or is it your only choice as a human)
* currently sorceress has no real enemies, they are basically a perfect tank cause noone can hurt them (much)
* currently archers are useless against everything but a slow enemy. now there arent that many slow enemies, and they rarely come without a fast unit next to them so archers are hardly used.
* currently heavy ranged are good against everything except sorceress/priest

so these changes will adress all these flukes in the current combat systems, and i welcome those changes therefor.

 

[DeletedUser1711]

i think they are doing is this for several reasons:
* currently heavy melee have it hard, cause almost all enemies have a bonus against them, wich makes the treant rarely usefull, Paladin however is better (is it? or is it your only choice as a human)
* currently sorceress has no real enemies, they are basically a perfect tank cause noone can hurt them (much)
* currently archers are useless against everything but a slow enemy. now there arent that many slow enemies, and they rarely come without a fast unit next to them so archers are hardly used.
* currently heavy ranged are good against everything except sorceress/priest

so these changes will adress all these flukes in the current combat systems, and i welcome those changes therefor.

I don't exactly mean that they shouldn't change anything. But with the way the chart looks, all troops that are the same "class" will have the same strenghts and weaknesses - besides the look of the troops, there would be barely a difference between human and elves anymore. And the little bit that still differs human and elves (because even the citys look very much alike now because ot the guest races) would be slimmed down even further. That's what I'm absolutely against!
Why make a choice - human or elf - if it doesn't even matter in the ende because everything is almost the same anyway?

I absolutely agree with your dismay and your questions - but congratulations on finding that chart comprehensible, anyway!
Can someone please spell out the upcoming relationships in a linear fashion, a la:
SwordDancers: Strong against Potato Monsters / Vulnerable to Creepy Baby Dolls
Archers: Strong against Tree Ants / Vulnerable to SeaCentaurs
and so on? I'm sure I'm not the only one who would be grateful.

Well, as suggested by the chart it would be like this:

Light Melee: strong against archers & mages | week against heavy melee & heavy archer
Heavy Archer: strong against archer & light melee | week against heavy melee & mage
Heavy Melee: strong against heavy archer & light melee | week against mage & archer
Mage: strong against heavy melee & heavy archer | week against melee & archer
Archer: strong against mage & heavy melee | week against melee & heavy archer

 

[Muf-Muf]

Thanks for the many posts - it's good to see this discussion going on. These are big changes and we're happy to provide you with as much information about it as we can in advance.

The pentagram does sort of highlight imbalances (or what feels like imbalances) between elves and humans - but maybe that's another topic.

Yes, you are right here: the races are indeed a bit unbalanced. We will make changes there - stay tuned for more behind the scenes posts, where we will go into this deeper.

I hope another bulwark improvement will be implemented together with it, because it becomes just as poor as it once was yet again.

Yes, the Ancient Wonders that give battle-related bonuses will get a revisit. The intention is to make them at least as good as they are now, so you will not end up with a "weaker wonder" than you had before.

But with the way the chart looks, all troops that are the same "class" will have the same strenghts and weaknesses - besides the look of the troops, there would be barely a difference between human and elves anymore.

The first part is exactly right: units with the same class will have the same strenghts and weaknesses. Still, to also comment on the second part of that quote, we believe that there are plenty of other ways that we can use to give each unit a different edge on the battle field. For example, we can work with the numbers, such as the damage the unit can deal, and the distance it can walk, and of course abilities. Don't worry - you will not end up with "the same unit in a different shape". We want to increase how interesting battles are, not decrease it.

 

[DeletedUser]

Muf-Muf, what about the questions i raised? are we going to see changes in the number of squads allowed in fights and the number of enemies we face?

 

[Muf-Muf]

You will still have a maximum of 5 squads that you can take into battle yourself (enemy armies can be bigger, just like they can be now). The number of enemies per squad will be rebalanced, just like your own number of troops per squad.

 

[DeletedUser]

You will still have a maximum of 5 squads that you can take into battle yourself (enemy armies can be bigger, just like they can be now). The number of enemies per squad will be rebalanced, just like your own number of troops per squad.

So basically, the fights will still be balanced in favour of the enemy.
So, you needed to change the fighting system to be able to add new units and make updating them easier, and instead of using this opportunity to bring some balance to the game, increasing the chance most players would actually enjoy fighting in this game, you used it to devaluate the troops we have managed to accumulate, changed the units so we all have to learn how to fight from scratch again, and still kept the numbers against us.

And you honestly think you will make fighting more attractive with these changes?
I can see loads of players that took months to learn how to barely scrape by in fights due to the overwhelming odds just give up on fighting altogether, once they realise all the troops they have are worth a 10th and that they have to learn everything again.
Good fighters will still manage, because they always did, but I thought you were trying to make it easier for the less experienced players... i guess I was wrong, you were actually trying to make it harder.

 

[Heymrdiedier]

You will still have a maximum of 5 squads that you can take into battle yourself (enemy armies can be bigger, just like they can be now). The number of enemies per squad will be rebalanced, just like your own number of troops per squad.

It would be nice if say your total combat troup size is 1000, you can choose to put that in 1 troup of 1000, or choose 2 groups of 500, or 8 troups of 125 etc as long as the total soldiers on the combat field doesnt exceed the max.

For examples some battles have 2 enemies, i dont need 5 troups to fight them, 2 would be enough, but agains 8 enemies, maybe id like to use 10.