Brad Wardell's site for talking about the customization of Windows.
Published on September 26, 2012 By Frogboy In Elemental Dev Journals

 

image

Who can ever forget the epic battle shown at the beginning of The Fellowship of the Ring?  Sauron the Maiar was able to wipe out hosts of men and elves in a single swing.  So terrible and powerful was he that he single handedly kept the armies of the last alliance at bay.

And yet…

There is a balance. Because what most people don’t realize is that the power of Sauron seemed great only in relation to his foes.  Some time in the past, the host of Numenor – mortal men – no elves, so overwhelmed Sauron and his allies – when Sauron was at his peek, that they were able to take him prisoner (this didn’t end well for Numenor in the long run).

And before then…

The half-elf, Luthien’s guardian companion, Huan, single handedly defeated Sauron in combat. Single. Handedly.  Huan was, essentially, a dog. How’s that for humiliating?

And before then…

A single elf nearly crippled Morgoth in single combat. Morgoth is to Sauron what Sauron is to Aragorn. Morgoth was a Valar, an entire order beyond what Sauron was. Practically a god.

The point being is that you don’t have to cripple the champions to make the soldiers you train relatively powerful.  The challenge is balance. And it is, to be certain, a significant challenge.

image

In the world of Elemental…

In the picture above, on the left, is Resana. She is the Empress of Krax. A Level 6 Channeler. She is quite mighty but only a wisp of what she will become later.  Next to her is a party of Krax Legionaires.  In Beta 5-B, they take 8 seasons to train (in Beta 5-A, the current public one, they’d take 17 turns to train).  In 1 on 1 combat, Resana would win unless the Legionaires got lucky in combat (critical hits).  But if there were two parties of them, she’d lose.

What changed?

What made training units unpleasant was that unless they were total junk, they took a long time to train. The equipment and skills were simply adding far too much training time. Why bother researching all this great tech if you couldn’t build it? So a considerable amount of time was spent relooking at how much equipment and traits should cost.

Another big change has to do with loot.  This is something we will be working more on. But in previous betas, it was common (literally) to find high end weapons very quickly – just laying around.

What we are moving towards, instead, is where you find cool loot early on but it’s not nearly as over powering. Your sovereign and champions start out with fairly low grade weapons (8 attack).  It’s a bit de-balancing to simply luck out and find a 12 attack +4 speed weapon.  That’s a 50% increase in raw damage not to mention a 25% improvement in initiative.

So instead, Resana finds interesting weapons with trade-offs. A Iron War Hammer that does 12 attack (yay) but weighs a lot (slowing her down) and lowers her initiative.  It makes her tougher in battle (she is doing more damage after all) but it also means she’d need troops to keep herself from getting swarmed. That’s just one example. 

Powerful, rare weapons are out there still. But they have to be earned. You won’t just turn over some lost cargo and find a magic broad sword anymore.

The other change we made has to do with hit points.  Previously, units gained 4 hit points per level.  So by level 10, that’s an additional 40 HP. It doesn’t take long before the trained units become almost irrelevant to the battle because that level 10 champion would have 60 HIP while that newly trained unit might half less than half of that.

The Goal

We do want players who have invested in their champions to be able to win epic battles, single handedly. However, we also want players who invest in building an empire to be able to achieve victory equally effectively.  In the early betas, the champions were considered to weak. The pendulum has swung too far the other way.  Beta 5-B will be our first pass at bringing balance to this conflict.


Comments (Page 6)
10 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last
on Sep 27, 2012

Some balance to soldiers and groups is definitely needed.

on Sep 27, 2012

I like the idea of an "overtax" bonus to grouped units based on how many more soldiers are in the unit.  That should be fairly easy to implement too.

on Sep 27, 2012


 
We do want players who have invested in their champions to be able to win epic battles, single handedly.

 

i just hope you change your mind on this

its so bad mechanic and so uncool i dont want to waste words on it

on Sep 27, 2012

I've said a thousand time before that the solution to this debate is in the very basic mechanics.

Look at a game like warhammer, or D&D: the powerful characters have similar, but better attacks then soldiers, but the units of soldiers get multiple attack dice (to represent multiple arrows, or sword blows). To compensate for this, in the later game, powerful champions get multiple attack DICE as well. So while the two are both powerful, they differ in the fact that the characters do smaller (gross) amounts of damage, but of higher quality (ie, none of the archers arrows may be able to pierce the dragon's hide, but the hero's sword can).

Elemental does give units multiplte attacks (this is why the displayed attack value multiplies depending on unit size), but instead of giving hero's more attacks in the late game it just gives characters 1 attack dice that increases in power to ridiculous levels, and the two types of units behave in completely different, rather than subtly different ways. By the late game, the units can't compete.

If we just gave characters similar Attack values to units (with small, % bonuses as they levelled up, as well as accuracy and other bonuses), and multiple attack DICE (say, between 2 and 5 over levels), then they would be very competetive without leaving units in the dust.

More than that, if we did it this way, accuracy could be implemented better. At the moment, it can't be implemented meaningfully, because no one wants to fight a battle in which half of all attacks miss. But if every unit had multiple attack dice, they could all roll to hit separately, and the final damage values added together, so alot of attack dice could miss, but most attack actions would still do damage.

on Sep 27, 2012

Sethai
I've said a thousand time before that the solution to this debate is in the very basic mechanics.

Look at a game like warhammer, or D&D: the powerful characters have similar, but better attacks then soldiers, but the units of soldiers get multiple attack dice (to represent multiple arrows, or sword blows). To compensate for this, in the later game, powerful champions get multiple attack DICE as well. So while the two are both powerful, they differ in the fact that the characters do smaller (gross) amounts of damage, but of higher quality (ie, none of the archers arrows may be able to pierce the dragon's hide, but the hero's sword can).

Instead elemental just gives characters 1 attack dice that increases in power to ridiculous levels, and the two types of units behave in completely different, rather than subtly different ways. By the late game, the units can't compete.

If we just gave characters similar Attack values to units (with small, % bonuses as they levelled up, as well as accuracy and other bonuses), and multiple attack DICE (say, between 2 and 5 over levels), then they would be very competetive without leaving units in the dust.

 

I would go a few steps further in eliminating the reason behind the imbalance, grouped units.  I would elimnate armies of 3, 5, etc, and make "armies" function as single units.  So they would appear to be a group of soldiers, but the army would use the same rules, roles, attack scores, hit points as a hero, but wouldn't have magic, heroic gear, or abilities from leveling, making them inferior, but massable.  They would be inferior, but becasue they used the same rules, they would still be able to compete agaisnt champions and monsters.  Also with this, you would rebalance weapons, monsters and such, which would be easy to do as you don't have to try and balance them out for two dfferent combat systems anymore. But, I have said this for years, and it's not going to happen at this point. 

on Sep 27, 2012

ddd888


i just hope you change your mind on this

its so bad mechanic and so uncool i dont want to waste words on it

I would possibly be okay with this is it was just the Sovereign.  But every champion is awful.

on Sep 27, 2012

Sethai
I've said a thousand time before that the solution to this debate is in the very basic mechanics.

Look at a game like warhammer, or D&D: the powerful characters have similar, but better attacks then soldiers, but the units of soldiers get multiple attack dice (to represent multiple arrows, or sword blows). To compensate for this, in the later game, powerful champions get multiple attack DICE as well. So while the two are both powerful, they differ in the fact that the characters do smaller (gross) amounts of damage, but of higher quality (ie, none of the archers arrows may be able to pierce the dragon's hide, but the hero's sword can).

Elemental does give units multiplte attacks (this is why the displayed attack value multiplies depending on unit size), but instead of giving hero's more attacks in the late game it just gives characters 1 attack dice that increases in power to ridiculous levels, and the two types of units behave in completely different, rather than subtly different ways. By the late game, the units can't compete.

If we just gave characters similar Attack values to units (with small, % bonuses as they levelled up, as well as accuracy and other bonuses), and multiple attack DICE (say, between 2 and 5 over levels), then they would be very competetive without leaving units in the dust.

More than that if we did it this way, accuracy could be implemented better. At the moment, it can't be used properly, because no one want to fight a battele in which half of all attacks miss. But if every unit had multiple attack dice, they could all roll to hit separately, and the final damage values added together, so alot of attack dice could miss, but most attack actions would still do damage.

It would be a lot easier to balance heroes with such a system because you'd always know roughly where they are.

on Sep 27, 2012

It reminds me of the D&D games I played with one of my GM friend. He was not very likely to give a shit load of gold and magical items. So this made these items much more valuable which made players end up worshipping a simple +1 sword.

on Sep 27, 2012

Sethai
I've said a thousand time before that the solution to this debate is in the very basic mechanics.

Look at a game like warhammer, or D&D: the powerful characters have similar, but better attacks then soldiers, but the units of soldiers get multiple attack dice (to represent multiple arrows, or sword blows). To compensate for this, in the later game, powerful champions get multiple attack DICE as well. So while the two are both powerful, they differ in the fact that the characters do smaller (gross) amounts of damage, but of higher quality (ie, none of the archers arrows may be able to pierce the dragon's hide, but the hero's sword can).

Elemental does give units multiplte attacks (this is why the displayed attack value multiplies depending on unit size), but instead of giving hero's more attacks in the late game it just gives characters 1 attack dice that increases in power to ridiculous levels, and the two types of units behave in completely different, rather than subtly different ways. By the late game, the units can't compete.

If we just gave characters similar Attack values to units (with small, % bonuses as they levelled up, as well as accuracy and other bonuses), and multiple attack DICE (say, between 2 and 5 over levels), then they would be very competetive without leaving units in the dust.

More than that if we did it this way, accuracy could be implemented better. At the moment, it can't be used properly, because no one want to fight a battele in which half of all attacks miss. But if every unit had multiple attack dice, they could all roll to hit separately, and the final damage values added together, so alot of attack dice could miss, but most attack actions would still do damage.

 

This.

on Sep 27, 2012

I messed around with the .981 beta a bit, had a crash after about 150 turns so I stopped.

 

The changes to hero equipment makes a huge change, I  think researching up the weapons tree to give your heroes weapons is viable now.

 

After a little more playing, I think the balance between troops and heroes is pretty close now.  The nerf to low-level hero eq makes the mid-level huts more dangerous, you can't rush them- even mages can't because they can't rush the low levels to get fireball or storm.

 

I do think some adjustments may have to be made to sovereigns to account for the system changes, and Ceresa's elementals will need real buffing if troops are to be more important.

 

 

 

 

on Sep 27, 2012

ddd888

quoting post: We do want players who have invested in their champions to be able to win epic battles, single handedly.

i just hope you change your mind on this

its so bad mechanic and so uncool i dont want to waste words on it

There needs to be some middle ground because the opposite situation, where you spend all this time leveling your heroes, buying/trading them equipment, casting spell buffs on them, etc, and then they are no better than a late game recruited unit, really, really sucks. We've had that before in earlier beta's and it destroys the hero part of the game.

Mid game heroes should be very useful but not dominant. However by late game if you have managed to keep leveling them well they should become increasingly potent to reward the player. Maybe not win "epic battles single handedly" but still very strong.

on Sep 28, 2012

halmal242



This.

Ditto.

I just don't have a problem with my troops competing with the AI, but I tend to like trying to avoid 'magic' in this game.  I like the magic system, I just kind of like the challenge of getting around it to see what it does. 

I really am disappointed with the possibility of losing squads, I really don't see how that could provide any fix that something else much simpler could not.  Squads increase costs, have less spiky 'DPS' (neither good or bad), lose power as they take damage, have severe weaknesses to some 'boss' mobs.  The trade off is you can pack more in an army, and if you have a war machine you can crank out fearsome units.

Now my "Ditto" is in reference to how my champions' leveling abilities can give massive self bonuses that the AI armies can't compete with...but this may be more of an AI thing.  But side by side my champions will out-pace the damage/defense of 5x troops that they have leveled with...then come the time when I get my 9 squad, suddenly my leveled troops aren't 1/2 as strong as my newbie squad of 9.

So to me there is possibly a equipment/training leveling problem.  It just feels odd that my level 15 squad of 5 can't compete with a new (level 3) squad of 9.  Granted the level 3s I was making were being produced in a city that I had focused on troop creation buffs, but it just 'felt' strange that my troops who have been though countless battles just didn't cut it.  It just felt strange that my vets couldn't reap the rewards of the civilization they helped form.  Sure I could upgrade their weapons, and armor...but that didn't make up the gap.  (plus actually for their design my troops were more effective in lighter armor...but would still have liked the trinkets)

Dunno how I would fix this though.  Letting them upgrade would essentially be giving them about the same customization as a champion and it would remove a cost of new troops (by just upgrading...don't need to hire/make new ones).   So, not sure if I like these alternate paths.

But as for removing the differing squad sizes...no, I see no reason for it.

on Sep 28, 2012

Alstein
                                                                           o  o  o
 
The changes to hero equipment makes a huge change, I  think researching up the weapons tree to give your heroes weapons is viable now.
 
After a little more playing, I think the balance between troops and heroes is pretty close now.  The nerf to low-level hero eq makes the mid-level huts more dangerous, you can't rush them- even mages can't because they can't rush the low levels to get fireball or storm.

                                                                             o  o  o 

This would be some great news.  I will be getting into the Beta 5C, later today, and I hope that I will be able to reach the same conclusion. 

I have never tried to minimize the difficulty/trickiness, of getting a proper balance, between Champions versus Soldiers.  But if Stardock can get this just right, it will be an immense asset to the game.  It will make both camps (fans of each category) reasonably happy, and provide those "alternative paths to victory" ,  that I was extolling in my Reply #48, to this thread.  If, in the process, Stardock can also preserve the size increases in Trained Units, that occur over the course of the game, as new squad tactics are unlocked in the Warfare Tech Tree, that would  ( IMO )  be the best of all possible worlds.   (I very much agree with the last sentence in dctrjons' Reply # 88 above.)

That's what I keep hoping for from Stardock:  the best, most versatile game possible; and so far, the FE Design Team's progress (improvement) from Beta to Beta, encourage me to think that we do indeed stand a pretty good chance of getting that, by the time the Retail version is released.               

Balance Rules !

on Sep 28, 2012

Mistwraithe


There needs to be some middle ground because the opposite situation, where you spend all this time leveling your heroes, buying/trading them equipment, casting spell buffs on them, etc, and then they are no better than a late game recruited unit, really, really sucks. We've had that before in earlier beta's and it destroys the hero part of the game.

Mid game heroes should be very useful but not dominant. However by late game if you have managed to keep leveling them well they should become increasingly potent to reward the player. Maybe not win "epic battles single handedly" but still very strong.

i totally agree

like i said many times the developing of champions is one of the coolest thing and i love them very much, i want them to be powerful, but not be able to win alone

they have to be generals to lead your army, or the strongest warrior you have but still less strong then many other warriors together, and so on

 

and there is A LOT of middle ground between old betas and actuals

on Sep 30, 2012

I like the idea of "investing" into our champions and I rememeber in early WoM, you actually did this with you Sov.  You gave of yourself to them to let them cast spells.  They did away with this to what we have now, but I liked the idea.  Really made them special and conncected to you in a way.  I mean when you only have a limited amount to give out, you certainly dont want to lose them and it even made them a bit different than other champions.  Im not saying I want to go back to that system, but I do like putting time and effort into my champions.

 

I feel the same way about my troops.  I design them all and rename them and get quite attached to them...even when a drake eats them...makes me want to dive in there and pull em out!  Would be really neat if some champions could come from normal troops as they hit higher lvls and survive.  I like investing them as well and then combining them with my champs that I may find.

 

I think the 3rd unit I like investing in, is of course my Sov.  If you dont take time in yourself that could be hurtful, though you could take the gov path and then camp your sov in a city i suppose.  I havnt actually done that, cause I like to get out there and mix it up and playing on a setting of epic speed for research and such, it takes me quite awhile to get troops that can be built.  Thus champs and my sov are initially what I have to use.

 

I remember a game...Forgotten Empires maybe....where you would send your heroes on quests and sometimes they would survive and most times they wouldnt.  Still, once you had one that had been on quite a few successful quests and lvled up, you became attached to them and would then use them in battles with your regular army.  Was neat in battle too because you would have real time fights with you controlling your hero or other units.  Again, heroes werent super uber, but they sure did help, but you would still need troops to back them up.

 

I guess my ultimate point is that you arent prolly going to have a balance between Champions and Units that everyone will like.  It seems one or the other will always be better in certain situations and there will be those who take advantage of that.  If we have the option to both invest in champs and units wouldnt that be a way of balancing them.  Both being able to take advantage of tech and magic?  I remember in MoM, being able to cast beneficial spells on my units, making those Paladins even better...oh ya!!  Loved my Pallies!!  Course you didnt have Tech in MoM, just magic, but man...some of those spells were flipping awesome and unless you heavily invested in the spell books you werent always going to get the same spells every game.

10 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last