1. it's already there, look closer.
2. agreed.
3. debatable, not completely necessary. IMHO.

Remember a patch is to "fix" bugs and a few tweaks, not to revamp the game.

So keep tweaking that AI JOSH, spend your resources wisely, since the AI IS the most important thing to us single players.

[This message has been edited by ravinhood (edited 12-07-2003 @ 09:36 AM).]

I'd leave the animal control alone... the druids are too weak to survive long... and most animals are crap anyway, like boars and stuff.

What I'd kill for would be for the person who is setting up a PBEM game to be able to customize the wizards without having to edit the scenario, so it would work with random games.

I would request some major buffs for the gargoyle and Necromancer.. two units I have never built. Not once.

i agree regarding the gargoyel and necromancer.

i request that treemen get entangle or entanglestrike, or both.
both cause entanglestrike wont be able to bring down fliers.

treemen would rule with entangle strike

[This message has been edited by Acheron (edited 12-07-2003 @ 03:22 PM).]

In my mod Treemen get Entangle Strike

Quote:

That's probably why they don't have it.

Entangle strike would be great on a unit, but I feel it would make it too strong. It'd be a risk attacking that unit with melee 'cus you can get entangled.

Patch 1.3 is going to take a looong time to come out, I feel. There aren't really any dire rectifications... 1.1 came out quick 'cus there were serious bugs. 1.2 took it's time, but not too long since there were also more bugs that needed fixing, and some important balancing issues.

I agree though with giving Treemen some kind of ability like Entangle. Entangle makes the most sense, but Druids already have entangle. Nobody would build them since Treemen are better, so I say leave Treemen alone. They have Regeneration, which is a great ability for those parties that like to go adventuring.

--Oops kinda contradicted myself there: I said I agree w/ giving Treemen Entangle, then I said No I don't since Druids would be obselete. Well, I say leave Treemen alone, that's my opinion on this topic.

[This message has been edited by CannibalBob (edited 12-07-2003 @ 10:56 PM).]

I tested my Treemen and they are perfect--not too strong, not too weak

10 ATT, 11 Def, 10 Res, 10 Dam, 24 Hits, 26 Mov, 130 gold

Physical Protection, Lightning Weakness, Vision I, Entangled Strike, Willpower, and the rest

Hmm... it seems that this thread has shifted away from the original point.

Back on track then:

For the upcoming v1.3 patch, can I make a few suggestions

Custom Game, settings (single & multiplayer)

A) Add option in Miscellaneous section: "Unique Races" on/off
Disabled by default (current). If checked, allowed races appear just once.

B) Add option in Miscellaneous section: "View Range" on/off
Enabled by default. If disabled, fog of war/view range is removed.
In combination with "Exploration" off option, reveals everything (open "boardgame" play).

C) Allow AI player only game
Do not disable "Start Game" button if only AI players are selected. Great in combination with B)

D) Allow selection of AI wizards
Click on portrait to assign wizard. Click on banner next to portrait to assign a color.
Unselected players are still randomized.

A) allows me to stop from restarting until condition that is met.
The combination of B)+C) would be great for map testing, (or running a demo, or for betting
D) Hands more control to the player, if he wants to.

I think the request might be reasonable (small change, big effect) but since I have not written the code, I can't surely tell.
Nevertheless, 1.2 included an extra option "Allow Surrender" which might be comparable. (That said, bug fixes are always first priority, ofcourse).

Thoughts?

[This message has been edited by Cranach (edited 12-08-2003 @ 05:00 AM).]

Cranach, I like all of your suggestion (although I doubt if anyone will use option C )

And in some way, A & D is the same. Just select those default wizard and you can make a game with unique race.

For B, it can be achieved by using Cheat code in AOW:WT

I just checked again, Climber, and you can't see what medal or how much experience the enemy unit has, you can only see your own.

Personally, I'm hoping in AoW3 that you can't see the enemy unit's abilities. Or if you can see them, you can only see those that have been demonstrated or those that are present for all members of that unit class. So if a unit gets double strike at gold, I should not be able to see whether or not my enemy's unit has double strike until I actually view that unit making a double strike -then and only then should the ability appear in the ability list for me to view. Similarly, unless an enchantment has a visual effect (e.g., fire halo's ignition), then I don't think I should get to know what enchantments my enemy's units have. One of the key advantageous of a computer-based TBS is being missed out on by revealing all this info that our wizard shouldn't have access to.

Then it would not be a strategy, but a guessing game.

[This message has been edited by lucretia96 (edited 12-09-2003 @ 03:02 PM).]

I would say it would be MORE of a strategy game. You would still know all the base stats of a unit, but there would be more unknown factors. The fact that there could be unknown factors increases possible stategies in that you can use this to your advantage (Just as the invisiblity/oncealment abilities increase strategy despite making it more of a "guessing game"). Perhaps true seeing units (or units with some other ability) would be able to detect the exact enchantments and/or abilities that a unit has.

I think it is a mistake to equate an increase in the unknown with a decrease in strategy.

One of the greatest limitations of board games is that concealment/invisibility type abilities are not feasible unless there is a non-player ref involved. With computer games, this limitation is removed, so why do we still have access to information that we wouldn't (how would I know what level of spellcasting the enemy hero has if I've never seen him in action before)?

It would favor the veteran players who remember all the unit stats, but it would be terrible for newbies.

Why is that? Everyone could still see the standard unit stats and abilities, just not those that have been acquired by medals or enchantments.

Quoted from Cranach:

Quoted from Climber:

Re: Cranach - This is an imperative suggestion, one that is greatly needed by mapmakers.

Re: Climber - Make a map sometime, brutha, with more than two Wizards on it, and try to see how it would play out in SP.

Kharagh, this is good idea for AOW3 too.

lucretia96, you have not mentioned enemy. But do seeing how much experience they need to get the next medal of your enemy that important? Trivial.

King David, very true. This is the mapmaker prespective that I don't have. Then C is pretty good!

Cranach's suggetion to v1.3 is pretty good and doable. However, devs sentiment is still the same-o, if it didn't boke don't fix it altitude. I just wish if there's someone here make something like the Wake of God mod for HOMM3.

I think it is pretty important in multiplayer games, where there is a stack of 4th level units and you can't decide who to kill first, going after a unit that is about to get a medal with a next kill is a wise choice.

OK, let's hope the devs will look at the feasibility of these changes.

I don't know whether ChowGuy or swolte can bring it under their attention,
- assuming these are additions devs/players are pleased with
- and it's not too elaborate to implement.

Quoted from climber:

But in another way, it isn't. These are two entirely different options:
A) Unique Races- This applies to the RANDOM generated wizards in the first place. But if 'checked' it should allow each race only once, regardless.
D) Select wizards - Unselected wizards remain random (and could be unique, depending on setting of A)

It's highly unlikely that there will be any large additions in a new patch. There simply does not exist the resources (time & money) to implement and test new features at this time. Sorry to dump cold water on this thread, but I didn't want people to be disappointed by expecting a large-scale patch. Ideas involving new features or major changes probably belong in an AoW3/AoWexpansion thread...

Yeah this is a "patch" that fixes things... not an expansion pack that "adds" things. AOWSM is the actual 'expansion' to AOW2... and I think it's great, not any features that are serious issues... except maybe that resurrect thing, but that'll be fixed. "Balancing" problems, such as the Gargoyle, means that you are just not creative enough.

Well, could you at least give Gluttons Seduce?

You can always "balance" most things in a MOD. You can easily give Gluttons Taunt in a MOD... you can also make them female and give them Hurl Lightning and Flying if you want.

Josh, still, I hope you will at least consider adding one option, because I think it could be a minor and pretty good change, really.

If it is too tedious to implement, I perfectly understand that. Bugs & balance first.

I know you probably won't go into details regarding the program itself, but I figure that if I'm right you might reconsider.
Let me explain, and please just deny if I'm wrong regarding its simplicity.

- Add an option Unique Races (fits in the Miscellaneous section of Custom Game)

The routine that selects the random race (it cycles through it n times, where n is the number of players) should mark it as 'unselectable' and then re-iterate - if the option Unique Races is checked.

If this is the case, won't you reconsider?

It would allow full player control regarding wiz selection, which would otherwise only be possible through implementing direct wiz selection (click portrait etc.). Something that is lacking, imho. Select 8 possible races, check Unique Races" box - voila.

(Anyway, this is my final plea)

Thanks
Marc

edit: typo

[This message has been edited by Cranach (edited 12-11-2003 @ 03:35 AM).]

Drag Peak balance.

my single request would be to increase guard (2x or 3x) size on all drag peak's especially the guard on the ones with 5 drags in them lol. They can really unbalance random maps if playing tc-always since so easy to grow them to full sized drags. (oh yeah, about 30 heroes players now who play aowsm, and all do it in tc-always cuz that is what we r use to)

[This message has been edited by MidnightWraith (edited 12-11-2003 @ 06:56 PM).]

Heh, I disagree with a good deal of the shouting and smoke in the forums, but I do have to agree with MidnightWraith here. One black dragon guarding a peak containing two full-sized dragons and three hatchlings is insane; depending on your resources, it's generally not too hard to take down that dragon, and I don't think I've ever lost a RMG game where I've found and taken that peak before the other players.

I agree the risk should equal the reward.

cranch, why do you want that option?
would it force players to choose different races than eachother? or would it only allow races to appear once on the map?

Both indeed, Acheron. The first would apply to MP, the other to SP.

If you'd allow 8 races only (in Advanced Options) and the "Unique Race" option is checked, this would effectively give Wizard selection people crave for - without the need of an undoubtfully more tedious change that would allow players to click on a wizard portrait and select.

A mix of random and pre-selected races would also be possible.