11 years later and we can still only do one manual combat at a time.

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions 11 years later and we can still only do one manual combat at a time.

This topic contains 52 replies, has 33 voices, and was last updated by  Taykor 5 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 53 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61661

    ifandbut
    Member

    This is a cross post from one I made on the Steam forms to get more eyes on what has been to me and my friend the biggest disappointment in AoW3.

    My friend and I loved playing Age of Wonders Shadow Magic. It was a pain in the but to get the multiplayer working some times but we could eaisly spend a weekend playing an 11 year old game and have more fun then playing the latest AAA game. The one thing that always frustrated us however was having to watch the other person play out their manual combat turns while the other person is able to do nothing.

    I thought we had the technology. I thought computers were powerful enough by now. But I guess I was wrong. How is it that, 11 years later, we still have to watch each other play out our manual combat turns. Why cant one person do manual combat while the other is managing their cities? It is very frustrating to get sucked into a screen where the other person can do nothing. And this is just my friend and I playing. I cant immangine what it would be like in a game with 4 players, let alone 8.

    #61720

    Exoudar
    Member

    Agreed and support +1

    I also made the same topic.

    #61722

    Hehaw
    Member

    It was chalked up to an engine limitation in AOW2, which I was fine with. However, a brand new game that appears to be in a different engine, you’d think they would have worked out a solution to the worst part about multiplayer.

    #61737

    Sonix
    Member

    Yep, it’s pretty much the only gripe I have with the multiplayer as well.
    If it’s really impossible to implement, then we should at least get an option to remain frozen on the world map.

    #61749

    3ep3q90
    Member

    I thought we had the technology. I thought computers were powerful enough by now. But I guess I was wrong. How is it that, 11 years later, we still have to watch each other play out our manual combat turns. Why cant one person do manual combat while the other is managing their cities?

    It is quite presumptuous of you to think that all of us have powerful gaming PCs.

    In addition, even for those that do, many prefer to keep things running as smooth and as cool as possible. They’re not freaks who always want to play games at maximum settings with the highest frames per second.

    Lastly, this is a 4X turn-based strategy game. Watching your opponents is half the fun. Always has been. It’s not a game or genre for impatient people. If you’re impatient then play a first-person shooter or some hack-and-slash action game.

    #61761

    Exoudar
    Member

    It is quite presumptuous of you to think that all of us have powerful gaming PCs.

    In addition, even for those that do, many prefer to keep things running as smooth and as cool as possible. They’re not freaks who always want to play games at maximum settings with the highest frames per second.

    Lastly, this is a 4X turn-based strategy game. Watching your opponents is half the fun. Always has been. It’s not a game or genre for impatient people. If you’re impatient then play a first-person shooter or some hack-and-slash action game.

    It doesn’t need as powerful pc as you think.

    Look at World of warcraft at example, there are at least 50+ players dueling in one area and everyone to his own, so it is possible and does not require end game pc.

    Second, I don’t see why you wouldn’t want that feature, sure 4x genre suppose to be slow but not boring.

    try playing 4 vs 4 ai and see.

    #61763

    yakidafi
    Member

    I would like to add that creative assembly (total war series) with their budget and technique can not (will not) do this.

    Also what will happen if you attack the player who is engaged in manual combat already?

    I am not fully sure I understood but we talk about simultaneous gameplay?

    #61799

    Exoudar
    Member

    Also what will happen if you attack the player who is engaged in manual combat already?

    simply it will say “Unit in combat, cannot attack”

    #61803

    The problem lies in the fact that the only way to make this work, is to have simultaneous turns.

    The only way to have simultaneous turns function is if you are okay with the fact that your armies can spend lots of time just switching places with one another, never actively participating in combat.

    You’d have to plot out where you’re GOING TO GO when the ‘end turn’ button is hit. Which is simply not going to work.

    #61811

    Poodlec
    Member

    It has nothing with technology and such, take Endless Space for example: yes, there can occur simultsneous battles every turn, but at a price of autoresolving 99% of them. That’s exactly point of tactical battles: you not building the “autocombat stacks”, you build what suits your playstyle. So i’m totally fine with as it is now, losing on auto the battle you could win because there was another battle elsewhere really frustrating.

    simply it will say “Unit in combat, cannot attack”

    I think he was reffering to what i mentioned earlier, if there tactical combat elsewhere, it will make all armies of engaged player/players vulnerable, because there only two options left: forced autocombat, or AI leading player troops. First is dumb and second gives advantage to human.

    #61813

    b0rsuk
    Member

    The problem lies in the fact that the only way to make this work, is to have simultaneous turns.

    Heroes of Might and Magic III has proved this is not true. During another player’s turn you can scroll around the map, plan your next move, examine armies, units, heroes, even go to city screens.

    There was also a very interesting proposal to let the other player control independents in player vs independents battles. What happened to that ?

    #61824

    Poodlec
    Member

    What happened to that ?

    Maybe it will be an option later, do it mandatory – and you have to fight too much lost battles, and there is possibility to “cheat” just moving strong indeps around while player kills them.

    #61836

    b0rsuk
    Member

    there is possibility to “cheat” just moving strong indeps around while player kills them.

    You can also do the same with your own units – attack, park them within the range of an archer, and let the other player shoot you to death. Is this a problem ?

    #61850

    Poodlec
    Member

    Is this a problem ?

    It will be if you can help your friend/teammate clear hardest treasure site with minimum effort and a one t1 unit. Not exactly what you want to do or expirience yourself. And there still a problem of choice how and to who it will give control over indeps. Will it be option before launching map or after ? Menu asking do you want to take control or not ? What relations you have with that player affect it or not ? And so on. There is a lot to think, i assure you, and hastily implementing this option can ruin the game.

    #61865

    Perq
    Member
    #61885

    tw
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>shadowclasper wrote:</div>
    The problem lies in the fact that the only way to make this work, is to have simultaneous turns.

    Heroes of Might and Magic III has proved this is not true. During another player’s turn you can scroll around the map, plan your next move, examine armies, units, heroes, even go to city screens.

    There was also a very interesting proposal to let the other player control independents in player vs independents battles. What happened to that ?

    Wait. So you can’t even scroll around map and click things while another player is doing combat?

    #61891

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>shadowclasper wrote:</div>
    The problem lies in the fact that the only way to make this work, is to have simultaneous turns.

    Heroes of Might and Magic III has proved this is not true. During another player’s turn you can scroll around the map, plan your next move, examine armies, units, heroes, even go to city screens.

    There was also a very interesting proposal to let the other player control independents in player vs independents battles. What happened to that ?

    Haven’t played it… but you can’t possibly do stuff like set production orders and similar? move units around? Sure, I could see you jumping out to just look at the map and read stuff and plan your next move, but being able to actually do anything would be out of the question.

    #61941

    Malanir
    Member

    +100000000 To original poster i made the same kind of topic and played the game for almost 10 years as well.

    @the people who says its not acceptable or is acceptable that people may be able to moove while people do their fights is our own problem, we just ask for this option no complain about it.

    And as someone said earlier yes they made it possible in Heroes III why not here ? We are in 2014 the game is brilliant and we all grew older and have less time and feeling to waste 50-70% of a game time in watching others fights when you are 3+ human players is really a bad feeling, so please Triumph dont let us down and find a solution to give us that option asap

    <3 your game without this option deserve a 18/20 and a 20/20 if you can make it 🙂

    #61944

    Tweeky
    Member

    Wait, let me get this straight, they were working on AoW3 for 11 years? AND they had prequels to it?!

    How is this acceptable… the game looks and feels unpolished and lacks new features (by new i mean not been done before duh)

    #61991

    Perq
    Member

    Haven’t played it… but you can’t possibly do stuff like set production orders and similar? move units around? Sure, I could see you jumping out to just look at the map and read stuff and plan your next move, but being able to actually do anything would be out of the question.

    From my topic about the same thing OP mentioned http://ageofwonders.com/forums/topic/aow2-compared-to-aow3-quick-first-impression/ :

    Quite simple, really. If player fight non-player (or even player), and another player attacks the player who is already fighting, just give a notice to player in question that the player he wants to attack is busy, and make him wait till he is done. This will be very rare to occur, so I doubt that could be really troublesome. And even if it could, that would be another choice how to play the game – I’d chose that option. There MUST be way to figure this one, as manual combat is one of the biggest strengths of the game (at least for me, and my friend… and I think some more people out there). If there is any chance for it to happen, I’d personally play in this mode (and if it would help, I can even help to develop it ;___;. I’m really, really desperate to see that in the game. Pls), and I think there were more people to use that system.

    #61999

    Warlaan
    Member

    <irony>
    No, there were 6 Prequels: AoW, AoW2, AoW2:SM, Overlord, Overlord:Raising Hell and Overlord 2.
    Sure they were working on AoW3 for 11 years, because in order to produce a game all you need is time, why would you need money for that?
    </irony>
    If you think the game looked and looked unpolished and lacked new features then apparently we were playing different games.

    Finally there is a company that has the decency not to ruin a series by trying to reinvent the wheel but instead just improves the mechanics enough to evade the known issues of the previous titles and changes so much of the content that it clearly is a new game, not just a remake. But of course you will always get complaints no matter what you do.

    I didn’t expect much from AoW3 because it is really difficult to create a good sequel after so many years, and I am really impressed with the result.

    #62381

    Poodlec
    Member

    If player fight non-player (or even player), and another player attacks the player who is already fighting, just give a notice to player in question that the player he wants to attack is busy, and make him wait till he is done.

    And with this we still have only one manual combat per player. Still, allowing multiple fights vs independents looks possible and speed up simultaneous turns type of games. Could be good improvement if an option to watch another player fight would not be dropped, this often was missed in Heroes as you have to wait while other player finish fights and stuff.

    #62386

    Perq
    Member

    And with this we still have only one manual combat per player. Still, allowing multiple fights vs independents looks possible and speed up simultaneous turns type of games. Could be good improvement if an option to watch another player fight would not be dropped, this often was missed in Heroes as you have to wait while other player finish fights and stuff.

    One manual combat per player. Can’t deal with this. But multiple different players could manual battle with each other, so its not that bad. Esp when there are only 2 human players. And yeah, keep that setting too, some people even prefer to watch others fight ;). The more the options the merrier. 😛

    #62623

    Malanir
    Member

    UP

    @the Developpers :
    This must be fixed asap, for the benefit of everyone for exemple, i invited people to play to this game added 10+ people to this joyful game : 7 of them are already quite bored of multiplayer because of the single manual battle at a time and almost dont want to play it anymore until this thing is fixed, do you think they will advise this game to 10 people too ? i dont think so, but if you fix it you have your awesome game ready to be a HIT GAME in this category so please DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

    Best regards : Malanir

    #62685

    Warlaan
    Member

    Please, dear developers: IF you decide to give in to this, make it an option!
    I have always loved the way it is now. It may make the game slower, but it makes it so much more social. Without that I might as well just play single player except for one or two important battles in the end.

    #62702

    Thariorn
    Member

    Triumph ‘just’ posted their plans for the next patches and THIS very thing with watching or not is implemented as an OPTION if it was to be implemented.

    #62717

    Erwin
    Member

    In the meanwhile I suggest playing with the option ‘ask between humans’ only. This way you will only have to watch battles between players and not vs indies which is a lot more exciting and less tedious! It does mean you might lose some more units due to auto combat but so does every other player on the map so that will equal out.

    #62844

    Fenraellis
    Member

    Personally, I’m still not keen on utilizing the option to not watch a battle even after it gets implemented, but that’s me. I don’t particularly have a need to look around my empire without being able to do things(which has very good reasons for why it will remain this way), as I already do my planning both ahead of time and persistently regardless, and I would rather know when the battle will be ending so I can continue actually doing things anyway.

    So, I’ll probably continue to watch battles anyway. More interesting than watching the waves crash and birds fly around.

    #62874

    Nodor
    Member

    <snip> How is it that, 11 years later, we still have to watch each other play out our manual combat turns. Why cant one person do manual combat while the other is managing their cities? It is very frustrating to get sucked into a screen where the other person can do nothing. <snip>

    I am bewildered by this complaint. I haven’t seen competitive multi-player yet, but from the perspective of co-op multi-player I would MUCH rather watch my ally combat something than stare at a black screen like you were forced to in Heroes of Might and Magic VI during combat. With simultaneous movement option enabled, if someone is mid combat and you could act in competitive multi-player, you would have several minutes of game time to gather and teleport units around such that any army winning a battle could be surrounded and obliterated by forces that moved in while they could not react.

    For the games I plan to play co-cooperatively with my nephews, the system as designed is brilliant.

    #62908

    KorbenDallas
    Member

    Just bought and downloaded the game today… at work.. so not able to play yet. I’m assuming as it stands that human-VS-human battles function as they do in Shadow Magic?

    If so, keeping it that way is fine with me, and probably what I prefer. But, I’ll be co-oping the game with friends, so I’m fine with adding it in as an option for those that play VS. I’ve only played SM coop too.

    <irony><br>
    Finally there is a company that has the decency not to ruin a series by trying to reinvent the wheel but instead just improves the mechanics enough to evade the known issues of the previous titles and changes so much of the content that it clearly is a new game, not just a remake. But of course you will always get complaints no matter what you do.

    This, a thousand times. I wanted a new/modern version of Shadow Magic. A game that I’ve poured hours into. I would not have bought it if they changed it into something completely different.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 53 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.