[Suggestion] Option to disable Tier III and IV level structures,spells and units

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 [Suggestion] Option to disable Tier III and IV level structures,spells and units

This topic contains 88 replies, has 35 voices, and was last updated by  aiatri 4 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 89 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #105009

    Low_K
    Member

    As this suggestion has been mentioned before in various threads, I thought I’d make a dedicated thread for this one.

    Be advised that the suggestion is for an option, so if you feel the need to keep using Tier III/IV units/spells, you are still able too.

    When this option is implemented the game will change significantly I think. It goes from a “One Tier To Rule Them All”, to a more balanced playthrough for the people who like to play long, empire building scenarios and in the meantime don’t get punished for turtling. Turtling gets punished enough by Michael Bay this year from the looks of it.

    Implementing it also for Dwellings, so that there are magic beings, only not the über-ones.

    I think support for this will be sufficient.

    As to the people who, no doubt, will be posting replies of how there is no need to disable those Tiers and that people who want to, need to change their tactics; It is an option, as in, you don’t have to use it if you don’t want it. 🙂

    Kind regards,

    Low

    #105019

    Could be interesting actually. Imagine getting a Sylvan Dwelling and thinking “Imma build the sh1t outta these dryads and unicorns!” 😛

    #105024

    Hieronymous
    Member

    I really, really hope they implement this.

    #105025

    llfoso
    Member

    You could have à slider and set it to any tier you want. I remember Rise of Nations let you set a max age and I really appreciated that feature.

    #105026

    this strikes me of more of a map by map/player mod thing, resource constraints and all.

    #105042

    NoOneII
    Member

    Do you remember Unreal Tournament and their “Mutators”? Small mods that could be activated for a match via the game menu, that altered the gameplay in fun ways.

    Maybeee…… It would be a good Idea to do similar things for our beloved AoW…

    #105095

    syntax_vi
    Member

    I would really like to see this option as well. Most games get to late game so quickly (even on very large / very slow) I’d love to go around without T4s and possibly T3’s. I like the early units but struggle to find a place for them based on how the game is designed.

    Even if revamped to give them a greater role, I still think it would be fun to play without. More options are always welcome, and it would be important to disable higher tier spells in tandem with this option as many of the lower tier units simply cannot hang with them.

    #105142

    Totally agreed. I’d LOVE to see this option.

    #105183

    bishmanrock
    Member

    Yup I agree, I’d like to see this and similar options under the Advanced menu.

    #105185

    Deggial
    Member

    The problem is:

    It is easy to demand “a simple option to disable feature XYZ”. Should be easy to implement, shouldn’t it? All you need is a toggle in the main menue and then all the devs have to do is to implement an ‘if (option == true) then…’ statement every now and then!

    Unfortunately, it is not so easy. The whole AI is developed with those upgrades in mind. Buildings are related to them – buildings that wouldn’t make sense anymore an must be toggled off as well. The whole program has to be revised in order to implement a “simple feature” like this. And then it has to be tested extensively to assure that nothing was broken by this feature. Please, don’t underestimate the cost of testing in professional game design.

    Is it doable nevertheless? Probabely yes.

    But in spending time (and money!) to something like this – something that obviously counters everything the devs have in mind for their game – this money and time would be missing for other features:
    New races.
    New game mechanics.
    New map features.
    All the awesome things we could read about in the dev logs!

    Personally, I would highly prefer all this new additions to the game. Additions, that everybody will be able to enjoy and not only a minority that wants to play the game with breaks tightened. (Not saying that there is something wrong with this whish. Not at all! Still, the vast majority would prefer to play without this option, I reckon.)

    So yes – in game, it would be “just an option”.
    But in reality, it would be a the choice on which game elements the devs should focus their time and effort.
    My vote is clear: NO for (complex) additions that only a vew would ever use! (Sorry, OP!)

    #105240

    “Is it doable nevertheless? Probabely yes.”

    Bro, what the eff was the point of that wall of text? It’s the typing equivalent of talking to hear yourself speak.

    #105248

    Deggial
    Member

    Bro, I tried to give reasons for my “No!”.
    I would have appreciated, if you would have countered my arguments with adequate refutation instead of being personally offensive. However, I apologize if I violated your sense of style with my post.

    #105250

    Taykor
    Member

    Actually, I think Deggial makes sense. It really would not be so easy. And as I personally would never use such a feature (because it’s nonsensical in my opinion), I’d prefer that the devs not waste their time on this.

    #105253

    You’re right. Sorry for any offence!

    #105263

    Negativity
    Member

    I’m afraid I’ll have to totally agree with Deggial’s no. Maybe it could lead to some interesting gameplay, under the right circumstances, but I don’t think it’s worth all the work it likely requires.
    But maybe we’re all wrong about this and it’s super-easy! Then sure, why not, disable tiers! Since there seems to be a certain number of people interested in this, I wonder what the devs think about it.

    #105266

    tesb
    Member

    The problem is:

    It is easy to demand “a simple option to disable feature XYZ”. Should be easy to implement, shouldn’t it? All you need is a toggle in the main menue and then all the devs have to do is to implement an ‘if (option == true) then…’ statement every now and then!

    <snip>

    in general you are right simple options are not always simple to implement. however you make a lot of assertions, sometimes a simple option is just that. do you know the code from the inside?

    when it comes to the choice you propose between content and this option (which is usually bogus because content creation is done by other people) i would rather prefer this option than a new class or race.

    there i said it, i rather get rid of t4 units than having some cool necromancer if it comes down to it.

    i just bought the game rather recently, but t4 units ruin it for me and i always play with slowest game speed to avoid them as long as possible. i like them as treasure guardians that you have to overcome with lower tier units but there is no strategy involved in spamming your own t4 units.

    personally i would prefer if the devs would give the community extensive modding tools, so we could do such things ourselves.

    edit:
    an alternative could be proper balancing, e.g. reduce t4 hp by ~25% to bring them on par wit t3 units hit point wise and reduce their aoe damage capabilities. or implement some other balancing mechanic (like one t4 unit per stack) etc.
    there are a lot of suggestions on this forum regarding t4 op’ness

    #105281

    smeagolheart
    Member
    #105297

    Low_K
    Member

    While I understand Deggial fully and maybe you are right, I somehow think that an option to disable Tier 3 and 4 structures, spells and units really shouldn’t need a complete re-write of the AI.

    When the AI doesn’t have the possibility of building Tier 3 and 4 units, as in her AI-script, she will not. Tactics wise the AI will not behave any different as in early game, when she hasn’t built any higher tier structure yet. As you say the whole AI is built around level 3 and 4 units and spells is probably not true as, as stated before, you remove the options of her script, the AI will continue building level 1 and 2s and not higher level structures and units thus disabling the script regarding middle/lategame.

    The possibility is there in the editor to disable buildings and spells, which I doubt will break AI, I just ask for an option to also implement it in Random Generated Maps via a useful switch/slider/button. This, in contrary to your view, is rfather easy; Disable structures, units and spells level 3 and up, just as in the editor only now without the need to make a user-created map.

    Tombles will most likely know what is possible and what not, as he wrote the AI (among others), the rest of us are just guessing here. 🙂

    Kind regards,

    Low

    EDIT: @smeagolheart; I added it in the thread you linked. Thanks!

    #105306

    Zepheyr
    Member

    I wholeheartedly support this idea. At a certain point in the game, tier 1 and even tier 2 units become next to useless except for special circumstances, and all you see roaming around the map are tier 3/4 doomstacks. A slider would probably be a simpler solution than rebalancing the entire game to make low tier units useful endgame, especially since this was a problem with the previous AoW games too.

    #105314

    llfoso
    Member

    I like this idea as an option but not because I think it’s needed. If it’s “needed” that really just means that the game lets you tech up too fast. Maybe T3 and T4 stuff needs to have research, gold and mana costs raised so the t1-t2 stuff doesnt go obselete as quickly.

    #105331

    vota dc
    Member

    The problem is:

    It is easy to demand “a simple option to disable feature XYZ”. Should be easy to implement, shouldn’t it? All you need is a toggle in the main menue and then all the devs have to do is to implement an ‘if (option == true) then…’ statement every now and then!

    Unfortunately, it is not so easy. The whole AI is developed with those upgrades in mind. Buildings are related to them – buildings that wouldn’t make sense anymore an must be toggled off as well. The whole program has to be revised in order to implement a “simple feature” like this. And then it has to be tested extensively to assure that nothing was broken by this feature. Please, don’t underestimate the cost of testing in professional game design.

    Is it doable nevertheless? Probabely yes.

    But in spending time (and money!) to something like this – something that obviously counters everything the devs have in mind for their game – this money and time would be missing for other features:<br>
    New races.<br>
    New game mechanics.<br>
    New map features.<br>
    All the awesome things we could read about in the dev logs!

    Personally, I would highly prefer all this new additions to the game. Additions, that everybody will be able to enjoy and not only a minority that wants to play the game with breaks tightened. (Not saying that there is something wrong with this whish. Not at all! Still, the vast majority would prefer to play without this option, I reckon.)

    So yes – in game, it would be “just an option”.<br>
    But in reality, it would be a the choice on which game elements the devs should focus their time and effort.<br>
    My vote is clear: NO for (complex) additions that only a vew would ever use! (Sorry, OP!)

    Westwood did it.
    Ea games didn’t.
    Guess who has more resources.

    Anyway it is already partially implemented in the early scenarios of campaign where you can’t use some specific units for lore reason.

    #105377

    tesb
    Member

    If it’s “needed” that really just means that the game lets you tech up too fast.

    i disagree. i think it is needed but slower tech progression does not solve the underlying problem.
    1) T4 are extremely sturdy. you can kill t3 units with t2/t1 with good tactical usage. T4’s just have too much hit points.
    2) some T4’s have ridiculous aoe abilities and even their base damage is far too high for another player with t1/2 to have any chance of defeating them. The only t4 unit that is not that op is the manticore rider

    On the one hand t4 units should be that strong, after all they are Dragons, Landships, Arcane Horrors and so on. The main problem is that you can spam them which trivializes the strategic and more importantly the tactical game play. Another issue is that there is only 1 t4 unit available to any one player, unless he managed to get hold of certain dwellings (dragons, giants or archon), i.e. there is no diversity. For t3 units you have at least the choice between your class t3 units and the race t3 units.

    To me the early parts of the game are the most challenging and therefore interesting, i personally can’t fathom how anyone enjoys the late game even between equally sized empires, when all you do is spam one unit.

    #105382

    Bouh
    Member

    i disagree. i think it is needed but slower tech progression does not solve the underlying problem.
    1) T4 are extremely sturdy. you can kill t3 units with t2/t1 with good tactical usage. T4′s just have too much hit points.
    2) some T4′s have ridiculous aoe abilities and even their base damage is far too high for another player with t1/2 to have any chance of defeating them. The only t4 unit that is not that op is the manticore rider

    You forget a critical thing : most powerful T4 (with powerful aoe) either have very limited production centers or cannot heal.

    And also, you forget that you can actually kill T4 with lower tier units, you just need many of them, as it should be : a T4 cost 6 to 10 times more than a T1, and 8 times more upkeep. 8 T1 units can definitely kill a T4, and even more easily when you use counter units.

    #105384

    1) T4 are extremely sturdy. you can kill t3 units with t2/t1 with good tactical usage. T4′s just have too much hit points.
    2) some T4′s have ridiculous aoe abilities and even their base damage is far too high for another player with t1/2 to have any chance of defeating them. The only t4 unit that is not that op is the manticore rider

    and you can kill t4’s quite easily with t3 and t2 units.

    Infact, I have brought down many a Manticore Rider with massed militia units.

    You’re supposed to tackle t4 units with t3 units, or many many t2 and t1 units.

    Bring the right tool for the job, e.g. massed militia against a Shrine of Smiting is not going to end well for you, but massed Cavalry on the other hand, is much more viable, and t3 units (exception Shock trooper who has low resist) will chop it into firewood.

    It’s interesting what you say, because the general consensus is that people want MORE T4 units in the game, namely, racial T4, which by definition would be much more accessible than class t4 (as in, no research, just an extra building).

    #105386

    To me the early parts of the game are the most challenging and therefore interesting, i personally can’t fathom how anyone enjoys the late game even between equally sized empires, when all you do is spam one unit.

    Quite possibly because we don’t spam one unit?

    What game settings are you playing btw, because that has a massive impact on the points you raise.

    Are you playing:

    single player
    extra large

    Because that almost guarantees you will end up facing many T4 units.

    #105392

    tesb
    Member

    i did not forget, i just never had those as any issues in my games. especially when you can summon 1 arcane horror per turn on larger maps due to the palaces. (medium sized map)

    i don’t think the comparison of many t1’s to one t4 holds, they are too different. there is however a critical factor mainly limited army size. even with unlimited army size, i never had to think that little when commanding stacks of arcane horrors

    #105393

    syntax_vi
    Member

    I like T4’s, and I like that they are powerful and unique. I certainly wouldn’t mind seeing more of them as well. The only change i’d make would be to their build times and possibly upkeep, but even if that were the case i’d still like to be able to disable them for some games.

    They certainly disable certain units for the campaign so I’m hoping this would not be so hard to do.

    #106267

    Low_K
    Member

    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>tesb wrote:</div>
    1) T4 are extremely sturdy. you can kill t3 units with t2/t1 with good tactical usage. T4′s just have too much hit points.<br>
    2) some T4′s have ridiculous aoe abilities and even their base damage is far too high for another player with t1/2 to have any chance of defeating them. The only t4 unit that is not that op is the manticore rider

    and you can kill t4′s quite easily with t3 and t2 units.

    Infact, I have brought down many a Manticore Rider with massed militia units.

    You’re supposed to tackle t4 units with t3 units, or many many t2 and t1 units.

    Bring the right tool for the job, e.g. massed militia against a Shrine of Smiting is not going to end well for you, but massed Cavalry on the other hand, is much more viable, and t3 units (exception Shock trooper who has low resist) will chop it into firewood.

    It’s interesting what you say, because the general consensus is that people want MORE T4 units in the game, namely, racial T4, which by definition would be much more accessible than class t4 (as in, no research, just an extra building).

    While killing Tier IV with Tier III or many Tier I and II all sounds great in theory, but when battling for instance a stack of 6 Shrines of Smiting, you cannot get enough Tier I, II’s (and maybe even III’s) into battle due to the 6 unit limit. Ofcourse you can attack with multiple stacks but how many of them do you have running around, as you also need defenders in cities? In the mentioned example, 6 Shrines with their overwpowered AoE effect will destroy any Tier I and II units standing around targets.

    I really would like to see this game has an option to wage war (on extra-large maps) using only Tier I-II (or even III) units and disabling all IV units and spells. On small maps you don’t get to Tier IV so why not make it so that on Extra Large maps, you also don’t have to go to Tier IV?

    Kind regards,

    Low

    #106269

    I just find it interesting that one of the major critiques of the game is that there are no racial t4 units…

    It won’t make much difference to me, as most of my games see very few t4 units. Players who are very good at straight teching and in the ideal conditions (i.e. Sorcerer, research arcane lab, large map, islands for easy defence, lots of independent ruins and whatnot) can get Horrors out around about the turn 50 mark, but that is extreme powerplaying and quite risky (same map, I am a dreadnought and have massed Gryphon Riders with pistols. When I meet that Sorcerer I’ll have multiple flametanks or other stuff so it should be interesting).

    I wouldn’t mind seeing such a toggle, for a very different game. Cavalry will get used alot more in such conditions imho.

    #106383

    I would love it, if there would be a working way of empire building in this game, but I don’t see it happen, its a war game to the core, and as such, there are no mechanical penalties for fast expansion and the game doesn’t care if you use scouts or infantry to hold a city (or no unit at all). there is just no wide vs high empire decission making at all. everyone is going wide (more cities more territory) until you hit opposition, as going high (big cities with far borders) comes automaticly and extremely fast in less then 100 turns.

    age of priests
    a game limited to T2 units would be a priest fest I suppose. atleast for me, but it could produce more realistic armies, such as armies of pikemen and swordmen + archers instead of the more fantastical army setups we see now.

    but well, that is a completely different game

    I will just wait for the addon and see how that affects the game first

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 89 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.