Battles and tactical stuff

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 Battles and tactical stuff


This topic contains 25 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by  ignacio_garcia_pascual 9 years, 9 months ago.

Viewing 26 posts - 1 through 26 (of 26 total)
  • Author
  • #597

    So far there are suggestions re the way battles are to be fought scattered all across the board so I thought it was a good idea to keep it all in one thread.

    For me personally the tactical battles are one of the main points that sell the AoW series to me. However, there’s still a room for improvements in that area. That’s why I’m really interested in the developers ideas on the matter:

    1. The size and scale of the battlefield – in hexes or turns it takes for a basic level unit to cross it from end to end

    2. Max number of units on the battlefield – I gather from the screenshots that the groups of archers and pikemen clustered together are treated as one tactical unit. This is also related to the max number of units in a stack on the campaign map.

    3. Variety of tactical maps – in previous games there were only a few types (city, underground, bridge, etc.). Will there be more in AOW3? How will they relate to the area on the campaign map where the battle is being fought?

    4. Sieges – I liked how one could attack a city from a few different sides at once. It created an opportunity for interesting tactical maneuvers. On the screenshots available it looks like this is changed now.

    5. Using navy as support in land battles – classic example here is the bridge scenario but maybe it’d be possible to implement this in other situations like attacking the seaside fortress

    6. Naval battles – so far we had a large body of water with ships just firing at each other. How about adding some variety? Islands, bays, coves, shallows etc?




    for 2)
    Bart Youknowwno, in other forum one of developers of the game wrote:

    Units do stack (up to 6 unit per stack). The Adjacent Hexagon rule even still exists

    so I think it is safe for know to conclude that maximum number of units in one army (one group in one hex on strategic map) is six and in battle will participate all armies standing on target hex and the six surrounding hexes so – 6 * 7 = 42 units is maximum for all sides (not included creatures that may be summoned during battle). 14 less than in AoW2 (8 * 7).
    I think that is possible that the battlefield will be somewhat smaller – fewer units in one stack = fewer hexes representing one strategic hex on combat map.

    I gather from the screenshots that the groups of archers and pikemen clustered together are treated as one tactical unit.

    I think that units with multiple figures are threated as in MoM – i.e. one group of 8 pikemen is one unit, one group of 8 archers is another unit and so one (so in your example these are two tactical units, not one). Probably cavalry and spellcasting units will have fewer figures in one group (3-5), generally probably this will be tied to the unit level (low level units (1, 2 level in therms of previous parts of AoW) will have more figures than high level units and some – like war machines, dragons, heroes (of course) will be single figure-units.
    The question (at least, for me) is are the multiple-figure units (“squads”) are pure aesthetic or have place in battle calculation – as each figure to roll separate dice for attack/defense and such. So when such a unit take damage and some of figures are dead, the power of the unit will decrease.

    As for naval combat, I`m not sure but maybe there will not be separate buildable naval units as such and it will be more like in Civilization V – each unit in the stack will have its own “automatic” transport-ship. And ships will have attack power tied to abilities and parameters of the unit.


    Yes, that was two tactical units of course, not one. :p

    I can see some naval units on the screenshots so I assume we will still be able to build them.



    Yes, I saw them too :). But it is possible that they may use the mechanic with automatic ships – when unit enters water hex it is automatically transformed in transport ship – probably with battle stats based upon that of the unit itself. It is much easer on the AI that way. I hope that I`m wrong because I like buildable ships and navies. And in this setting with a place for clockpunk and steampunk there are many interesting possibilities for water (and air) battle and transport ships.

    But maybe I`m over interpreting here – for now the one thing that is sure is that when embark an army on transport ship, it will not be represented on the battle map (in case of naval battle) with just one ship (witch is vulnerable and hard for the AI to manage), but with many ships – one for each transported unit. And all of them will have some battle power, based upon abilities of the transported units.



    No, Civilization V system with automatic transport ships will be completely inappropriate in AoW. The lizardmen were kicked out of AoW2 because they could walk on water and it made them greatly inbalanced. With automatic embarkment water obtacles will become unimportant and this will be bad for gameplay.

    What I can think of is cities producing fleets instead of separate ships, and these fleets working according to the second paragraph of gorlum’s post.


    I agree. The fleets are a good idea. The one-on-one naval battles were a tad boring. Though the question remains: how exactly will these fleets abilities be linked to the abilities of the units? Let’s say the unit is archers so give the ship archery, but what if it’s swordsmen? Should they be able to board and capture enemy ship or what?



    A really good game design i’ve liked in previous aows that i would love to see in this one, is the bonus exp on killing blows. It adds a lot of strategical depth to those that are more hardcore, while being neutral to those that like a more fast/casual battle experience.



    Most games with automatic embarkment do have a significant penalty for doing so. The usual penalty is that embarking takes an entire turn to do – so crossing even a one-tile body of water takes at two turns and anything bigger takes at least three.

    That said, I do have a preference for having actual shipbuilding. What I’d like to see is to have dedicated warships (with no carrying capacity) and transports. The dedicated warships either have no carrying capacity at all or can carry only heroes (with a bonus to the ship’s combat statistics to represent the leadership and fighting ability of the hero) but are effective fighters on their own right, and generally serve to defend sea lanes against enemy transports and swimmers/flyers that may attack. Meanwhile, transports are helpless or nearly helpless when empty, but gain fighting ability based on the unit inside them when occupied.



    From AoW 2 heaven:

    Damage isn’t reduced or abilities effected when an unit is wounded. An unit doesn’t lose its combat effectiveness when it has for example 1,2 HP left. So multiple figured units is just really a display thing and has no gameplay rules.

    The last sentence. So if i understand correctly if only one swordman remains from a regiment it still do the same damage as the full squad. Honestly i dont see a reason behind this.I think  its not just confuse people but it also look bad when 1 memeber of a squad do as much damage as 8



    *hunts down the reference*

    That’s… actually a bit of a shame, since in MoM it was actually one of the distinctions of multifigure units that they can be degraded in combat effectiveness.



    Unlike MoM, our figures are just visualisation. It’s the unit, not the individual characters, that deal damage and have hitpoints.

    In AoW3, the goal is to defeat the enemy. To accomplish this, you’ll be getting into plenty of battles. We don’t want to penalise you for putting units into line of fire, because that’s what you are supposed to do, that’s what we want you to do.

    Units losing their effectiness will slow combat down. One of our goals in Age of Wonders III is to make tactical combat faster then in the previous games.



    Arnout IS definatelly right. We are looking for realism but too much realism will make the game boring. i never heard anyone complaining that a footman with 1hp left could walk just as much and deal as much damage as in full life. Same should be done now. only the visuals change and IMO it’s a very good things, battles will look so big and epic 😀



    Faster combat is good i have to admit and the multi figured units look very cool also, just it will be a bit confusing(for the first few battles).

    Arnout i have one question for You. Will there be somekind of chance to hit system? In AoW or even in AoW 2 it was never displayed but was surely one, because if a unit with 6 attack  tried to hit something with 15 defend it surelly missed atleast one hit. So you will keep this or units always hit no matter what stats they have?



    I think there is a chance system. I mean my units didn’t always delt the maximum damage, or dealt damage at all. But as a fanatical NWN & DND fan i wish to be able to see the rolls and the results PLEASE



    Arnout: Units losing their effectiness will slow combat down. One of our goals in Age of Wonders III is to make tactical combat faster then in the previous games.


    It’s good that units don’t lose their effectiness. but i’m a bit worried about making combat faster. it’s a good thing, but please don’t dumb tactical combat down, the combat system of the AoW serie is one of the best in the game history imo, i had such fun defending or sieging or just to figure out how i can get the most out of my troops and theire abilities. so please don’t dumb it down that it’s more accessible for casual players or consols/pads! please don’t do it that way!


    Steven Aus

    In reply to:

    I wholeheartedly agree!  And especially if you are implementing the battle creator idea/mode. 🙂



    Also do not make huge hexes (once again). Althought AOW is a hex based game, it felt almost if i could go anywhere :p I would NOT like to see huge hexes like i.e in enchantress 2. And the “green-yellow-red” movement points is a must.



    I second this notion!


    I remember one tactic trouble. Enemy army can stand inside the city. Result 4(1) vs 3(2).trouble image – .
    The second problem no delay before any attack in the beginning of the turn on the world map. can optionally .




    Yes I second this aswell, it’s mucht better for the feeling, when the hexes are not so big. i don’t like how spread the troops are otherwise. (bad example is Fallen Enchantress, well i anyway don’t like the tactical battle in FE, to simple)




    I am sure this is something on everybody’s minds…


    Brother JO

    Well , it could be also better if the enviroment in battleground had more effect on combat.I mean where you fight should matter for you.In Aow1 and aow2 you nearly didn’t care where you fight at all…(well except shadow world where you have shadow sickness etc.)

    I also have more suggestions about how enviroment should affect battleground on this topic:


    I agree with this too.


    In AoW1 the defending player had option to retreat which was subsequently removed (deffo was not available in SM). Are there any plans to re-introduce it in AoW3 ? Also, in AoW1 AI could withdraw which I haven’t seen happening in SM. Even when AI cannot do anything against my units (example AI swordsmen vs my eagles: I’m being attacked, don’t want to fight and have no option of tactical withdrawal. The AI won’t withdraw either and they’ll just be sitting there looking at each other till the judgement day).




    One of our goals in Age of Wonders III is to make tactical combat faster then in the previous games.

    Thats an excellent idea, cause i played maybe a thousand online games with TC between players and auto(fc) against indies. And the big TCs were the core of the fun playing online games. While they were incredible fun to watch and play, they took often just too long. could be easly about 1 hour long if too many big units are involved, and some players are slow thinkers, too.

    What i would like is, to watch more TCs, cause thats the creme of the aow games and play less on the global civ like map(the build game), but TCs need to be played out faster. However, this does not mean a captiol city should not have 2 TC maps(even, Xcom terror from the deep had them, but i think aow ones would be much more enjoyable, though), cause i find rushing made to easy in this game and best enjoyment comes from the big battles when people got a bit time to build their stuff up. Also the online community will always use rmg maps with average settings most of the time, so it might be a good idea to balance this on that.


    please don’t dumb tactical combat down


    Tactical combat is almost everything that makes this game so unique.

    My wish is that you guys make a more inteligent IA, that doesn’t just try to surround a city when the opposite door is open! XD

Viewing 26 posts - 1 through 26 (of 26 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.