Forum Replies Created
Not…exactly. Cities can go pretty low before they start having a chance at rebellion. I don’t have the game in front of me now cause I’m on my phone, but it’s like -500 or -600 before it starts revolting. I would say the goal isn’t so much to get happiness boosted heavily so much as have it at like +200 in nearly all cities, with solutions to happiness tipping points.
Dont lose lots of heroes. Don’t lose lots of cities, or suffer crushing defeats. Don’t rush production. Keep mana free for disfunction(critical!). Invest heavily in scouting(truesight) and decent garrisons. Then target the rogue and march on him so he doesn’t get a free window to raid you constantly.
If there’s any bit of advice I can give you, get improved disfunction. You can trade on removing his age of deception before it does damage, and catch magically concealed forces with their pants down. But more importantly you can immediately counter incite revolt castings.
Think of it this way. Age of Deception lays the happiness equivalent of tinder and kindling and gasoline across your empire. Your investments serve as fireproofing things. Incite revolt is the equivalent of a global range spark that can be dropped anywhere. If you can smother it immediately(disjunxtion), or coat that city in fireproofing(happiness bonuses), it’ll catch, and unhappiness and penalties will spread like wildfire, crippling your empire.
Luca. That’s the point.
A rogue late game doesn’t have any T4 units or production enhancements except happy bombs from iron grip. There comes a point late in the game where typical rogue shadow raids no longer work as well as they used to, because there are so many cities on the map. Age of Deception pretty much cements the rogue into their purest state. They have the weakest military in the game, but their strikes do massive economic and civic damage when they connect, causing far reaching damage.
You absolutely have to prevent the chain from starting. If you do, age of Deception becomes a lot weaker than other ultimate spells, but once it goes off you’re in trouble.
On the global level, there is no counter except disfunction. Age of Deception is very strong, and no global morale bonuses are going to stand up to that.
On the local level, simply making sure not to have cities in disliked terrain, converting terrain to favored types, and Terra forming to pump happiness will more than offset age of Deception.
If you have a strong Terra forming and placement plan, you should not lose any high value cities to age of Deception. It’s real purpose is to adversely impact newly acquired cities, cities in risky terrain, and troops moving through disliked and hated terrain.
Necromancers are pretty heavily resistant to rogue disruption tactics and slash and burn. However, necromancers are also very slow to get moving in the early game, which means a rogue could feel much safer to go for the economic boom tactics seen as far riskier with the last expansion.
Would you please elaborate on what you said here, Garresh? I do not play Rogue very often, but I sense that there are nuggets of wisdom buried in that paragraph. What exactly are the rogue disruption tactics and slash and burn, and why is the Necromancer resistant to them? What are the economic boom tactics you’re referring to? Any insights you can provide this Rogue apprentice would be much appreciated!
Rogues focus heavily on disruption. Slash and Burn type stuff being destruction adept and quick hits with elf/goblin scoundrels with concealment, or fast assassins, or even just cavalry under cover of crows. The basis is take a city when their primary forces are away, and burn it to the ground before they get back. Against a necromancer, they return home, cast Raise City, and move on with their life like nothing happened. There are some weird nuances here though, such as the interaction of Incite Revolt with undead cities. If gotten early, it will not disrupt the city or lead to rebellion, but it will cripple that city’s economic growth. How high of an impact that has is dependent on a lot of factors, most notably how many other cities are around to capture and ghoulify. But anyways, you see that in this case there are no clear winners, just a lot of how powered counters vying for supremacy.
As far as hard counters are concerned, I think the only matchup I know of that is really tricky is Theocrat vs Dreadnought, simply because both of those classes occupy a similar role, while Dreadnought units are heavily resistant to all the spirit based tactics of Theocrats.
Outside of that, most of the hard counters listed are a little bit…wrong. For instance, Rogue vs Druid. In the early game, and some way into midgame, that’s actually fairly stacked in the Druid’s favor. Druids have a lot of cheap concealment, which makes a rogue afraid to commit to a stealth attack because there’s a high likelihood the druid will see it, prepare an ambush, and completely destroy the rogue’s forces. Druid’s also have a lot of decent yet subtle economic boosts. However, Shadow Stalkers are a very potent counter to almost everything druid’s have, forcing them to rely heavily on racial or hired forces to equalize the balance.
A lot of these sort of trades exist, where each class possesses a powerful counter to the other. Necromancers are pretty heavily resistant to rogue disruption tactics and slash and burn. However, necromancers are also very slow to get moving in the early game, which means a rogue could feel much safer to go for the economic boom tactics seen as far riskier with the last expansion. If you’re looking for hard counters, you’ll be hard pressed. In almost every situation where a class seems to counter yours, there is a tool in your kit that counters theirs just as strong. Much of the challenge is leveraging your tool faster or better than your opponent.
Mass panic is an amazing spell, but by the time it hits the field it usually winds up being the case that enemy stacks are largely immune or highly resistant. T4s are mostly unaffected. Still really good, but its worth noting that it has a limited window of opportunity where it is useful.
I do think Age of Deception is a little overpowered, but there are some confounding factors which make it hard to gauge. For one thing, rogue military in straight fights gets weaker against everything but warlord in the late game. Stalkers are way stronger than a T3, but in ultra late they’re simply not competitive *if* the enemy has T3-T4 elemental damage. Warlords get the shaft unfortunately, but if they leverage their bonuses towards supports its not so clear cut.
More importantly, Age of Deception is more vulnerable to disjunction than other ultimates. I know that sounds insane, but hear me out. There are 3 effects to age of deception. In descending order of potency, those are Happiness Penalties, Global Invisibility, and Poison Damage. The first two are extremely vulnerable to a disjunction because they do not have an immediate impact.
Happiness penalties are for destablizing the enemy empire. They can totally weak enemy forces on the battlefield and lower income, but the *real* purpose is to cause revolts. And that takes time. If you eat a disjunction before you can get a revolt to spawn troops, it will generally lose all its progress by the time you re-cast it. It does create an unusual situation where if the enemy empire is only meta-stable they now have to force *all* their Mana into disjunctions, but then the rogue player is going to recast it and it becomes rather silly. But unless someone can force the other to waste Mana, it generally will reach equilibrium *if* age of deception is being disjuncted.
Anyways, the invisibility is also affected because using concealment can often take more than a few turns in lategame. Sometimes you’re sending troops past 3 or 4 cities to get to your target in lategame, walking through enemy territory the whole time. If it eats a disjunction, then it tips your hand and you’ve wasted several turns.
I don’t see this as a problem, though. In fact, if it wasn’t for this I would say that age of deception is the most OP ultimate in the game. Im still convinced its very strong, but the fact that it requires an active military to push it over the edge, and takes several turns to achieve this, means that it comes out mostly okay.
If its not disjuncted, I would say it is the best. But that’s fine to be honest. It fits the sorc class and is what they’re supposed to be good at. I’ve advocated for sorc nerfs in the past, but combat magic is like their thing. They deserve to be best at it. Especially lategame as their production can no longer keep up with pure production classes such as dread and warlord. So whether it is best or not is up for debate, but it damn well *should* be the best. Haha.
In terms of military spammability? Yeah every class is like that. Rogues are considered slightly weaker than most in terms of lategame military. You should see them try to take on theocrat or sorc t4 units. But age of deception is *incredibly* strong yes. Not overpowered though.
not really interested in the competition. Agree pretty much with Gloweye and Taykor.
BUT: I would be very interested in people posting mods in other places than steam!
I only found the mods on http://www.nexusmods.com/ageofwonders3/ so far. So thanks a lot for GLoweye and Silvergirl and Drow7 for putting up some mods. Really love the ballista.
Have I missed another website? Please tell me!
Moddb has my variants arsenal uploaded to it, but its a slightly out of date version because I’ve been dealing with IRL shit lately and had to take a break from Modding.
The diplomacy system of AOW has never been its strong point. Its functional and it works, but this is a war game at heart. Rogues do still engage in conflict like any other class. The difference is that they mostly avoid full scale battles in favor of guerilla tactics, ambush, and disruption of logistics and supplies. Stealthily hitting a city and then plundering it is a popular rogue strategy. In general you still fight, but you should under no circumstances engage in battles that aren’t decidedly in your favor.October 13, 2015 at 03:23 #234687
I take back what I said. It looks like the source code itself can’t handle a new class actually…
Assertion failed: “false”
Message: [WORLD_ACTIVATE]Could not find a leader unit race (DRACONIAN)
and class (WARLOCK) and gender (Male) combination.
Bout to head to bed but Ill check those tomorrow and post back if that fixes it.
Yep. It crashes whenever I try to launch with a new player class. It appears to be a problem with rendering, as it tries to find a combination of race and class in Lords.cpp or something?
You guys rock, I wish there were more gaming studios half as awesome as this!
I would say it is 4x gamers are more respectful and cool to dev for.
That’s probably true, I imagine people in the 4x game genre are more thoughtful in general, as the game is a thinking game rather than a reaction game.
I’ve seen many games not get half this much care after being released.
The thing I like most about Triumph so far is the thought and discussion put into changes, most of them just make sense.
Honestly. I don’t buy it. I’ve seen lots of whiners over the last year or so trashing the devs and complaining beyond reason. The real strength here isn’t the fact that its a 4x, but rather that its a small market. As a niche game, the community is more tight knit, and we all sort of know each other. If you start namedropping most of us can say “oh yeah that guy who does [blank]”. The devs have the sense to cater to that, but that doesn’t mean they don’t still have the patience of saints. And even some of the regulars can get a little hotblooded at times. I know I’ve had spats with ExNihil and Bouh for instance, though it never reached the point of outright rudeness so much as just a very heated argument iirc.
Point is, people can be assholes everywhere. We just do a good job putting up a good unified front as a community.
HM. I only have just started out, so I haven’t got anything to show for it. Maybe Ill run into some hiccups. Not sure.
And while I’m on a ramble, consider one of the most successful rpg series of all time: the Elder Scrolls. They have always used a flat exp per action system to improve skills.
Kind of a nitpick on my part, but IMO the Elder Scrolls has one of the worst XP systems of all time. At least Morrowind (I think it was) did. It was the game I was alluding to when I was talking about feeling the need to “jump all the time.” Having to avoid taking certain actions and accidentally leveling up in the “wrong” way–terrible design! I never understood how that game was successful. God that XP system was an abomination, so glad AoW (bugged or not) is nothing like that game.
I agree with you that the broken AoW system actually works out mostly okay. Units still get extra XP for killing stuff.
Well, I was more referring to Skyrim than Morrowind. The fault of such a system is that it comes down to different actions affecting different exp sets. If the sets are unified, that problem disappears. And lo and behold, the exp sets are unified in AOw.
Beat me to it. Haha. Also the mod tools are quite robust. They’re not flawless, but I think based on what I’ve personally seen, the mods will outdo those from Shadow Magic. 2 days ago, I found out how to design a new class. Now I’m in the pre-design stages laying out my tech tree and designing new units at the theoretical level, but from what I’ve seen early on these tools are more than enough. Course now I’m juggling Variants Arsenal and an entirely new class, so…
Still, mod tools are great!
And while I’m on a ramble, consider one of the most successful rpg series of all time: the Elder Scrolls. They have always used a flat exp per action system to improve skills. There are some tweaks based on certain interactions, but in general you get exp for simply using abilities, regardless of the enemies hit. Where things get interesting is stronger enemies usually take more attacks to kill, and heavily defended areas have more enemies which means more attacks. This naturally means that even with flat exp gains, more dangerous and interesting areas will still give higher exp gains that a simple bandit camp.
Now with age of wonders, why would an archer learn more from shooting a giant than a wolf? Its not the caliber of the target, but the experience from simply being in the field surviving and being useful. Simply being out and about participating in fights should lead to a steady rate of exp gains, which is what the current system encourages.
In short, the broken system is actually better designed than the original intended system. Even if it could be fixed, it shouldn’t. There is less potential for abuse, and more sensible gameplay as a result from the current system. 🙂
Furthermore, the original exp system would make it so that optimally farming exp directly opposes optimal strategy. The current exp system doesn’t care. Play correctly and you’ll still get good exp. To be honest, having played games where the exp farming becomes a strategic decision, it can actually become incredibly unenjoyable. Feeling like you have to fight in a suboptimal way to even get a small amount of exp where it needs to go is very frustrating. Lots of Japanese tactics games have this mechanic and while it may fit a dedicated rpg, in a strategy game it feels off to require you to not use strategy to instead make numbers go up.
All things being said, this current system actually makes more sense theoretically. Even if there was time to change it, I’m not sure I would at this phase. Accident or no, it actually does work really well.
Actually the more I think about the “broken” exp system, the more sense it makes in my eyes. Consider, a tier 2 vs a tier 1. Both take 10 attacks to reach level 2. However, kills help a tier 2 less. So it makes exp fairly uniform across tiers since the amount of battles available are somewhat limited, but kill exp always affects lower tiers at a higher relative value.
While I do not necessarily agree or disagree with this system personally, it seems to mathematically fit the nature of a strategy game with rpg elements, as leveling should be important, but not so important it becomes the solitary focus. And amusingly enough it actually limits the exp abuse in some ways as units get the same exp for stalling out fights, whereas under the intended system you would be encouraged to have your high tiers kill trash defenders of tier 1s while your other units threw ranged attacks at an enemy ogre.
One system encourages abuse. The other only really allows abuse with stunlocks and last-hitting with important units. Are you sure this change wasn’t intentional? Theoretically, the current broken system actually interferes with optimal tactics less than the original system.October 9, 2015 at 15:27 #234370October 8, 2015 at 20:33 #234310October 8, 2015 at 18:32 #234301October 8, 2015 at 18:26 #234300October 7, 2015 at 22:51 #234219October 7, 2015 at 22:46 #234218