Races Survey and Terraria Wonders

Hi everyone,

Thanks to everyone who participated in our last survey. Both the survey results, and discussion about the statements was very insightful.

We hope you’ll participate in this new survey, which focuses on playable races. We’d love to know what you think!

Before we get to the results, first something completely different. TriumphNet_Icon_LargeOur dutch game industry buddies Engine Software, responsible for the ports and expansions of indie mega hit Terraria, have snuck in an Age of Wonders item set based on the Horned God. See it here in all its pixelated glory.

[wpsqt name=”Races Survey” type=”survey”]

Feel free to discuss below & have a great weekend : D>

The following two tabs change content below.

SikBok

Latest posts by SikBok (see all)

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 Races Survey and Terraria Wonders

This topic contains 196 replies, has 68 voices, and was last updated by  BB Shockwave 6 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 197 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #216195

    SiaFu
    Member

    I think the art design of AoW3 is fantastic. The race themes (Mesoamerican, Egyptian, Indian etc) were spot on. A little neglected aspect is the randomizer and variations in terrain which makes the best TBS hex map I’ve played in a long time (especially noticeable along coasts). Only the newer mesa-terrace-like mountains evoke some flashbacks to ancient maps like Command and Conquer, but the rest is excellent, down to ambient sound variation in different climates.

    Unit design: From high-level monstrosities like the Eldritch Horror to small T1 detail like Yosemite Sam dwarven Scoundrels I’ve had a hard time choosing which aspect I like better.
    And I think it’s a huge oversight that no monster/roaming dwellings were in the poll as I really like the Nagas. Even the small touches like the snakeskin pattern on the Glutton (which is far from my favorite unit, bu looks much better than in previous AoWs). There are so many little artistic quirks in the units I like it’d be hard to list them all, so I’ll concentrate on the few I don’t:

    Halflings (esp. heroes now they’re rendered as units and not leaders) all look like Chucky with their oversized heads and large lifeless eyes. Smaller eyes would help move them out of the Uncanny Valley (no blinking, and eye texture mismatch on lower settings really add to the doll-like effect).
    And while I like the Egyptian Tigrans, my only gripe is that Leader fur patterning (Tiger/leopard etc) doesn’t extend beyond the face (and they do show a lot of fur in various leader clothes).

    Back to praise: Deathbringers like an elegant meld of a female Cenobyte and Morticia Adams; Crabby Bone Collectors; the steampunk Dreadnought lineup, elegant variations on similar models and skeletons that greatly differentiate Dragons, Wyverns, Cockatrices and Gryphons etc. Mongolian Horse Archers, Phalanx (except for bucklers instead of larger Hoplon shields) and so on..

    And a special thanks to the devs for subtle unit changes through patches: such as Tigran horse archer mounts and Goblin butcher halberds that make class and race variations meld nicely.

    Regarding starting race preferences, I mostly do SP and focus on conversion so I play an eclectic medley of racial/class units in each game, usually starting with Humans for early production or Draconians for early military. I like the Tigran athletic mobility and Frostlings have an edge on island maps, but rely too much on frost synergies for my mixed-team approach.

    Now with Racial governances and the new expansion, I need to get my bearings again.
    I especially like the wetland terrain hex bonuses the Goblins get and wish something similar were introduced for other races as well.

    #216197

    vota dc
    Member

    Asymetrical races and classes combo would be fun. Even in Age of Kings the conqueror some factions are good in some maps and other are good in other maps.

    #216252

    nspannaus
    Member

    It occurs to me that a lot of what makes this game so great also serves to limit it in many ways. As it stands, the game is EXTREMELY versatile. In single player, you can tailor the settings to accommodate so many play styles. The game can be played as an arms-race conquest duel; it can be an open RPG-adventure focused on exploration; it can even simulate a large-scale RTS. And then there’s mulitplayer which adds so much more to the mix. In order to accommodate this freedom of play, keeping the game “balanced” must be an incredibly difficult task. The result is a slightly homogenized experience across the board, unfortunately.

    It’s great that the studio really listens to fan feedback and tries to cater to our requests. That said, I hope the phenomenon of “decision by committee” isn’t further tempering potentially big developments.

    For these reasons and more, my humble opinion is that the Triumph designers listen to their gut and take a few more risks when modifying the current game and in the development of future games.

    We, the fans, are here because we LOVE the product as it is. We’re perfectly content with the status quo. But progress requires change, and these survey results might not be the best indicator of how the studio should INNOVATE down the road.

    Most of the forum discussions seem to boil down to the question of game balance. Perhaps there is a way to allow for more asymmetry in single-player modes while creating optional (and DISTINCT) rules in multiplayer mode that would assure a fair game for all.

    Compartmentalizing the single- and multi-player games would most likely allow the studio a LOT more freedom in “mixing things up” a bit.

    Finally, I think we should look to Starcraft and even Hearthstone as prime examples of games that are both asymmetrical AND balanced. Specialist units in both games are extremely effective in specific situations. More versatile units are generally weaker but can adapt to more situations. Hearthstone specifically has incredible depth, extremely distinct classes, yet the overall balance of the game is near-perfect. I realize that a card game has little to do with a 4X game like AoW… but the behind-the-scenes philosophies might be comparable.

    Just my two cents.

    #216254

    erathvael
    Member

    More than anything, I’d love to see more development of the existing races.

    The old Age of Wonders tended to get really interesting around tier III, when races got their creative, non-symmetrical units. They had more staying-power than the early tiers, and tended to eclipse them.

    We still see that in AoW III, but now it tends to be class units. I like the class mechanic, but I miss the distinct feel of the old high-tier race units.

    An extra, non-symmetrical tier III for each race would be awesome!

    #216269

    llfoso
    Member

    My two favorite games do a crossover, but I don’t get to enjoy it because it’s console only. (T~T)

    #216281

    ten9
    Member

    More than anything, I’d love to see more development of the existing races.

    The old Age of Wonders tended to get really interesting around tier III, when races got their creative, non-symmetrical units. They had more staying-power than the early tiers, and tended to eclipse them.

    We still see that in AoW III, but now it tends to be class units. I like the class mechanic, but I miss the distinct feel of the old high-tier race units.

    An extra, non-symmetrical tier III for each race would be awesome!

    I agree with this. What the races lack is importance because the higher tier units are class units or summoned creatures. If the races get a distinct higher tier unit or creature, they will become more important automatically.
    And this in turn will help immersion.
    It is the races that give me a sense of immersion and feel, not the classes.

    #216282

    Draxynnic
    Member

    Hrrrmn. My thoughts on presentation can probably use a bit of unpacking to become useful rather than being a simple vote, so here goes:

    (Like some of the other posters, I’m a bit more picky with those races I like more, probably because in those cases the things that feel off particularly stand out.

    Draconians: My thoughts on draconian aesthetics are fairly complex. On the whole, I largely preferred the long-snouted AoW2 draconians (and fully quadruped hatchlings) – however, for the regular units, the short snout does work reasonably well. Changing them now could be a lot of work for a small benefit that not everyone agrees is an improvement.

    Faces for heroes and leaders, however, are a bit more problematic, as they’re closer to human. Draconian rank and file manage to at least give the impression of a reptilian snout, albeit a short one – the leaders have a distinct nose, however, which takes them that much closer to being human. Tigrans have shown that snouts are possible: It would be useful to have some draconian faces with the same. A short-term solution could also be to make the draconian racial helmets available to leaders: if a draconian leader could wear the helm of a Flyer, that would generate the illusion of an old-style long snout (leaving it up to player interpretation if it’s just an illusion or if the wearer has a full-length snout underneath).

    Apart from wanting a longer face, the aesthetics for the draconian racial units are, IMO, very good, with the detail work being particularly impressive. Most class units also work well. The exceptions are:

    Female Rogue units: Draconian bards in particular should have one of the spiny hair-like options rather than the red mop. Succubi get a bit more of a pass because they’re magical creatures that technically probably aren’t truly draconians, but a hair replacement would probably be good for them as well.

    Warbreed: Given the enmity between dragons and giants, it seems unlikely that the draconian warbreed would be a half-Troll like most warbreeds, and would instead be a little more, well, draconic, like the AoW2 Crusher. It would be good if the appearance could reflect this: scalier skin, big dragonesque head instead of the helmet.

    Theocrat: This is definitely getting into ‘stretch goal’ territory, but I think the Shrine of Smiting seems a bit out of place for draconians, in that it appears to be a shrine to a fairly human-like figure. Having a draconian Shrine of Smiting with a dragon on it instead would be more fitting. Similarly, while warlord armour looks fairly fitting for draconians, crusaders do feel a little off. Perhaps a reskinning would be sufficient (make their armour bronze instead of white…) and/or giving their helmets a bit of a draconic motif.

    Dwarves: On the whole, I’m fairly happy with dwarves myself – but this comes with a caveat that I’m not a dwarf fanatic, and those that are will be more picky (kinda like I just was for draconians, perhaps). One criticism is that the armour on dwarven racial units does seem a bit… shapeless. Part of that is that the beard is such a large part of many dwarven units, but they could probably do with some more definition – more pronounced shoulders in particular, and perhaps having their hauberks be belted at the waist rather than simply hanging from the shoulders.

    Goblins: Goblins seem pretty much spot on to me. I can understand people not liking the buck teeth – I think they’re gobliny enough myself, but I wouldn’t object to changing them to fangs either. I am inclined to think that the goblin warbreed should be the same size as the others (part Troll, yo, and/or thinking about the Goblin King in The Hobbit). The short handblade that goblin assassins appear to have can probably do with lengthening, too. Oh, and on further consideration: It always struck me as a little odd that the beetle riders, an elite unit, is equipped as an Untouchable. I guess it fits the concept from earlier instalments that it’s the beetle that does the fighting and the rider just directs and hides behind the beetle, but even so I’d expect the riders to be a little better equipped.
    Orcs: Orcs also work well in my opinion – and, for the record, I personally like the ‘shark fin’ helmet design: it gives them a common design element that implies a certain degree of viciousness without falling back on horns again. There’s nothing I can think of that really jumps out as non-fitting.

    Humans: Humans work well with just about everything: possibly because they’re the base template. Racial units have a strong uniting theme and also meld well with class units. Priests do seem to have a scowl well beyond human norms, but that’s not a major issue. I would, however, propose giving more of a tan to the human units which have more exposed skin: it works with succubi and exalted because they’re magical creatures, but the likes of martyrs and berserkers really feel like they should be tanned or sunburnt.

    High Elves: High Elf racial units all look quite good to me, individually and in having a strong common theme. One thing I find particularly interesting there is that they have a style which is similar enough to themes that have been used for elves before to be quickly recognisable, without being so close to any of them that it feels like a rip-off: well done there! However, most of the bareheaded class units, being bald, just look totally off to me. I think it’s the combination of baldness with pointy ears and a narrow head – it just makes me think of a vampire or something rather than an elf. I think giving some hair to these units – martyr, exalted, berserker, manticore rider – would be a big improvement.

    Halflings: I actually like the lack of an overall cohesive look that halflings have. To me, the halfling racial units aren’t supposed to resemble a structured military and instead a collection of halflings from other walks of life pressed into a militia, and the lack of a unified appearance fits this well. Halfling class units mostly look pretty good, although there’s something off about halfling bards that I just can’t quite put my finger on.

    Frostlings:: Racial units all look good to me. I do find it a bit perturbing, though, that while the traditional small-sized frostlings are supposed to be the most common frostlings, all of the frostling class units use the human-sized, part Frost Witch model of the upper classes. For some of the more elite or otherwise higher-class units, this makes sense, but I think it would be worth looking at some of the class units and basing them on the smaller model instead.

    Tigrans: Tigrans also mostly work pretty well. The hair of the tigran bards does seem out of place, though: it can probably stand to be a bit sleeker or even removed altogether.

    Warbreeds: Not technically a race, but I think it’s easier to comment on them here rather than make similar comments for multiple races.

    Warbreeds all have a common theme which fits well with the more ‘savage’ races like orcs and goblins. On the whole, this is generally okay, since warlords in general have a bit of a less civilised air than other classes (with the possible exception of archdruids). People have called for the removal of, for instance, high elf warbreeds on the basis that high elves would not do that… however, as long as we still have all elvenkind in one race, I would observe that dark elves, and thus more evil high elf populations, probably WOULD have no qualms about creating warbreed.

    However, and this is a bit nitpicky: Every warbreed has a symbol on their lower chest, where the chains come together. The symbol is, basically, a face with a really toothy grin. This is a symbol that seems quite fitting for orcs and goblins – the races most typically associated with ogrelike allies – however, for races such as humans, elves, dwarves and halflings, even ones ruthless enough to produce warbreeds, it’s a little less fitting. So one improvement, albeit one that may be a bit nitpicky, could be replacing that symbol with something closer to the culture. For instance, the frostling and dwarf warbreed could have the round shield of Raiders and Axemen respectively in that position.

    Preferred Races to Play

    This one largely came down to personal preference: what I tend to appreciate is mobility and interesting abilities, so the races I generally prefer playing tend to be races that lean more in that direction than the more straightforward options. I don’t think there’s any race I actually don’t enjoy, but there are certainly some I am more excited about absorbing into my empire than others. I’ve split them into three categories for the sake of the vote, but units in the lowest category aren’t unenjoyable – I just don’t find them as exciting as the others. However, I think there is an important role to play for the solid, dependable races with few bells and whistles nonetheless.

    Visual variation between races versus between classes

    Given the choice, I would definitely go for more racial variation, I think. It’s probably more work (but avoids some of the weirdnesses discussed above), but generally I think that aesthetically speaking it would be better for the class and race aesthetics to be more melded together, rather than the class almost completely replacing the race apart from the base model.

    I’ve picked on bards quite a bit up there: that’s one unit where there’s a lot of potential for variations between different cultures. The harp, for instance, is probably more associated with elves: given the resources, what would be awesome for each race to have their own form of musician. So elves might carry a harp, orcs might have drums, halflings flutes, and so on. Bards, however, are already one of the more visually distinct units because you can see the model – for more heavily armoured units like crusaders, phalanxes and monster hunters, there’s often little to tell between members of different race, short of giveaways like giant beards. While I wouldn’t necessarily remove the class look entirely, it would be nice for such units to have some form of equipment distinction between the races so that they’re distinct: things like helmet swaps, weapon swaps, shield swaps (where relevant), palette and symbol changes, or at a more ambitious level, tweak existing assets to include some element of the race’s aesthetic theme (going back to the draconian example, for instance, the helms of crusaders and/or phalanxes could be given horns or some other draconic motif).

    While some visual distinction of classes is certainly worthwhile, to a certain element it can be redundant because if you’re going up against an opponent of a particular class, you already know what class they are. If your opponent is a Theocrat, for instance, all you generally need is to see a big shield to parse something as a crusader, or a pair of feathered wings on a humanoid form for an Exalted. More racial variation in the appearances of class units may result in more useful battlefield information that can be gained ‘at a glance’: when you see a Crusader with blue-tinged armour and a snowflake instead of a sun on their shield, however, you can more quickly recognise that it’s a frostling crusader and that fire will be more useful than cold against it.

    Gameplay variation between races versus gameplay variation between classes

    Gameplay-wise, I’m fairly content with where things are at the moment. However, class variation is probably in the better spot at the moment – I wouldn’t suggest paring back class variation in order to make room for race variation, but if it was a choice between increasing one or the other from where we are now, I’d go with race variation.

    Asymmetry versus symmetry

    This has pretty much been said before. Asymmetry makes things interesting. I do prefer not to see anything fall all the way down to being total filler, however, and I don’t think it’s necessary for everything to be totally asymmetric as long as each race has its distinctiveness.

    #216322

    Merkraad
    Member

    Asymmetrical races all the way. Lot of effort went into this already with racial governance, but we need more.

    Why doesn’t the Dwarven Juggernaut have the Meteoric Armor, for example? Its armored; it should have if made in a dwarf city Or any Dwarf Unit, not only Armored? Or maybe, simply more armored dwarvn units.

    Elven units should be fragile, but get more Phase, more Total Awareness, maybe a Dodge skill that works similar to Lucky (avoid attack), a unit with Double Strike. Sorta quick and deadly.In this sense, racial gov should give the ignore line of sight to all elven units, not only Archers. So heroes are deadly archers too…

    More Goblin units should have Volunteer. Better, a skill with another name, the point is that they should be weak but a true horde. They wear rags and makeshift armor, so they’re cheap and expendable.

    Point is, to have afeeling that if a player of a race is left alone and develops, you might be in trouble – they will be even more good than what they are good at. Dwarven units will be super resilient, goblins will have huge numbers everywhere.

    #216341

    For Goblins, Numetal had the idea of having a ‘Goblin horde’ modifier which meant that Goblins would get a bonus* from other Goblins in the same army.

    *eg +1 attack or +100 morale.

    So a Goblin horde would actually be very scary but they die quickly and deaths would actively weaken the horde…

    #216350

    Teehon
    Member

    For Goblins, Numetal had the idea of having a ‘Goblin horde’ modifier which meant that Goblins would get a bonus* from other Goblins in the same army.

    *eg +1 attack or +100 morale.

    So a Goblin horde would actually be very scary but they die quickly and deaths would actively weaken the horde…

    Maybe an increase to defenses (+0.5 Def +0.5 Res for each Goblin in the Party), but make their disadvantage even bigger (-10 HP or additional -1 Def -1 Res on top of -5 HP). That means, they start tough but once their numbers decrease they start crumbling.

    Alternative variant: they get a +100 to Morale if there are more than 5 Goblins on the battlefield (for each extra Goblin), but for each Goblin below 5 they get -100. A lone Goblin is totally miserable.

    About Dwarves:
    For each Dwarf standing next to the unit, it gets additional point of Resistance and +50 Morale. If a dwarven unit stands to another 2 or more units it gets Fearless, Immunity to Fear and Drain Energy.

    Drawback: all classial Dwarves get slowed down to 28 for normal units and 32 for fast units. That means, 32MP Warbreed and 28MP Assassin.

    #216373

    llfoso
    Member

    My thought was always that goblins would simply not suffer morale penalties from losing battles. So you can send wave after wave of cheap units to wear down your opponent without having to worry about the consequences to your empire.

    #216381

    Thoughts on theme and presentation of races:

    For visuals/aesthetics, I would have preferred more “normal” hairstyles for leaders/heroes. Overall I don’t think this is very important; gameplay should be the main focus. Otherwise things are okay.

    Variation:

    IMO racial variation is better/more important than having class variation. Right now we are playing as a certain class, then choosing a race to go along with it; I would prefer it the other way around. Things don’t have to be crazy different like Zerg vs. Protoss but this being a fantasy game, I would prefer if the differences were slightly greater than they are now.

    Asymmetry is good but throwing too many things in at once just creates a bunch of gimmicks that feel overly contrived. AoW3 is close to the point where the races play asymmetrically enough but it is currently sacrificing racial diversity for class diversity. Having a unique machine unit for each race, racial T4s, and a few racial spells would go a long way in making each race feel unique.

    #216384

    Sorry for the double post but I wanted to add a few more things about visuals. The Halflings are too fat/chubby/weak looking. Goblins are a bit overly ugly but I suppose that’s a part of their design.

    #216385

    Indrid
    Member

    I really dislike Halflings’ and Tigrans’ appearance/theme and refuse to play them. Halflings seem comedic and laughable in a war game, and I dislike Tigrans because they do the whole “humanoid body with an animal’s head” which is in so many fantasy games and I think is very lame. Draconions don’t literally just have a lizard’s head or something.

    In terms of class/race differences, I would have preferred all of the units to be class based aside from maybe a special race T4. Then all those class units could be modified depending on race. Seems silly to have Necromancer Priests with a healing/defensive buff that can’t heal your units for example. Weird for Druids to be leading Knights into battle. And so on. The game has great diversity and I really enjoy it, but would have preferred a different system for the class/race interaction with regards to unit selection.

    AoW3 is my first AoW game so I have no previous affection for any of the factions.

    #216420

    Joohaan
    Member

    Love the game, spent so much time on it it’s getting silly. Really well made and love the effort the developers have put into it, and still do, not in the least here on the forums. That being said, I agree with what some people have said already… I much prefer racial variety to across-the-board, homogenized balance. Makes me want to specialize and master a certain race/playstyle.

    If I had my wish, classes would play a much, much (as far as units goes) smaller role. Having higher tier race units would help immersion and make the race feel more like a skin/model choice. My biggest gripe however, is with the “lore” aspect of classes and races though. Some combinations really hurt my brain… it doesnt make any sense (to me) to see goblin, orc or tigran theocrats. I don’t want to see elven dreadnoughts. Goblin phalanxes?

    In the same vein I’d also want to get rid of the the current alignment system. In short, I want niched races, more in tune with the first game. Evil undead/necros, goblins and orcs… neutral humans… good elves. To some extent atleast.

    #216424

    Buczer
    Member

    In the same vein I’d also want to get rid of the the current alignment system. In short, I want niched races, more in tune with the first game. Evil undead/necros, goblins and orcs… neutral humans… good elves. To some extent atleast.

    Please, no. Fixed alignment are and were bullshit and works only for “black & white high fantasy”, when someone is evil/good becouse he was born as one of evil/good species. AoW3 system is better – you can play either as human tyrant or peace guardian, and offcourse pragmatic neutral politician. The only thing that doesnt fit here is good necromancer.
    Seeing this monstrous bitch Nimue classified as “neutral” makes me sick.

    #216439

    Hatmage
    Member

    To expand on my problem with how halflings look – it might be okay, simply from a character design perspective, to have a mixture of various non-soldiers of “comedic” appearance, not meant to be taken seriously, but when you then make those units rough equivalents to the professional troops of other cultures, said profssional troops cannot be taken seriously either. They are degraded by being on par with the joke characters. If an trained orc is as deadly as a halfling with a chicken and pitchfork, or only barely more deadly, I won’t fear the halfling, I’ll see the orc as just as unfit for combat as the halfling looks.

    #216480

    NuMetal
    Member

    Variation is very important IMO. However, classes over races, and not to much at the cost of balance.

    +1

    #216481

    Joohaan
    Member

    In the same vein I’d also want to get rid of the the current alignment system. In short, I want niched races, more in tune with the first game. Evil undead/necros, goblins and orcs… neutral humans… good elves. To some extent atleast.

    Please, no. Fixed alignment are and were bullshit and works only for “black & white high fantasy”, when someone is evil/good becouse he was born as one of evil/good species. AoW3 system is better – you can play either as human tyrant or peace guardian, and offcourse pragmatic neutral politician. The only thing that doesnt fit here is good necromancer.
    Seeing this monstrous bitch Nimue classified as “neutral” makes me sick.

    Maybe you’re right… As far as humans, tigrans, frostling and maybe even dwarves goes I’d be just as happy seeing them evil, good or something inbetween, suited to the preferred playstyle/setting. But I don’t really like the concept of good orcs or goblins… or neutral necros. And eventhough them elves can be douchebags, I really want to see them as good. And, if we ever see the glorious return of the dark elves, I’d very much like them to be evil, in their own special way.

    Not always that cut and dry of course, looking at the highmen in the earlier game. Greater good and all that. But still… If you chose to play/was born a certain race, then dammit, you’re gonna have too work amazingly hard to change the other races perception of you.

    The current system works well enough coupled with classes… if we see a goblin theocrat, it’s not too farfetched him being good. Then again, I’d much rather get rid of the class combos and make each race more unique. And in doing so, it would make it much harder to justify the mixed alignments.

    Meh, I dunno… I’m probably still stuck in the old game 😉

    #216494

    Elanaitassil
    Member

    Thank you for giving us the oportunity to express ourselves on this – in my opinion – crucial subject.

    I am quite pleased with the new Tigrans and Frostlings, and the newest general additions to the game. I think the game is getting better and better as updates are released. However i would like to talk about a few things :

    I was a HUGE AoWSM fan, i grew up with it, and played with many friends until recently. To be honest, Triumph Studios, i was VERY disappointed at start when i bought AOW3.
    The game had obviously way better graphics, and gave me a very refreshing feel at start. I was very enthusiastic. But, soon, i realised that, besides the new class system, the game looked very poor to me. Like i said earlier, the game is way better now in my opinion, and seems to carry on toward greatness.

    => I think what AoW3 needs the most now, is variety. Racial units are mirrors and i’m very sad about this. The stats slightly vary and a few specific (and often passive) skills or traits make them slightly different, but overall, i dont get the feeling of actually having to CHOOSE a race to play. It’s more like… “spend your units’ statistic points and choose your visual preferences”, if you know what i mean.
    I know those slight differences actually have a big impact on strengths and weaknesses, but i’m not talking about stats and balances right now, i’m talking about the way i simply have fun.
    This is the main reason why i quit AoW3 after maybe 80 hours of gameplay, and returned only recently.

    I wish i could see the variety of Shadow Demons for example. You can’t imagine how much i love them ! (my steam picture is a shadow demon hero btw xP). Brains, harvesters… : they had awesome mechanics, morphology diversity, many strategies came to my mind to fully use their potential… !
    I have trouble feeling like this with the racial units in AoW3 because of the lack of diversity in both the looks and the mechanics. I often end up playing class units mainly, and thus, going toward the same classes, everytime, because they obviously can’t ALL fit my tastes…

    I think the frostlings and the tigrans have their own atmosphere, as opposed to most other races, and actually have a few nice skills that make them interesting in my opinion. However, they still aren’t as “exotic” as i hoped.
    The halflings are a failure, i think. The leprechauns… what happened to them ? I REALLY loved them.

    => The second very important subject (and i know it will probably stay the same and there’s probably no point talking about this) : i prefer the “hit chance” from AoWSM rather than the “damage mofidier” in AoW3.
    The orcish bats, or the leprechauns were a gamble because they were VERY hard to hit, but once you managed to do it, they died most of the time. I REALLY liked that ! That was fun ! How many times did i laugh because a damn bat was unstoppable and literally murdered my entire army, only survivor of my friend’s troops, before dying on the first hit in the next fight at gold medal ? This can’t happen in AoW3.

    What about obstacles, or meat shields ? In AoWSM, you could hide behind stones, trees, houses, or even bigger units to planify your strategy, or flee with a dying unit behind a cover. This is not possible anymore ! The damage is lowered indeed, but on a 5-6 hp unit, it still means death.
    Last game, i was defending one of my city, under siege by undead creatures. Their ranged attacks killed my units behind walls, and they didn’t even have to break the gate ! Of course, i was outnumbered, but still, this would never happen in Shadow Magic. In AoWSM, you had to THINK before actually trying to capture even an outpost or a turret because the walls were a huge defense. you had to use magic, flying or teleporting units, siege / demolishers, or you would probably have huge losses. In AoW3, as long as you outnumber your opponents, you can kill almost anything behind walls : they are barely noticable nuisances in this kind of situation.

    There are many things i DO like, in AoW3, but those two points are the main obstacles in order for me to actually call it a worthy sequel. Right now it’s not Age of Wonders. It’s… another game 🙁 .

    I hope this opinion will find its way somewhere… maybe some people will agree with me…?

    Anyway, the game is still enjoyable as it is right now. Please keep up polishing it, and it may become better than AoWSM…
    … i think ?

    😉

    #216530

    BB Shockwave
    Member

    I’m really want more races/classes, but i fell like races still don’t have so much impact (i would enjoy more).

    I… still don’t get why people say that. They have a HUGE impact. An Orc barbarian and a Goblin Barbarian will be very different units, not to mention how you will be using racial units for most of the game, not just class units – they are usually just too good to leave out. When playing a draconian dreadnaught, I still used Raptors to protect my powerful ranged units, and Chargers and Flyers to quickly tie down the enemy archers. Had I been playing a dwarf dreadnaught, I’d have to use very different strategies.

    #216620

    @ Elena, shadow demons and hit chance are probably the things I miss the least.

    Also Syrons.

    #216621

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    For these reasons and more, my humble opinion is that the Triumph designers listen to their gut and take a few more risks when modifying the current game and in the development of future games.

    This.

    Triumph, you guys have had a golden hand with AoW3 development. Imo, the game is a quantum leap compared with AoW2 SM which in its own way already was – and still is – an amazingly good game.
    More than ever, in my opinion AoW 3 FOR ME has become “best game ever” (for some time now), for a couple of reasons and also for all the potential that’s STILL slumbering (and not to mention in any future title).

    I’ve been visiting an old friend of mine first time since a couple of years, and we used to play a lot HoMM and other games with tactical battles, and although it was kind of a social visit with family and all I took my laptop and showed him.
    First thing he did when we had said our goodbyes was, he bought the complete game, installed it for himself and his wife (I’ve gifted my wife the summer sale version), and next thing I hear from him he’s pestering me with an hour of questions. 🙂

    So don’t take this too seriously and – LISTEN TO YOUR GUT!

    #216661

    BB Shockwave
    Member

    Much agreed. At this point I trust the developers to modify the game and I’m pretty sure I will still like the outcome.

    A new Class (a demon-summoning/fire damage oriented Warlock maybe) would be nice, as would be new races, but I’m happy with smaller patch-releases like the more recent stuff (Party Robots, LOL! :D) too.

    @ Elena, shadow demons and hit chance are probably the things I miss the least.

    Also Syrons.

    Syrons and Shadow Demons YES, Hit chance… NOPE.

    Hated it, it usually made even my toughest units useless and gave the enemy a chance to use stacks of 8 Ballistas to easily bring down even tough units since even level 10 heroes could miss at melee and they only needed to hit you like twice… Not to mention the lack of retaliation by archer units, the no melee penalty on ranged attacks, and how it made them incredibly overpowered. The new flanking system is a nice way to still give weaker units a chance against tough ones.

    That said, I would not mind a spell or ability like the Tigran Mystic’s “Blurred” that gives a 25% miss chance for melee attacks.

    #216664

    BB Shockwave
    Member

    One thing I do miss is casting multiple spells per turn. I am sure that’d be overpowered, but given how most heroes don’t learn many spells unless you gear them towards being casters instead of melee or ranged fighters, it would not be such a large difference. I think there should be at least a way for us to test it, with a mod or something, and see if it unbalances the game.

    I think what AoW3 needs the most now, is variety. Racial units are mirrors and i’m very sad about this. The stats slightly vary and a few specific (and often passive) skills or traits make them slightly different, but overall, i dont get the feeling of actually having to CHOOSE a race to play. It’s more like… “spend your units’ statistic points and choose your visual preferences”, if you know what i mean.

    COME ON…. seriously? Compare a Tigran Prowler and a Human Swordsman… or a Draconian Flamer with a Goblin Swarm Darter. Don’t tell me they are exactly just archers and fighters…

    The second very important subject (and i know it will probably stay the same and there’s probably no point talking about this) : i prefer the “hit chance” from AoWSM rather than the “damage mofidier” in AoW3.
    The orcish bats, or the leprechauns were a gamble because they were VERY hard to hit, but once you managed to do it, they died most of the time. I REALLY liked that ! That was fun ! How many times did i laugh because a damn bat was unstoppable and literally murdered my entire army, only survivor of my friend’s troops, before dying on the first hit in the next fight at gold medal ? This can’t happen in AoW3.

    Yeah, and I for one pretty much stopped playing AoW2 for this. It often felt like the game was cheating, giving the AI much better hit chances than you. Often you could be swinging with a high level hero at a measily Tier I swordsman and miss, while he hits you at every turn – or bite your fingers off in anticipation when the enemy marches with its EIGHT Ballistae and each take their turn shooting and hitting your weaker units or heroes in every round, while you have no hope at tying them down or even getting near them.
    Or when the AI was using bloody FLAME strike to kill my Phoenixes, who were supposed to be immune to fire… but yeah, spells do physical damage too, it’s just hidden. I do not miss the hit chance at all, and I think I am playing AoW3 more than the previous game because of it. The AI can still troll you something fierce with flanking, and it will never miss a chance to exploit any such weakness, or gang up on weak units, but it’s something you can see coming, calculate damage, and not having it all based on random chance.

    What about obstacles, or meat shields ? In AoWSM, you could hide behind stones, trees, houses, or even bigger units to planify your strategy, or flee with a dying unit behind a cover. This is not possible anymore ! The damage is lowered indeed, but on a 5-6 hp unit, it still means death.

    Umm, they are still there. The aforementioned Swarm Darters are truly powerful because they ignore such cover, but hiding behind a rock or another unit indeed lowers damage by 50% or so – not to mention using distance as well. I do miss elevation damage boosts for archers, yes – but they get extra range if mounted on walls now, which is just as good.

    Last game, i was defending one of my city, under siege by undead creatures. Their ranged attacks killed my units behind walls, and they didn’t even have to break the gate ! Of course, i was outnumbered, but still, this would never happen in Shadow Magic. In AoWSM, you had to THINK before actually trying to capture even an outpost or a turret because the walls were a huge defense. you had to use magic, flying or teleporting units, siege / demolishers, or you would probably have huge losses.

    Not really… all you had to do was to walk to the gate and smash it down, then the enemy rushed out even if you had no flying units. You just had to use units with shields or high-HP cavalry. I rarely if ever had to use wall crushers to break the walls themselves. Also, bringing a catapult to a siege was useful only for one thing – it made sure the enemy always used all spells, ballistas and everything to kill them, which at least gave you more time to climb the walls.
    And I think you were defending your town incorrectly, then. I defended my Halfling town against an army of a Bone Dragon, 2 Bone Collectors, a Banshee and 2 Wraiths with nothing but 4 Halfling Adventurers and 2 Farmers – killing all but 1 Bone Collector and a Wraith before losing. Their ranged attacks, plus flanking picked them off before they could storm the gates, and their Luck factor made the enemy miss a lot (it was a very happy town).

    Flying units can be hit by anyone now, and archers no longer can shoot into melee without worry, changes that actually fan-made patches in AoW2 tried to resolve too (such as adding weak melee attacks to archers so they would retaliate and waste their action points like all other units). Ever read that GameFAQs walkthrough to AoWII that basically boils down to “build a flying unit in every town, block gate with it, shoot rest with archers, WIN” for town defense? Yeah, not missing that aspect much. Flyers are still incredibly useful for their high mobility and how they can flank enemies more easily or get behind walls.

    The game is easily the best AOW game, I think. Finally every unit is useful, there are no more “don’t even bother training them” units like in AOW2, Concealment actually works against the AI (the lack of that in AOW2 annoyed me to no amount, given how it worked well in AoW1, and how it made a lot of units useless).

    #216665

    Buczer
    Member

    @ Elena, shadow demons and hit chance are probably the things I miss the least.

    Also Syrons.

    I can understand the objections to SD (as they wont work with current mechanics) but not to the Syrons. As creator’s idea they can be easily redesigned both mechanically, estetically and thematically (I already proposed them asian-inspired design wich fit the “powers from beyond” theme – just imagine fearie glowing bushi armour). I would sooner see Syrons than Dark Elves (who would add absolutelly nothing with the exception of drider ripp offs) or Lizardmen (Naga are too similar to them right now, but in AoW4 – why not)

    #216666

    bam65
    Member

    There really should be a racial tier 4. Such a feature would solve some of the issues with diversity and variety by itself.

    #216667

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    I disagree very strongly, with all parts of this statement.

    #216690

    slashman
    Member

    I used to be a very strong supporter of extremely asymetrical races. Right up until I realized how very crippling it was to the AI and how much effort is required by the devs, not just to balance that, but to make an AI that can understand that it can’t play each faction similarly.

    I don’t want another Endless Legend where the only way the AI seems at all smart is to give it so many large bonuses that it isn’t required to play the same game as the player.

    #216695

    Nodor
    Member

    So, over the last week I have watched “keep classes unique and varied over races” transform into “We want different races over classes”.

    This makes me very very sad. AoW has replay-ability at the moment because the classes > races.

    The game is already playable with racial tier 3 spam, and specialization summons from tier 4. If classes are weakened further, then you effectively remove them from the game entirely.

    The big problem with AoW 2 is that certain races were trump (Orcs, Elves, and Archons spring to mind). So you always played the trump races and the game suffered from useless content (the other, weaker races) because of it. I know there is nostalgia out there for the races people recall as trump, but please don’t ruin what has become an excellent game by returning to a flawed model.

    (Now if you didn’t change the stats and did this all with art that would be fine in my book.)

Viewing 30 posts - 31 through 60 (of 197 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.