|
| Thread: Realms of Might and Magic |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
posted October 02, 2013 08:56 AM |
|
|
markkur said:
Jiriki9 said:
...-You will be able to trade almost ANYTHING in the game - one way or another. Even single individuals will be available for trade, in at least two ways: as hostage and by marriage.
Love this idea! Maybe include the possibility of family-defection in the mix. Like when the last Saxon King Harold had his younger brother fight against him at Stamford bridge. 
 quite possible
|
|
Locksley
Promising
Famous Hero
Wielding a six-string
|
|
posted October 04, 2013 04:03 PM |
|
|
Diplomacy
Jiriki9 said:
-The computer players shall make REASONABLE and FITTING diplomacy! That is one of the most annoying things about current games' diplomacy, as far as I know. The AIs are either easy to abuse or only willing to trade/form pacts if they get an advantage that makes the whole interaction ridiculous. This also include a fitting balance between aggression and the will to conquer opposed to peace and friendship. In some games, AI alwayshad only the ultimate goal to make war against you if they are able and only made peace if you were to strong. I think that is not enough. There are other reasons for pacts than not being able to take what you want by force. Here, the government and culture will come in! A Barbaric culture will have much more will to use violence than an Agricultural one. Also, the language shall be more fitting!
Very good!Jiriki9 said:
-there shall be a number of formable pacts and each with the option otmake it open or secret.
Interesting, it's not a very common thing and make things unpredictable. You could make finding out secret alliances as the main task for Spies.Jiriki9 said:
-Diplomacy will also be available for neutral locations and armies! These, though, will only hold up to it alone, not all neutrals!
I don't understand this fully. Is it like in Heroes where neutrals simply join? Or does the neutrals function like a minimal state?Jiriki9 said:
Sounds interesting!
Here's a link to an overview of Europa Universalis diplomacyhttp://www.paradoxian.org/eu3wiki/Diplomacy That's the diplomatic actions you can make but as I said many other things have an effect over time too and/or give different amounts of new diplomats per year.
More quotes and comments
Makkur said:
Where I would part way with RL impacts is not the natural rules of sight and movement that we experience every day in life but any RL requirements about real warfare. <iow> I like the idea of a battlefield making my creatures walk uphill or downhill but I don't want to employ West Point tactics in the game; because I think we've proven that knowing creature abilities etc, provides the strategies we need to learn for effective deployment. Bottom line. I no longer want my army standing in a flat arena like it's 40 years ago and I'm only playing chess with glorified game-pieces. Elevation, that's "my ticket" because I want pits, hills and mountains to battle in and around. I've read lots of posts in favor of 2d, just thought I'd make one in favor of 3d and all that it will bring when done correctly.
Jiriki9 said:
I plan to make the battlefield very important! There will be different obstacles, height, terrain andsize variations. And there will be battlefield locations, sometimes local troops on the battlefield and even levels! For the first, a simple example ios just buildings, which shelter your units (like an abandoned tower or a Windmill). But there could be more intriguing things like secret mechanisms, aiding or opposing neutrals, magical structures, etc., etc., etc. An example for the second idea could be you and your opponent are fighting in a farming area that belongs to neither of you - and in this area both of you will face the angry farmers which are not that happy you are fighting on their lands. For the levels, the best example is fighting over a mine, which will feature more than 2 levels, between (most of) the units can switch by using stairs and more.
Also the size will vary by various variables.
Well said! 3D would also make Flyers much more relevant with some "upper" levels where dragons and griffins could battle each other or make air based attacks on the ground, and it would be necessary to watch out for falling flyers. Archers and casters should reach the sky.
Jiriki9 said:
you may be quite right. I think, though, that regiments work towards this as well - because you will, with proceeding game - also be able to have larger regiments. And there will boni for regiments as well. So a dragon may easily crush through 3 regiments which include 20 unarmed, untrained goblins each. But he may have problems with one regiment of 30 Elite Dwarven Warriors in Mithril Armour with heavy Mithril axes, warded by Runes, with a great Discipline and backed up by a Supreme Commander and Tactician. And a regiment of 20 High-Level Elven Sharpshooters with Longbows and diverse upgrades may, with a bit of luck, finish off the Dragon before it can come close. Dragons, however, will indeed belong to the strongest units in the game, probably, hard to kill, heavy damage and strong abilites.
But what if the Dragon has Smaug's golden belly armour and garlic tooth paste?
Jiriki9 said:
Hmm, I will try. The point is that the outstanding about this game shall be the combination of all of it and the variety and vastness of anything. And still I hope to make it playable for average fantasy turn-based strategy players.
Good luck!
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted October 04, 2013 06:47 PM |
|
|
Locksley said:
Well said! 3D would also make Flyers much more relevant with some "upper" levels where dragons and griffins could battle each other or make air based attacks on the ground, and it would be necessary to watch out for falling flyers.
That's a very good point, I hadn't thought that far. But I absolutely agree, the dynamics of what you've described would be a great contribution to the battlefield experience; i.e. other than the "Goblin-Trapper can't snare a flyer" or "flyers can fly over an obstacle", the idea of the huge vertical impact of a flyer, like a dragon, is not even a factor on current battlefields.
Btw, I really like your idea of "almost a separate battle" happening on higher ground between groups of flyers. i.e. These could be about "flanking movements" <iow> trying to clear a nearby hill to better position your army and thus...adding more general battlefield complexity. Again, this needs to be done in the realm of the fantastic and not be some rote West-point stuff.
____________
"Do your own research"
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted October 04, 2013 09:25 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Interesting, it's not a very common thing and make things unpredictable. You could make finding out secret alliances as the main task for Spies.
That was about the secret pacts. It will indeed be important and the "song of ice and fire" books (for those who not know it: the books which the "game of thrones" series by hbo is based on) gave me a good deal of inspiration on that. And there is more to it than just the secret itself. One could ask: "why the hell should I make open pacts and let my enemies know at all?" Well, there are several reasons. First, you may do so to express power. Other realms may think twice to attack not only you but also another realm with whom you've made a defense pact. Second, pacts can be broken and secret pacts are broken much more easily - because noone will know a pact was broken! Third, sometimes it is of no use, because it cannot really be hidden. A good example for the last point is trading of "large" things - like, for example locations, armies or even cities...it will probably slip an enemy that you bought an artifact from another realm - but it will almost certainly not slip beneath their attention when you got an army from an officially neutral realm.
Quote:
I don't understand this fully. Is it like in Heroes where neutrals simply join? Or does the neutrals function like a minimal state?
More like the latter. You can make one-time trades and temporary pacts with single neutrals. For example you encounter a neutral town - let's say dwarven-inhabited - that is not so much worth for you and well guarded, so you decide to leave it alone in matters of war - and deal with it the diplomatic way. You may offer them gold and a view of their unit will switch sides - or you may offer them gold or ressources and they will send you weapons in return - or you may agree that you stay peaceful with them on the condition that they do not let enemies of you pass their lands. This way, neutral towns will be more alive and not just early-game-cannon-fodder. Same goes for anything neutral, potentially. however, all diplomacy to them will remain timed.
Quote:
Here's a link to an overview of Europa Universalis diplomacyhttp://www.paradoxian.org/eu3wiki/Diplomacy That's the diplomatic actions you can make but as I said many other things have an effect over time too and/or give different amounts of new diplomats per year.
Thank. That looks much more complex a diplomacy than in any game I've played so far...
Quote:
Well said! 3D would also make Flyers much more relevant with some "upper" levels where dragons and griffins could battle each other or make air based attacks on the ground, and it would be necessary to watch out for falling flyers. Archers and casters should reach the sky.
I indeed think about a sky level for the flyers. But probably only one, or it would get to complex. And flyers on the "Ground level" will still fly and not necessarily be reachable by ground melee troops!
Quote:
But what if the Dragon has Smaug's golden belly armour and garlic tooth paste?
Then the elves need more than a bit luck. And the dwarves, well, gold makes dwarves wild anyway, don't it? 
Quote:
Good luck!
Quote:
Btw, I really like your idea of "almost a separate battle" happening on higher ground between groups of flyers. i.e. These could be about "flanking movements" <iow> trying to clear a nearby hill to better position your army and thus...adding more general battlefield complexity. Again, this needs to be done in the realm of the fantastic and not be some rote West-point stuff.
Well, as you mention flanking I cannot hold back one more thing about battles. Flanking WILL be important. VERY important. Because in this game, melee combat will not resolve like in HoMM. Instead, melee-fighting troops get ENGAGED in combat - face-to-face. And that means, flanking gets really important, because a regiment - in this game - will not really be able to split its attention. Flanking means less retaliation (and an attack in the back means none!), shatter enemy discipline and morale, reduce retreat chances and make the enemy having to choose which of the regiments you chose to attack them with he will try to finish first. And that flanking is important will make positioning important. A rush forward may be tempting, but if you're not carefull, it amy turn out to be a suicide commando...
|
|
markkur
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
|
|
posted October 05, 2013 02:45 AM |
|
Edited by markkur at 02:46, 05 Oct 2013.
|
Jiriki9 said:
...shatter enemy discipline and morale, reduce retreat chances and make the enemy having to choose which of the regiments you chose to attack them with he will try to finish first. And that flanking is important will make positioning important. A rush forward may be tempting, but if you're not carefull, it amy turn out to be a suicide commando...
I like the ideas. So, the ability to "rally troops" would be a part of battles? And also able to re-position rallied troops? I've always thought that the Hero should have a few "leaders" that s/he could command to different purposes.
i.e Something like this; The Hero has 3 Captains, and during the battle, he keeps one near at hand because of a magic boost, then, a little later, he sends a Captain that specializes in Defense to a regiment (regiments if he's a veteran?) that he wants to defend a position and as the battle wanes, the Hero send his last to rally troops that are falling back.
Bottom line, I'd just think it would be a lot more engaging if "Hero command could be deepened" in some way. Much like Generals have their bodyguard, but instead, we could have a small group of Captains.
Sorry that I didn't check first but have you already determined battlefield size?
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted October 05, 2013 09:06 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I like the ideas. So, the ability to "rally troops" would be a part of battles? And also able to re-position rallied troops? I've always thought that the Hero should have a few "leaders" that s/he could command to different purposes.
Probably.
For the leaders: not sure...but you will be able to have mroe than one "hero" in the army and whilst only one can be the "general" (or however it should be called. The one who commands all.), others may be able to take the task you give to leaders. Heroes will DEFINITELY be able to be part of regiments - or not to be it!
Quote:
Sorry that I didn't check first but have you already determined battlefield size?
Quote:
...and size variations
|
|
Jiriki9
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Altar Dweller
|
|
posted December 22, 2013 04:55 PM |
|
|
Well, it's time to fresh this up again. I've had not much time to write on it, but many many ideas dwelled in my mind. I'm planning on revisioning most of the faction-customizing, which will go in 4-steps now: Race => Culture/Society => Government => Leader. I've decided to make the culture available as a rather complex customizing and thus will make religion part of it. Of course, players will also be able to choose from a choice of several ready culture-packs.
Today, though, I want to show a bit about something else:
Town & Province Management
In this game, your realm would be divided into provinces, and each province will contain a town. The management of these is a key to the game, as only an adequate province and town management will allow you to succeed in any way. Without it, neither research nor recruiting will be available, nor trade or production. Even magic and diplomacy will not easily be able to help a realm whose provinces are in disarray.
Province Borders
Each province has clear borders ingame. These are not predefined though. Rather, it works like this:
1. Each province in the players realm has a value that is called influence. This value determines the maximum size of the province. It is primarily created in the city (which has it's own influence count that is also counted for the province), but several locations within the province and some rssources, character or unit abilities can also increase it.
2. At the beginning of the game, the conquering or founding of a city, on the players will or on some other occasions, the borders of a province are set automatically.
3. Furthermore, the player can set the borders manually by opening the provicne screen and "set borders". The province is then shown from above and the player can move the borders by clicking and drawing them. He can also have them auto-set by several aspects (maximum spread, ressource gain, defensive,...) here. However. there are a number of rules:
-drawing a border over a natural obstacle (a river, cliff, lake, etc.) needs more influence than drawing it over free fields.
-you cannot draw a border over a foreign border (this includes other realms, but also neutral borders from cities or some locations.
-you can draw a border over some neutral locations, and over some you cannot. It depends on the location.
-you can expand the borders of one of your provinces over the borders of another, but that other province than no longer contains the land beneath the border.
-if the provinces borders are drawn too small for it's amount of population. people will move away from the province, so one has to be a bit careful
Also, these borders are the "official" borders. When an enemy enters them, they are not reduced - but within their range, you will not gain benifit from anything there.
wip
|
| |
|
|
