• Good day, Stranger! — Are you new to our forums?

    Have I seen you here before? To participate in or to create forum discussions, you will need your own forum account. Register your account here!

Is Battle rewarding enough to you?

Should battle be more...?


  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .

Andrathaniel

Dreamer
I noticed many people don't find battle rewarding enough. They don't even own any armories. Some even want to destroy their barracks and make some space for more culture buildings or workshops. Moreover, they rely exclusively on negotiating.

While negotiating might be handy, it's expensive and long to get by. And having to choose between upgrading your tech tree and negotiating is not an easy thing to do.

What do you think? Should battle be more "accessible" in terms of costs? Should it be more "rewarding"? Spill the beans!
 

oldskoolrx7

Guest
I sold my armouries because fighting is boring, stupid (AI is often really dumb, randomness of maps etc) and time consuming. That is to say after the initial fun of fighting, it goes downhill REALLY fast.

Also the interface sucks, what were they thinking with not putting the armies in an obvious order.

Oh wait, it also sucks having to restart once you have seen the map.

So pretty much most aspects of combat are badly thought out, unnecessarily annoying and extremely grindy.

Edit: Not sure I actually answered the question in my complaining... so yes, twice the rewards would be a start to make it more interesting, rather than something I smash through at the end of a chapter.
 

CrazyWizard

Sorcerer
I do no longer battle on the world map, Instead I focus my troops on the tournament.
Main reason is the losses at the world map compared to tournament it's "cheaper" to buy off the world map, and keep the troups for the tournament.

I would not know how battling on the world map could become more rewarding, when I started this was the only source of relecs and therefore very rewarding, now relics fly around your head by the millions from the tournaments massively degrading it's value.

I currently do the world map for 2 things only, the little bit of ranking points they give, but most importantly the expansions.

Negotiating is very cheap once you reach a certain stage of the game. it's 1 set of 8 negotiations per 2-4 days and your production is massive.
Tournaments instead cant be really negotioated the same way, there are simply to many fights to buy off, and they become more and more expensive quite fast.
 

grosvenor2510

Guest
I'm new, but quite enjoy battling. It costs me far too much in resources like Marble and Steel to negotiate.

Saying that, it would be nice to receive something more for winning battles, especially as the battles get harder.
 

MsFreak

Adventurer
I sold my armouries because fighting is boring, stupid (AI is often really dumb, randomness of maps etc) and time consuming. That is to say after the initial fun of fighting, it goes downhill REALLY fast.

Also the interface sucks, what were they thinking with not putting the armies in an obvious order.

Oh wait, it also sucks having to restart once you have seen the map.

So pretty much most aspects of combat are badly thought out, unnecessarily annoying and extremely grindy.

Edit: Not sure I actually answered the question in my complaining... so yes, twice the rewards would be a start to make it more interesting, rather than something I smash through at the end of a chapter.
I have to ask as in all my readings I don't think I have seen a positive post from you, why do you stay? You seem to dislike everything about the game :confused:
 

oldskoolrx7

Guest
I have to ask as in all my readings I don't think I have seen a positive post from you, why do you stay? You seem to dislike everything about the game :confused:
You have not looked hard enough :D

The choices are
1) Leave and don't have a little fun and lose chatting with people.
2) Stay, keep the above and stay silent and watch the game get worse
3) Stay and try to get things changed.

I chose 3. I have tried to be constructive and have been shouted down by a few people, so I am a product of people who only want the game to be exactly as the devs want.

If you look REALLY closely, you would see a lot of suggestions on my part that would improve the game for everyone AND I also take on board suggestions better than mine. So I guess I COULD stop saying what is wrong with the game.... but that would be like being part of something and ignoring the bad bits and just walking away.

Also, the topic asked for feedback, which I gave, along with reasons... you might want to stay on topic! ;-P

Feel free to PM me, if you want, I am very approachable!
 

Valnad

Spellcaster
I sold my armouries because fighting is boring, stupid (AI is often really dumb, randomness of maps etc) and time consuming. That is to say after the initial fun of fighting, it goes downhill REALLY fast.

Also the interface sucks, what were they thinking with not putting the armies in an obvious order.

Oh wait, it also sucks having to restart once you have seen the map.

So pretty much most aspects of combat are badly thought out, unnecessarily annoying and extremely grindy.

Edit: Not sure I actually answered the question in my complaining... so yes, twice the rewards would be a start to make it more interesting, rather than something I smash through at the end of a chapter.
I pretty much agree with everything you wrote.

One thing that would REALLY make a difference and that would not involve much work for the coder(s) is to let us see the map and where the enemy troops are places in the planning overview. Any experienced player knows that you start with your swords/axes and then retreat once you know the layout and formation of the enemy lines.

If I were to fight every tournament battle manually, I would be spending several hours on Elvenary just grinding through map battles. At this point I can't even be bothered to start - retreat - plan - restart. I just throw in a mixture of sorceress III, granite golems and maybe a sword unit as cannon fodder and then I hit the auto fight button. Sure, it's costly as hell and not very efficient, but it does save me the time and bother to sit and wait for a sluggish flash mini-game that stopped being fun a long, long time ago.

Also, while we're on the subject, someone has to mention the poor unit strength balance. Archers/xbows, I mean... come on? They are barely useful in the beginning of the game, but even before you reach the dwarves tech they have become utterly useless. Light melee can be used as cannon fodder so I guess they are okay, but the ants are only useful on crystal zones (where they are uber). I never use ants unless all of the enemies are light melee. The paladins are much, much more useful. On the other side of the fence, the dogs are very rarely useful but at least they have something unique that gives them some usability. As elf I would pretty much only use sorceresses, golems and swords.


So, in short, tl;dr verson:

1. Give players access to the battlefield layout and the formation of the enemy troops in the planning overview BEFORE having to start a fight.
2. Tweak some of the troop units. Maybe give the archers extra range, as elves lack a long-range unit.
3. Add more relic gains to the more difficult map zones (>10 hexes away from town)

Maybe even add a troop training time decrease bonus to the high level armories?
 

shadowblack

Necromancer
Frankly, the rewards are the least of the combat's problems. There are plenty of other issues:
- no in-game explanation how troops are ordered duting combat. You have to either figure it out on your own, or read about it on a forum somewhere
- no way to see the battlefield and enemy formation before starting combat, so pretty much everyone does the same: start combat with 1 Sword Dancer/Axe Barbarian, see battlefield and enemy formation, retreat, then try again with a proper army
- the difficulty of provinces increases with each scouted province while our army gets fewer and slower upgrades
- the unit upgrades. Oh, boy. Let's look at the human units:
Chapter I: Axe Barbarian and Crossbowman
Chapter II: Cerberus and Axe Barbarian II
Chapter III: Paladin and Crossbowman II
Chapter IV: Priest and Cerberus II
So far so good. But this is where the problems begin:
Chapter V: Paladin II and Priest II
Chapter VI: Axe Barbarian III (i.e Storm Barbarian) and Paladin III (i.e. Blessed Paladin)
Chapter VII: Priest III
Chapter VIII: Crossbowman III (i.e. Master Crossbowman) and Cerberus III (i.e. Sinister Cerberus)

Notice how long it takes to get the second upgrade for Crossbowmen? As enemy strength increases their usefulness decreases rapidly. By the time you get Priest II at the latest they are useless 99% of the time. I'm currently using Priest II in place of archers, because:
- they are not classified as a ranged unit and so many units with bonuses against Light Ranged units get no bonuses against Priests
- they can hit any unit on the battlefield. That annoying Cannoneer on the other side of the map? No problem.
- their attack bonus against Heavy Melee is much better than that of Crossbowmen and they also have a defense bonus against Light Ranged units, unlike Crossbowmen
- Priests have a very useful debuff while Crossbowmen have nothing
- Priest III is unlocked long before Master Crossbowmen, so I can't think of a single good reason why would want to use Crossbowmen - especially since their stats are rather disappointing. See this post, but remember that the Mastrer Crossbowman from the picture has bonuses from Ancient Wonders, such as Needs of Tempest (so their stats are even lower than what is seen there)

Cerberus II, despite low damage and low HP, remains seomewhat useful due to high bonuses against Light Archers and good bonuses against Heavy archers. Plus they are fast and can reach enemy units quickly (and can also make a slow unit, such as Treants, just go back and forth while Priests annihilate them from a safe distance).

As for elven units, the situation is similar:
Chapter I: Sword Dancer and Elven Archer
Chapter II: Sword Dancer II and Treant
Chapter III: Archer II and Golem
Chapter IV: Treant II and Sorceress
Chapter V: Golem II and Sorceress II
Chapter VI: Sword Dancer III (i.e. Sword Acrobat) and Golem III (i.e. Granite Golem)
Chapter VII: Sorceress III
Chapter VIII: Archer III and Treant III

Again Archers rapidly become useless, this time thanks to Golem II (and later Granite Golem). Treants remain useful in Crystal Provinces, and occasinally in other provinces, depending on enemy units present. No stats ahve been provided for them, so no idea how useful Treant III will be, but I can't imagine that Archer III will be of any use this late in the game.

The Archer and Crossbowman upgrades should have come MUCH earlier, and the Cerberus and Treant upgrades should have been in the Fairy Chapter at the latest. Chapter VIII is just too late, even if the player has the Needles of Tempest AW (and many won't have it).
 

Andrathaniel

Dreamer
Frankly, the rewards are the least of the combat's problems. There are plenty of other issues:
- no in-game explanation how troops are ordered duting combat. You have to either figure it out on your own, or read about it on a forum somewhere.
no way to see the battlefield and enemy formation before starting combat, so pretty much everyone does the same: start combat with 1 Sword Dancer/Axe Barbarian, see battlefield and enemy formation, retreat, then try again with a proper army
- the difficulty of provinces increases with each scouted province while our army gets fewer and slower upgrades
- the unit upgrades.
So you think not only combat should be made more rewarding but that units should be made stronger?
 

oldskoolrx7

Guest
So you think not only combat should be made more rewarding but that units should be made stronger?
I think their point was there would be no point making it more rewarding if they still didn't like doing it (because the units are not well balanced)
 

Zzzyk

Adventurer
I do no longer battle on the world map, Instead I focus my troops on the tournament.
Main reason is the losses at the world map compared to tournament it's "cheaper" to buy off the world map, and keep the troups for the tournament.
100% my approach as well.
 

Andrathaniel

Dreamer
I think their point was there would be no point making it more rewarding if they still didn't like doing it (because the units are not well balanced)
That's something we can agree on. I also find it a bit unbalanced. Takes days to build troops and half an hour to have them all killed. If I understand, you're basically calling for a complete reform of the battle system?

I do no longer battle on the world map, Instead I focus my troops on the tournament.
Main reason is the losses at the world map compared to tournament it's "cheaper" to buy off the world map, and keep the troups for the tournament.
Don't you think there could be a compromise between the tournament and the world map? Negotiating the world map isn't exactly accessible to "mid-level" players like me and most of my folks.
Edited: Zanyah - 2016-07-12 - Merged 2 consecutive posts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Katwijk

Guest
Takes days to build troops and half an hour to have them all killed.
You can use Auto-Fight to acquire enough sectors to get past the Advanced Scouting chests.
  • The difficulty of the fights has always been a soft cap if you're after more than enough sectors
  • There's always been a hard cap on the total number of sectors, because of cost of scouting and the limited capacity of the Main Hall
  • The Orcs that are being introduced in Chapter VIII will probably have the effect of introducing a soft cap for negotiations as well
  • I'd wager that the developers would prefer to have a balance between Catering/Negotiating/Auto-Fighting/Manual Combat,
    regardless of where folks might be in the development of their cities
 

Arjavh

Guest
I always love these polls, but I'll have to vote for the non-existent option #4. The rewards are fine as they are.

One knowledge point and one relic per battle won.

One rune shard per region cleared. Plus opening a region can give you another player to visit or if unoccupied a spot to collect coins until eternity. And of course, if you do enough regions you can unlock another 5x5 plot to build on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Andrathaniel

Dreamer
I play with Elves right now and I had a thought about battle. What if they augmented the bonus we get from upgrading units? Would that be a kickstart at making combat better?

For example, Sword Dancers gain a 20% attack bonus when we upgrade them to Sword Dancers II. What if they made that bonus to be 25% or 30%? Do you think it would help? Or, what if they gave a 10% at the very beginning?
 

Skattered

Spellcaster
I am also one of those people who never fight. I don't own a single armory and it's place i added extra goods factories. I am closing to 230 provinces and have no problem at all with the goods, if anything, i have them in spades, luckily there's tournament, they're good sink for them.

My reasons?

1. Time. Negotiating or catering in tournament literally takes seconds for each province, while fighting would take few minutes at best, for each battle and there are 8 to clear in each province. Sure, you can auto fight but the loss is just so great its just isn't worth doing
2. Lack of supplies. I have just enough supplies to maintain my factories with culture around 150%, i literally have no spare supplies to build an army. And, no, i am not demolishing my hard earned level 19 factories to free up supplies
3. Lack of skill. To put simply, i suck at RTS battling. I probably could learn but i simply have no time and patience to. I like the city building type of game minus the battles.

At the end of the day, it's all depend on the style of play you prefer and enjoy. I've seen people with 5 armories and they absolutely love battling and that's fine too.

But for me, no amount of reward will get me to battle, i will build the armory if its required for the new races, but i still won't use them for battle.

The day they force me to battle is the day i will stop playing, simply cos it won't be fun for me. And i suspect i am not alone.
 

oldskoolrx7

Guest
I am also one of those people who never fight. I don't own a single armory and it's place i added extra goods factories. I am closing to 230 provinces and have no problem at all with the goods, if anything, i have them in spades, luckily there's tournament, they're good sink for them.
...
3. Lack of skill. To put simply, i suck at RTS battling. I probably could learn but i simply have no time and patience to. I like the city building type of game minus the battles.
...
The day they force me to battle is the day i will stop playing, simply cos it won't be fun for me. the And i suspect i am not alone.
I find this interesting and strikes a chord. A lot of the issues I have with battles are related to time and NEEDING to learn how to do things, rather than having FUN discovering things. If I am required to fight I will also quit, I suspect orcs MAY make that happen, although only time will tell.
 

odie1kenobie

Adventurer
I battle a lot, it is time consuming and like someone suggested, maybe there should be a bigger bonus for fighting. Granite Golems are the best, can almost wipe anything out.
 

Katwijk

Guest
having FUN discovering things
I don't like the Thud and Blunder aspects of combat, but Auto-fight is just dandy if you treat it as a logistics puzzle.

I haven't acquired three million sectors like some folks have, but I've cleared all of my Advanced Scouting chests with just Auto-fight.