Age of Wonders 3

[Absinthe]

4x were born as single player affairs. Disregarding Mp balance allows for deeper and different strategies.

Wrong as hell and stupid as fuck. It is disregarding competitive balance that reduces the depth and range of strategy. MilesBeyond pointed out earlier on how bad balancing in Age of Empires 3 reduced strategic complexity because fire ships were easily defeated by the very unit they were supposed to counter, making galley spam the one choice for naval combat. This sort of thing happens a lot when you have bad balance as it allows one choice to become the obviously superior choice. It results in an unhealthy metagame where some options are worthless and ignored. When you ruin the balance in a game, it ends up taking the strategic thought out of the strategy game.

The point of a healthy balance is precisely that players can enjoy a wide variety of options and strategies.

You can have underpowered civs performing very well in specific circumstances or being exceptionally good vs a single different civ or strategy. In a Sp environment you can, for example, have a niche unit that gives you an advantage in early conquest without having to endlessly fine tune the balance between the number of cities you can realistically conquer before said advantage wanes. All examples I already made, if you bothered to read the thread.

You keep insisting on this bizarre delusion of yours that all balance must be reductive, homogeneous balance.

In a Sp environment you can simply program an asymetric AI and have it play by different rules. This nowadays means half-arsed mechanics, like AI getting money out of thin air and consequently invalidating a good portion of tactics (blockades, hampering of commerce) but there are examples of it being done well (MoO, and MoM with the restoration patch, for example).

This has no bearing on the subject of competitive balance. Asymmetric challenges can be implemented regardless of whether or not the game has competitive balancing and they can be implemented regardless of whether or not you are playing online multiplayer or singleplayer.

b) It's an ultimately pointless affair. Dafuq, they can't even manage to balance Street Fighter properly, imagine what they do to poor, poor 4Xs (half joking here, I know the point of fighting games is not to have each character balanced vs the others. Even they learned the lesson.)

This is called the Perfect Solution Fallacy. If they didn't balance Street Fighter at all, it wouldn't've lasted as long.

And again I ask, could you name a 4x game that you deem "balanced"? Even those on the other side of the barricade concluded that AoW isn't. Have you got an example you can bring to the table?

I'll name a solid 4X. Alpha Centauri.

Because there are generations of players that still love and play daily things like MoM and MoO (unbalanced monstruosities...) in single player while last time I checked only a small % of players actually play 4x in MP. But we must all live in your boring and gray world 'coz banalance!

Quit being a little bitch with retarded conceits about balance.

 

[Matalarata]

Wrong as hell and stupid as fuck.

Except it's true. The fact you could play MP doesn't mean they were born for Mp. You're literally the only human being I know that believes the contrary. Case in point, try and find me any sort of commentary on MoM races and their performance in Mp, if your idea of balance (abundantly discussed before) was implemented I'm pretty sure the game would be a tenth of the classic it is now. You can then proceed and do the same with MoO. See? Examples! You should learn using those.

Perfection solution fallacy? Are you really so dense? First of all I said I was joking. Second no, you fucker. If balancing something with say, an hundred variables is fucking hard, blancing a game with a thousand variables is ten times harder. The reason why Mp balance shouldn't dictate terms in a 4x game design is, for the sixth time, this:

a) It seriously reduces the diversity of tactics and strategies you can include.

Quit being a little bitch with retarded conceits about balance.

Name a balanced 4x and exit your mother basement Absinthe, I thought you had me on ignore since I'm afraid to play Mp. Still haven't seen you in the Mp subforum, though! Untill then, yawn, and remove the sand from your vagina, it makes you obnoxious, I'm only here to play and have fun.

I have many times seen balance being the motivator for adding a new mechanic to a series, or for making unused/unuseable choices relevant - effectively restored to a significant position in the game.

Examples? Because axing features for balance is the norm, usually.



This discussion has now become circular, both of you are ignoring what has been written just a couple pages earlier and our resident butthurt champion of AoW III started going ad-hominem again. It's also totally OT, if you're interested in Mp/Sp balance and such things you should simply start a new thread


Edit:

I'll name a solid 4X. Alpha Centauri.

I had missed it, so you think Alpha Centauri is balanced? I asked balanced, not solid. I never played it in Mp but plenty in Sp. I'm pretty sure there are a number of first comes/first wins techs and secret projects though. It's been some years since I last fired it up, I remember the fluff but hardly the mechanics. From the top of my mind I'd say that being able to popboom, run free market and have social engineering benefits would make Morgan Ind much, much better than say, Gaians in a Mp game.

 

[BING XI LAO]

I have many times seen balance being the motivator for adding a new mechanic to a series, or for making unused/unuseable choices relevant - effectively restored to a significant position in the game.

Examples? Because axing features for balance is the norm, usually.

AoW2's introduction of retaliations being limited and draining movement points, and AoW3's introduction of flanking, to counter super-unit syndrome. Civ3's introduction of corruption, Civ4's city maintenance, and civ5's global happiness (ugh), to counter infinite city sprawl (although all of these are totally trash compared to what you see added in some civ4 mods, which is a revolution/secession mechanic).

AoE2 with its more recent expansions/patches managed to shake up[ the warship choices a bit, and now you see more fireships and demoships than before.

On the other hand I was totally triggered by AoW3 making flying units be attackable by melee walkers in combat, for the sake of balance. That was pure homogenising garbage.

You'd be right to say that balance often degrades games, and it should always take 2nd priority to diversity of features. But it's just wrong that it's its inherent nature to *always* damage diversity, or that MP balance is about making every option equal against every other.

Also I could have sworn you'd linked an MP forum last night, but I didn't get round to clicking it, and now can't find it. Must be going mad.

 

[Matalarata]

AoW2's introduction of retaliations being limited and draining movement points, and AoW3's introduction of flanking, to counter super-unit syndrome. Civ3's introduction of corruption, Civ4's city maintenance, and civ5's global happiness (ugh), to counter infinite city sprawl (although all of these are totally trash compared to what you see added in some civ4 mods, which is a revolution/secession mechanic).

Those are all farily minor though and they are wide, that is, mechanics affecting more than one faction. Again I repeat, this was never meant to be a rant vs balance, you get my point when you say:

AoW3 making flying units be attackable by melee walkers in combat, for the sake of balance. That was pure homogenising garbage.

I suppose we could call it homogenised balancing but since I've only seen it practiced 'coz muh MP I simply cut corner and call it Multi Player balancing. Is not that I haven't tried to make my point clear though...

You'd be right to say that balance often degrades games, and it should always take 2nd priority to diversity of features. But it's just wrong that it's its inherent nature to *always* damage diversity, or that MP balance is about making every option equal against every other.

That's the problem actually. From my experience there is a loud minority effect of sort. Personally, I only actively partecipated in the development of a single 4x "game", it was on old mod for CivIV called Fall from Heaven, look for it if you've never heard about it, it's very good imho. During development (and this was a big, project. With multiple modders, coders and modelers working on it) those that played CivIV Mp were very loudly requesting thorough axing of features or a balancing project of sort. Kael, the lead modder that later on was hired by Stardock to salvage Elemental (good luck with that, mate!) was very clear about it. The only factors taken into consideration by the team when implementing features were:

-Is it fun?
-Is it lore-friendly?
-Can we make the AI use it, somehow?

In case the answer was yes to all of those, the feature was implemented and tested. I still think that's the best approach in order to produce something memorable.

Also I could have sworn you'd linked an MP forum last night, but I didn't get round to clicking it, and now can't find it. Must be going mad.

No, I linked Dominion mod inspector, an html document to browse magic, rituals, artifacts and units. Wanna see something glorious from the Mp forums? Here:

Mam Lum

An example of how Dominions throws homogenizing balance out of the window and it's hundreds times more fun for doing it. The spoilered part of my post should give you an hint about the amount of variables behind a single engagement, imagine a full war. Or multiple.

 

[BING XI LAO]

During development (and this was a big, project. With multiple modders, coders and modelers working on it) those that played CivIV Mp were very loudly requesting thorough axing of features or a balancing project of sort.

What a bunch of PEASANTS. I do like the FFH2 mod, and modmods.

 

[Absinthe]

Except it's true. The fact you could play MP doesn't mean they were born for Mp.

Dude, stop playing stupid to try to score points. I was clearly calling you wrong on your idiotic assertion that disregarding balance improves strategic depth. But on the subject that 4X games games are designed for singleplayer, you seem to have forgotten that 4X games by and large have their roots in board game design which was meant to be played with multiple people. Damn near every 4X game was designed around hotseat multiplayer gameplay so yes, they were born for MP, and I personally played a lot of 4X in hotseat. They were among the few multiplayer games that you could play with friends on 1 computer without having multiple joysticks or needing to share the left and right sides of a keyboard that is prone to locking up when too many buttons are pressed simultaneously.

Case in point, try and find me any sort of commentary on MoM races and their performance in Mp, if your idea of balance (abundantly discussed before) was implemented I'm pretty sure the game would be a tenth of the classic it is now. You can then proceed and do the same with MoO. See? Examples! You should learn using those.

Congrats, you picked one of the only 4X games without so much as a built-in hotseat multiplayer, although there is a mod for it.

Perfection solution fallacy? Are you really so dense? First of all I said I was joking. Second no, you fucker. If balancing something with say, an hundred variables is fucking hard, blancing a game with a thousand variables is ten times harder.

Translation: "If I say I'm half-joking, that means you're not allowed to criticize me!! But I will respond seriously to defend my purportedly joking argument." That's not how it works, dumbass. Stop with the disingenuous line of argumentation and whining. And you're still bitching and moaning that you shouldn't balance games because it's "too hard."

Name a balanced 4x and exit your mother basement Absinthe, I thought you had me on ignore since I'm afraid to play Mp. Still haven't seen you in the Mp subforum, though! Untill then, yawn, and remove the sand from your vagina, it makes you obnoxious, I'm only here to play and have fun.

Already named AC, idiot. And I have no idea what you're smoking but I never put anyone on ignore. Stop acting so ridiculously sore.

I had missed it, so you think Alpha Centauri is balanced? I asked balanced, not solid. I never played it in Mp but plenty in Sp. I'm pretty sure there are a number of first comes/first wins techs and secret projects though. It's been some years since I last fired it up, I remember the fluff but hardly the mechanics. From the top of my mind I'd say that being able to popboom, run free market and have social engineering benefits would make Morgan Ind much, much better than say, Gaians in a Mp game.

Overall it's fairly well-balanced, yes. And your memory is faulty. Morgan can't pop boom without golden ages because he can't run Planned economics. It's usually the Gaians who are most likely to sit around in Dem/Planned for free pop booms all the time. And Gaians are a powerhouse faction between their mindworm rushes and high efficiency bonus.

 

[Citizen]

4x games should be booth balanced enough and unbalanced enough to be fun and engaging. The only way to make a great 4x is to achieve a balance between balance and imbalance, THE META-BALANCE.

 

[Matalarata]

Dude, stop playing stupid to try to score points.

No! And I don't need to score point, I got plenty of friends I already play with on these boards.

Damn near every 4X game was designed around hotseat multiplayer gameplay so yes, they were born for MP

You're high on your own farts. You started this conversetion yourself, months ago, by bitching about undeads in AoW III. No, you supreme gentleman, they weren't designed around hotseat and you're a deluded fool if you think so. I'm pretty sure the great majority of MoM/MoO players around the world never played hotseat. Try again, maybe with less butthurt

Congrats, you picked one of the only 4X games without so much as a built-in hotseat multiplayer

I picked one of the sacred beasts that gave raise to the genre itself. You should really try and play it sometimes, instead of just talking bro.

And Gaians are a powerhouse faction between their mindworm rushes and high efficiency bonus.

I ask you a MP balanced game, you named a solid game (no objections here) and as soon as we start talking mechanics, you point out a powerhouse faction! Thanks for proving my point by trying to score, mate!

4x games should be booth balanced enough and unbalanced enough to be fun and engaging. The only way to make a great 4x is to achieve a balance between balance and imbalance, THE META-BALANCE.

Inane but close to truth. Like a Malkavian.



Edit:

Translation: "If I say I'm half-joking, that means you're not allowed to criticize me!! But I will respond seriously to defend my purportedly joking argument." That's not how it works, dumbass. Stop with the disingenuous line of argumentation and whining. And you're still bitching and moaning that you shouldn't balance games because it's "too hard."

Forgot to answer this. In your supreme butthurt (you're still the only one calling names like a 12 years old) you failed to notice you quoted my joke yourself, in parenthesis. Even games which were undoubtly born as competitive player vs player affairs, renounced homogeneization in design years ago. Unattainable.

here:

(half joking here, I know the point of fighting games is not to have each character balanced vs the others. Even they learned the lesson.)

Except for the bold part, that's no edit. Try again? ...have you removed the sand at least?



AAAAAND Edit2: Absinthe Sorry for thinking you had me on ignore. You simply stopped responding and I assumed as such. Ignoring is for pussies .
Believe it or not but I do consider your analysis of AoW mechanics sound. It's just that it's really the wrong game to crunch. Again, come with me to the MP subforums and give Dominions a spin. It will hurt only for a month or two!

 

[Absinthe]

Okay, ignoring most of the blatantly dumb and meaningless shit because it's a waste of breath.

No, you supreme gentleman, they weren't designed around hotseat and you're a deluded fool if you think so.

The design principles were lifted from board game design which is a balanced competitive turn-based multiplayer design. So in effect a lot of them were designed around hotseat gameplay.

I'm pretty sure the great majority of MoM/MoO players around the world never played hotseat.

And a lot of other games are. Regardless, this is becoming a digression from the main point, which is that competitive balance improves strategic depth rather than detracting from it. I think your lack of a counterargument to this point speaks for itself.

I ask you a MP balanced game, you named a solid game (no objections here) and as soon as we start talking mechanics, you point out a powerhouse faction! Thanks for proving my point by trying to score, mate!

Except you don't actually have a point. Yawn. Go ask which faction can beat Gaians. The correct answer is all of them. And Gaians can beat all the other factions too. They are considered a powerhouse in that they are easy to play and have solid advantages overall, not in that they are the one faction to rule them all or that they cannot be outperformed. Zak can out-tech, Morgan can achieve extreme economic superiority, Spartans have an easy military superiority, so do Believers in their own way, Yang has extreme human wave tactics going for him, Peacekeepers are an oddity with no major strengths or weaknesses, although their own perks are rather underrated. The closest there is to a weak faction in SMAC is Spartans but they are also the faction with the deadliest early game rushes. Nothing compares to a Spartan impact rover rush.

Forgot to answer this. In your supreme butthurt (you're still the only one calling names like a 12 years old)

The irony and sheer lack of self-awareness in this line is impressive. You repeatedly attempted to derail this shit into a dick-measuring contest, character assassination shit, random digressions, non-responses, and other weird point-scoring crap that has fuck-all to do with the argument at hand, and yet you accuse me of acting a child because you can't handle being called an idiot?

Even games which were undoubtly born as competitive player vs player affairs, renounced homogeneization in design years ago. Unattainable.

From the start, I have not argued in favor of reductive homogenization as balance, you idiot. I've made mention of that enough times that I think you're just being willfully obtuse at this stage. Although your statement that homogenized balance is unattainable is also frankly retarded as it is in fact the easiest form of balance to achieve, even if it is also frequently the least entertaining.

AAAAAND Edit2: Absinthe Sorry for thinking you had me on ignore. You simply stopped responding and I assumed as such. Ignoring is for pussies .

I stopped responding because someone else took over the argument back then and there wasn't much for me to add. Even now this is closer to a rehash than breaking any new ground in the argument. I'm not sure how you made the leap that I must have had you on ignore from that but I suspect you're just a naturally self-absorbed person. Also, seriously, if you're wondering if someone has you on ignore, just press the Ignoring button at the top of the post. It shows a list of who is ignoring that poster and who that poster is ignoring.

Believe it or not but I do consider your analysis of AoW mechanics sound. It's just that it's really the wrong game to crunch.

Age of Wonders 3 is blatantly balanced around competitive gameplay. That doesn't mean their design decisions were good ones, but it is clearly intended as a competitively balanced game.

Again, come with me to the MP subforums and give Dominions a spin. It will hurt only for a month or two!

Thing is, I don't have Dominions. And I still have a few other games I want to go through (Master of Magic among them) before I consider getting that one.

 

[BING XI LAO]

Lol resurrecting this argument was fun

 

[Matalarata]

Okay, ignoring most of the blatantly dumb and meaningless shit because it's a waste of breath.

A gentleman as usual . You really can't see how butthurt this makes you look, right? I thought it was an internet persona of yours but you really think you know what you're talking about.

The design principles were lifted from board game design which is a balanced competitive turn-based multiplayer design. So in effect a lot of them were designed around hotseat gameplay.

Yes... and? The basic design principle of a CRPG was lifted from pnp RPGs, which are multi-player in nature by default. Are you arguing things like Mass Effect should be the norm 'coz they have multiplayer like pnp had? What's an RPG? 4x?
The experience of playing a board game, and I started playing those when you still used to shit your pants, is completely different from a cpu assisted 4x. Hell, those were born to allow deeper and more complex mechanics and to allow single player to begin with, you dimwit. I also already tackled this point, oh intelligent and never-edgy one, when I said what makes Dominions special, here:

Dominions is like a board game, with such complexity it needs cpu assistance to be played. Really, comparing it to anything else is pointless and, again, it's an unbalanced clusterfuck! It goes beyond concepts like OP or UP, people play it for totally different reasons than AoW, imho.

Dominions was a board game to begin with. Did you knew that? It was born as a board game, a physical game. When mechanics became too deep and cumbersome and lenghty to execute, they produced a PC game out of it. Notice how, the only real life applicable example of your thesis is the single game I'm sperging about. And it totally defeats your cowmpeteiteiv bullshit theory. It's an unbalanced clusterfuck filled with ifs and buts and hows and whats, and its unique mechanics are due to the lack of the same process you endlessly offend me about.

Except you don't actually have a point. Yawn. Go ask which faction can beat Gaians. The correct answer is all of them. And Gaians can beat all the other factions too. They are considered a powerhouse in that they are easy to play and have solid advantages overall, not in that they are the one faction to rule them all or that they cannot be outperformed. Zak can out-tech, Morgan can achieve extreme economic superiority, Spartans have an easy military superiority, so do Believers in their own way, Yang has extreme human wave tactics going for him, Peacekeepers are an oddity with no major strengths or weaknesses, although their own perks are rather underrated. The closest there is to a weak faction in SMAC is Spartans but they are also the faction with the deadliest early game rushes. Nothing compares to a Spartan impact rover rush.

Here, have a diagram you autist king.

You *kick* ---------------> Goalpost

I ask again. Can you name a 4x balanced for multiplayer that you also deem solid and fun to play? I ask again since you're so nebulous it isn't even funny, do you consider Alpha Centauri a game that is balanced for multiplayer? Are there civs which have a mathematical advantage over others? I ask all this because I tend to know my limit very well (you should try too) and as I already said:

I never played it in Mp but plenty in Sp. I'm pretty sure there are a number of first comes/first wins techs and secret projects though

If you deem AC a valid example of your thesis I'll install it again, ask some buddy to give it a spin and bring your point to one of the related threads, I'm pretty sure there are a lot of actual players here that will chime in. As far as I remember though, it's far from a Multi oriented title, needing lots and lots of gentleman's agreement to be played. Crawlers? Game changing secret projects? I can hardly believe an "anything goes" competitive environment would spontaneusly form, but you could have a point. I admit my ignorance.

The irony and sheer lack of self-awareness in this line is impressive. You repeatedly attempted to derail this shit into a dick-measuring contest, character assassination shit, random digressions, non-responses, and other weird point-scoring crap that has fuck-all to do with the argument at hand, and yet you accuse me of acting a child because you can't handle being called an idiot?

No mate, I have been quoted and answered another poster. BING XI LAO, to be precise. I also pointed out again and again all this is OT. Did you even read my post or I should think I'm arguing with a 9 years old here? Dick measuring ? Character assassination boy, I'm the one trying to score points? Where has the bad bad poster hurt your precious codex persona? Idiot !

From the start, I have not argued in favor of reductive homogenization as balance, you idiot. I've made mention of that enough times that I think you're just being willfully obtuse at this stage. Although your statement that homogenized balance is unattainable is also frankly retarded as it is in fact the easiest form of balance to achieve, even if it is also frequently the least entertaining.

Except.... that's exactly what you did. Either that or you went so butthurt when I talked about doing sport and your mom's basement that you stopped reading and you still don't understand my point which, for the seventh time is this:

Balancing 4x for Mp is pernicious because:

a) It seriously reduces the diversity of tactics and strategies you can include.

It's also pointless, when you achieve it you no longer have a game. In any case, I could double up my question with a "could you name an half succesful homogenized MP game"? But you'll aptly ignore it! (serious question, I'm curious)

Age of Wonders 3 is blatantly balanced around competitive gameplay. That doesn't mean their design decisions were good ones, but it is clearly intended as a competitively balanced game.

Yep, that's why it sucked so hard in the beginning it wasn't even funny! When they let go of homogenization at least a bit, the game became much better. Really, you prove my point with each post you make and each time you try to sound informed. And then you:

The irony and sheer lack of self-awareness in this line is impressive.

Priceless

How many players deemed that blatantly balanced around competitive gameplay a fun game though? How many play it MP. How much better would it be if they implemented crazy things? Please don't let me repeat me again and again, read sometimes.

Thing is, I don't have Dominions. And I still have a few other games I want to go through (Master of Magic among them) before I consider getting that one.

Discussing the genesis of 4x themselves and you didn't even bother to play it? Ffs I was joking when I said go play it. That's your problem, you're an uneducated plebeian trying to act all


I will also stop responding to you itt. You think you have an argument? Be a man and start a specific thread. Either that or go discuss into the AC thread why you used it when I asked for an example of a 4X game that's balanced and primarly thought for MP. I will kindly leave the cowmpetaitaiv bullshit aside, out of respect.

 

[Raghar]

MP and SP balances should be separated. In MP competitive environment would cause rigid numeric analysis of balance, and when results would allow a player to be 3x better than other equally smart, it would fuck MP.

 

[Absinthe]

New thread for this shit now: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?threads/is-competitive-balance-good-or-bad-for-games.122861/

 

[hello friend]

There are much much more effective ways to play, but the most fun by far is to go dreadnought, hire mostly dreadnought heroes, and start massing artillery as soon as you can. After a while your heroes can summon their own artillery, you can send them off in different directions and lay siege to multiple cities with little to no army - AI won't leave the walls so you can just keep summoning, use hero's reload ability to shoot faster. Only skills you should pick are reload and spellcasting.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

What's up with pacing of the different campaigns in AOW3?

Court Campaign:
- Easy 1v1
- 1v2 (actually 1v2v1, but if you're smart, you will stay away from Lucius until you're done) on a linear map, but you have to rush instantly or you get to fight one million shades and orcs. Shnaga just spams Shades without mercy and you have to push her shit without respite, all the while fighting Ulugh.

Commonwealth:
- Easy 1v1 - just get those sweet reinforcements and then keep smashing Oscar's dudes until the middle of the map. Then help the Giants and rush Oscar, or wait a bit by building and rebuilding and murder Oscar with an army of giants, musketeers and cannons.
- Adventure-style map.

There are much much more effective ways to play, but the most fun by far is to go dreadnought, hire mostly dreadnought heroes, and start massing artillery as soon as you can. After a while your heroes can summon their own artillery, you can send them off in different directions and lay siege to multiple cities with little to no army - AI won't leave the walls so you can just keep summoning, use hero's reload ability to shoot faster. Only skills you should pick are reload and spellcasting.

Wow I started Commonwealth campaign and I fell in love with Dreadnought. Musketeers + Engineers gives you the ability to field one-shot, high-damage ranged units that can walk as much as they want before firing a shot. Sure, Muskets reload slowly, but that's where you engineers get in, and when they ain't doing a thing, you can fire Blunderbuss or thrown flashbangs. Cannons are love, cannons are life, and with Overload Machine, you can fire over 40 damage shots that kill most lvl1 units in one shot, and best yet, its an area attack, and you can even stack something like Star Blades on top of it, too.

It does seem to have problems coping with physically-resistant foes, like Wraith Kings and Phantasm Warriors, through.

 

[The Brazilian Slaughter]

AOW3 is looking far better than the game I saw at launch.
I like the way combat flows now, even if I miss the ability to select all my people and walk them together. Race is more important, too.

Its better to go mono or multi-racial? Mono-racial seems less hassle (one turn immigrations wtf) and helps get racial governance bonuses, but you get evil alignment for pressing the implied genocide button.

Btw, its just me or you're better served by simply ignoring defenses or putting token garrisons, and then doing rushing the enemy with everything you have? Seems like making nice fortresses doesn't pay back as much, especially if a Rogue is around to Dread Siege your ass.

I can't believe alignment doesn't carry over the campaign, that's pretty dumb. In fact, wtf is this "new leader per scenario" shit, I thought I was playing Sundren/Edward's campaign, not these dudes?
Also, why all heroes in Commonwealth campaign get Resurgence to avoid gay-ass "you have lost because the AI decided to home-in on your hero and ignore your huge Golden Dragon" situations, but not in Elven Court?

By the way, in the second stage of Edward's campaign, Edward gets some cryptic warning by some weird old man

Spoiler

Is that Merlin? Because he says he "wielded every power in creation and defeated the shadow". Who else but Merlin could be it?

 

[Absinthe]

Monoracial is much better. Going multiracial just screws you out of valuable racial governance bonuses so unless you want a specific racial unit to fill a niche it's not worth the trouble. This also creates problems with alignment, since a good alignment is a pain in the ass if you want to go monoracial (or conquer things). AoW 3's alignment system is just garbage in general, since it strongly depends on strategic decisions. No one really cared about alignment before the alignment specs, and now with the alignment specs you end up feeling a pair of meddling hands interfering with how you want to play. It would've been much better if they handled alignment more like the previous AoW games or Eador.

And yes, you're generally better off rushing the enemy, otherwise they will snowball aggressively and the game becomes much harder, so building up your cities and focusing on developing is sooner a way to lose than a way to win against the AI. By the way, Dread Siege is actually a Warlord ability. Rogues have Incite Revolt. Anyone can grab Keeper of the Peace adept for Rally of the Populace to give a base -500 happiness and an increased chance of spawning revolts though.

And if you're having trouble dealing with phys resist, don't forget you have Flame Tanks. Dealing with physical resist is basically their niche. You can also just go Grey Guard master for the ridiculous Cardinal Culling spell which nukes phys resist (and melee phys attack damage) for all copies of that unit. It was designed as an aggressive punishment against making stacks of a single unit, but in the end it's just a stupidly powerful debuff and the reasons why people will make entire stacks of the same unit cannot be solved that easily.

 

[SymbolicFrank]

Do dragons still land so melee fighters can hit them? That was about the most stupid thing.

 

[baud]

Do dragons still land so melee fighters can hit them? That was about the most stupid thing.

From the thread, a few message above.

On the other hand I was totally triggered by AoW3 making flying units be attackable by melee walkers in combat, for the sake of balance.

 

[baud]

snip

I think there's a quote from the French football team discussion that has little relevance to your post

 

[BING XI LAO]

Do dragons still land so melee fighters can hit them? That was about the most stupid thing.

From the thread, a few message above.

On the other hand I was totally triggered by AoW3 making flying units be attackable by melee walkers in combat, for the sake of balance.

I didn't check for several years though.

 

[Absinthe]

Informative.

As a rule it seems the class units are better, but there are some racial specifics I like. I have a great love for Draconian Firebombers, for example. Goblin Blight Doctors also seem great for druids due to Weakening, and I got a new respect for them once a Sorcerer AI took over a city by using an army of goblin doctors, apprentices and priests and then proceeding to kill me by "nothing personnel-ing" me with phasing and bolts, wtf.

Honestly Blight Doctors aren't a very good pick for Sorcerers, since Sorcerers barely use the blight channel. It's better for Rogues and Arch Druids and maybe Necromancers. Arch Druids also benefit from the Goblin military RG4 that allows you to train Trolls, which benefit from Wildlife Refuge (-25% upkeep) and Beast Mastery (+2 resist and mind control immune). If you really want to witness Sorcerers abuse supports, go Frostling Sorcerer with Keeper of the Peace master. The Frostling Ice Queen is a T3 support, the Arch Angel summon is a T4 support, and the Royal Guard can take damage in place of White Witches and Ice Queens. Also, the Frostling RG5 (this is generally too late to matter) gives all your supports +2 frost damage and Frost Aura.

Anyway Frostling Ice Queens with phase, projectile resistance, and inflict stun are rather nasty. Arch Angels are also nasty when you make sure to summon them in a base with an Arcane Catalyst (needs Wizard Tower Ruins), giving them +2 ranks total with your class building, so they start with inflict daze, inflict stun, projectile resistance, and phase. Might want to combo it with Wild Magic Adept so you can Degenerate away any resistances and add Lesser Elementals to your summons.

This also plays into the Class units vs Racial units thing. If you pursue a racial unit strategy, you can just avoid researching expensive class units until later while you get the stuff you want from specs/upgrades/magic. And occasionally racial units just give you different options. High Elf Dreadnought for instance can spam Unicorn Riders with pistols (Side Arms empire upgrade) and take over cities fast. High Elves, Draconians, and Halflings all contribute flyers to the otherwise land-bound Dreadnought (also Halflings benefit from Suppress Nature removing their giant set of terrain morale penalties). Sorcerers and Arch Druids are especially dependent on racial units because their class units are overwhelmingly summons so their bases need to crank out racial units for the most part.

Weird, I can swear I'm getting attacked by a Rogue with it.

Either that's not a Rogue or you are confusing the happiness penalties a city gets for enemy inside its domain or enemy at the gates for a Dread Siege.

Thanks for the tip! Flame Resist is cool!

Physical Resist got a lot of muscle back in AOW3, due to the way damage works now.

Meanwhile multi-channel attacks are a joke when faced with regular resistance scores. I swear they were balanced around the assumption everyone has 10 resist. This is also what makes the Fallen Angel awful for T4 fights. All the other T4s have like 12+ resist, damage channel immunities, and are probably immune to petrify (juggernaut, shrine of smiting, dread reaper, horned god, arch angel, shadow stalker (okay this one's a T3)) somehow. Eldritch Horror has 13 resist and 60% spirit immunity, so there is a low chance of petrifying scream working on them. Works on Manticores though, assuming they're not backed by a Warlord hero giving the stack Strong Will through Blood Brothers.

 

[Johannes]

What's a fun way to get to know the game SP, when I'm interested more in learning the game than jerking off? Scenarios, random maps, campaigns?

 

[Absinthe]

Either scenarios or random maps, I'd say.

 

[mwnn85]

Is the Complete STEAM version worth picking up for £6 / $7.85 ? (-84%) (WinGameStore pcgames5off for -5%)
Incline / Decline please.

You get the Windows/OSX/Linux release with all the DLC that was released excluding the pre-order scenario.
I've already played it of course and can run the GOG Windows release through Wine.

The battles are the strongest part of the game - flanking, unit types, resistances, leveling up, etc.
The overland map, management & research aspects felt a bit lacking.
Some of the scenarios felt like they had to be rushed through in order to establish a foothold.
No shadow realm whatsoever.

Age of Wonders always feels like it gets 80% right and 20% wrong which isn't quite enough to reach classic status.
Played all the usual suspects like Civilization 4 Complete and Warlock (1+2) but I've yet to try Endless Legend.