Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Some minor things were implemented, and some good ideas were set aside. It doesnt take much looking back to see a distinct difference in the way they were presented here. I tried to point it out regularly but few seemed to get the tips.

Altho I will admit that since I didnt seem able to make it clear how to do things right (within the limitations of the forum) I went ahead and manipulated some of it. Personal contacts to give hints on how to ask for things if I highly agreed with them. And in some cases I will guiltily admit that I spurred some people to continue presenting things I didnt much agree with since they seemed so good at presenting it as temptingly as a stick up the ***. It not my job anymore to give a **** whether or not they can figure things out for themselves.

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Well, I have to admit that I started playing Dominions 3 on the newest patch so I did miss the whole updating process... I do have CoE3 still installed (I played a game as the Bakemono sorcerer during the weekend actually), and I am keeping an eye out on the updates once in a while. I am not enjoying CoE3 that much currently but I'm not dropping hope that I will eventually... So, for one I apologize if I've been too negative or "poisonous" regarding the game.

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

You'd probably make a fairly good politician based on the first paragraph. I was interested in actual examples of things that were "poisoned"

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Exactly. Im just not that rude, a fault that others have pointed out here often. For a long time I often referred nicely that free things go away when people forget how to pay for free things. Even the people I dislike the most here, I cant bring myself to go specifically to their threads and say things like:
In the past I have been paid to read the rants and reword them into nice requests to post to the staff forums. And then reword the techs or devs response into something nice enough for public forum posting. Many large companies operate that way. Im not paid to do that anymore.

But even then, I still would never post answers like those above. Its just not me. If people cant look at what threads and people got results, and which ones didnt, then oh well.

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

I'll preface my comments by saying that I'm about as undemanding a CoE buyer as there is since I purchased it as a thank you to IW for Dom 3 and wasn't really concerned about whether I'd like it or not. I'm glad people are enjoying the game and I hope it sells well.

Having spent some time with it I'm of the same mind as elmokki as regards luck vs. decision making. Currently luck plays too great a role in the game for my taste. But looking at the pace at which things like modding are being added to the game I'm pretty optimistic that CoE3 can add more in the way of decision making - without sacrificing streamlined gameplay.

I should also mention that I've only played the game SP, don't really plan on playing MP, and view the game as having a SP focus. Given that, my focus is on fun rather than game balance.


* Allow more control over spellcasting. Probably my favorite class is the warlock. It's exciting to get a spell that attacks an entire row ... but pretty frustrating when the AI decides to start off combat with a spell that attacks just a single or handful of opponents instead (obviously front loading damage is good since it reduces the number of hits my troops will take). So what about giving the player complete control over available spells, even to the extent of just selecting one to be cast repeatedly (and if it could no longer be cast then the game would default to the complete spell list)? Edi mentioned here or on the CoE forum that there are some very powerful spells and if you could specify that they be cast repeatedly it would be OP. But I guess I don't mind because from a SP perspective if I get a great spell it's damn fun to watch it annihilate my opponents. :evil: From a MP perspective this could be a problem but if the game developed more tactical depth this could actually present some interesting possibilities - I know my opponent has a great spell and I'm counting on him using it so I attack with a force designed with that in mind. Like I said, I don't think the game currently has that depth, but the potential is there.

If that's a nonstarter then what about a limited scripting system for 1-3 turns? Something along the lines of:

Round 1: cast fire attack at entire first row of opponents
Round 2: cast armor buff on entire first row of army
Round 3: cast strength buff on multiple units in first row of army

Now, you'd probably want to leave the back row out of this so people can't just target mages. And this would be optional - you could choose to ignore scripting and just let the AI handle as it now does so it wouldn't add complexity for those that don't want it (but I bet most people would use it :)). And even if you did use it, it wouldn't add the kind of additional burden scripting does in Dom3 because CoE has far fewer commanders to manage.


* Allow more control over unit placement. Thinking over how to provide some control over unit placement, making it army based seemed like it would defeat the purpose of having a fast playing, low micro game. But making it unit based seemed like it might provide some degree of control over your armies without adding much to the micro. Just as is currently the case, each unit would have a default rank and you could use that rank and never use any of this functionality. But if you wanted, you could pull up a list of your current units and change their rank. Perhaps something along the lines of FrontA, FrontB, Middle, and Back. FrontA would be the first units chosen for the front line, after that would come FrontB. So some battles I might want my swordsmen up front to take the first hit and then my summons to clean things up after my mages had softened up the opposition, other battles I might want my summons to go right to work on the enemy.

Again, just like the suggestion with scripting this would be optional and could be ignored if the player didn't want to deal with it.


Now I suspect neither of those ideas are trivial things to do and would involve considerable new coding and maybe there's an easier way to implement decision making for the player but I think these are the kinds of things that would add depth to the game.



I also have a couple of requests that I think would make the game more fun.

* Please (really, please) add a slider to control indie spawn rate. I understand the era chosen effects this but I'm thinking of a global control. Personally, I find indies maddening - I want to focus on fighting my rivals, not tracking down deer and bandits. Also, in the weeks leading up to the release of CoE3 I played a good amount of CoE2 and, unless I'm misremembering, indies didn't seem to be such an aggravation there. Was the spawn rate turned up for CoE3?

* I think it would be very helpful for AIs to start the game with an immobile commander in their capitol, something like the barbarian's totem pole. This would prevent them from losing the game by sending all their commanders out in the field and having them killed or having a small force of indies walk in and take their capitol, resulting in them losing the game if that's their only city. I can't really think of any drawback to doing this. It would mean a bit of a tougher fight for the player to take the opponent's cap but I don't see that as a problem.

* Lastly, in CoE2 the warlock had the ability to bind with an element, which would make him tougher. He still wasn't anything like the stronger monsters but it improved his battlefield survivability ... and it was just cool. Any chance of getting that back?

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Posting your requests here isn't likely to get a response, you'd do better to post in the feature requests thread of the desura forum:http://www.desura.com/games/conquest...ature-requests

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Yes if anyone has actual requests for the devs please add them to the wishlists on the official forum at Desura.com
You will note that so far the devs do still reply there.

Most of the spawns can be controlled by taking control of the generator tiles (brigand camps, graveyards). It is mostly the wildlife that people complain about still. There is one mod already for CoE3 which makes the Deer less of a problem, and can be used as a template for doing the same for other spawns that a player finds irritating. Also I understand that Edi is working on a mod to at least make all of the wild animals less wild.

A map scenario could add an immobile commander for nations that dont have one altho that tends to only be a problem for the lower AI levels which would seem to fit that they are lower AI levels. The new modding commands might also if someone wants to play with them after the patch. At the least, it would allow players to test the theory and see if they like the result.

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

I think the warlock's elemental binding is not coming back in its old form. Some kind of durability buff for them would not be out of place though.

Gandalf is also correct that I am working on a wildlife mod that should reduce the tendency of deer etc to attack everything on sight, but that mod will make game a bit harder for witches and druids (and barbarians when they get spirit guides).

Basically it involves setting terrain preferences for wilderness for a lot of monsters. I need to test out a crapload of modding stuff anyway, so I might as well do something useful at the same time.

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

What is that supposed to mean?

Re: Conquest of Elysium 3 dev log
 

Wow. Really?
Or are you just trying to give me enough rope to hang myself