Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

So after having played the Dominions 2 demo... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The addition of some global report windows certainly help this game out a lot. So is the ability to disable those unnerving fade effects for when windows pop up and go away.

The game's interface is definitely better than Dominions 1. However, it is still fairly clunky. It took me nearly 5 minutes to figure out how to issue orders to my commanders (other than moving). Click on the displayed order to change it? Odd.

The game still lacks a display of the name of the nation that owns a territory when you select that territory. It is rather annoying to have to have to go to the scores window to match up the flag to the nation name. Plus, this is very non-intuitive. Adding the display of the nations' name to the territories they control will help a lot. So would an option to display the exact number of commanders and troops in every territory you control on the map, instead of just a box that varies in size. The box is nice, but the numbers would IMO be vastly superior for gauging your troop strengths nation-wide at a glance.

Friendly fire is far too much of a problem in this game. Half of my troop losses come from my own archers and mages missing their targets far too often. The game needs a strategy that makes archers stop firing on units that are in melee combat with your own melee units. The fire 3 rounds and flee option is not good for this purpose at all. Neither is combining it with the "hold 2 turns and attack" option you can give melee troops. That is just a clunky solution that does not work well. Mages miss way too often in this game. They need much higher precision scores. All of them. Unless right next to their targets, my mages tend to hit targets less than 20% of the time.

The automatic casting choices are a bit strange. My mages will sometimes cast low level weak damaging spells, rather than higher level ones that can do a lot more damage. Sometimes they make smart choices.

Storming castles is rather strange as well. I attacked Pangaea's castle with 10 commanders (some mages, some priests, some chiefs) and nearly 100 troops while playing as Machaka. I had 60 archer type units, the rest light infantry or spiders (the expensive ones). The enemy had 2 troops (a minotaur and a centaur) and 4 commanders. I lost 20 troops and 4 commanders, they lost 2 troops. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. You'd think that repeated storms of arrows would do something to these guys, but apparently not.

The mountain citadel is 100% useles. It is the same as the dark citadel in every way, except that it has only 10 admin instead of 20.

The way some of these units have costs scaled is not very well designed. Often, there will be very small increases in a few stats over the cheaper troop, for 3x as much gold and 2x the resources. Balance and a sense of scale seem to be lacking. The game designers seemed to be far too concerned with having more types of units than necessary, while not paying enough attention to the purpose of all of the units, or the balance between them.

Battles tend to end after only killing a small amount of the enemy and then they just run away, even when they have roughly equatable forces. The morale system is more of a hindrance to this game than a benefit.

The loss of the ability in Dominions 1 to target enemy mages and/or enemy commanders specifically seems rather strange...

[edit]
Almost forgot... the game devs could have definitely chosen a better image pattern to make the basic game interface with. If you don't have an art budget, keep it simple.
[/edit]

I shall delay my final judgement on the game until after reading some responses...

[ January 11, 2004, 23:27: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

What's really painful is that I like the game for what it does well, but must conceed that you have many good points.


>The game's interface is definitely better than Dominions 1. However, it is still fairly clunky.

Indeed.


>The game still lacks a display of the name of the nation that owns a territory when you select that territory.

Absolutely. It should be part of the info when you look at the province.


>Friendly fire is far too much of a problem in this game.

Always has been.
I must assume that this is a low priority for the developers, since a 'fire and hold' commmand would be fairly easy to do.


>Mages miss way too often in this game. They need much higher precision scores. All of them. Unless right next to their targets, my mages tend to hit targets less than 20% of the time.

This got much worse in Dom2.
I don't know what Illwinter was thinking.
"Perhaps the players will enjoy missing often?"

This singlehandedly made a host of spells near pointless.


>The automatic casting choices are a bit strange. My mages will sometimes cast low level weak damaging spells, rather than higher level ones that can do a lot more damage. Sometimes they make smart choices.

Always been a problem.

I have suggested many times that a simple solution woule be to have a 'repeat Last cast' command, that would have the mage simply keep repeating his Last spell. This would require no change to the AI, and wouldn't be a complex change, but would afford players some control of the mages actions. I'd love to see more, but I'd settle for this simple fix.

I understand that they are trying to simulate the choas of battle. However there is no reason for mages to get stupid.


>The mountain citadel is 100% useles. It is the same as the dark citadel in every way, except that it has only 10 admin instead of 20.

If you fought one you'd see the difference.
They are much stronger from the wall layout and arrow fire (the DC has no fire).

On the other hand I agree that it's not a very useful fort for the players. Illwinter has overestimated the value of defense and underestimated the value of economics.

Honestly, I don't think anyone is happy with the forts costs. Illwinter seems particularly stubborn about changing it, so don't hold your breath.


>The way some of these units have costs scaled is not very well designed.

Agreed.


>The game designers seemed to be far too concerned with having more types of units than necessary, while not paying enough attention to the purpose of all of the units, or the balance between them.

The light cav and light inf are still a waste of time. If they produce the mod utility I will come out with a mod with units that have better balance. I'll fix the mage precision as well. Yes I know... how arrogant of me. It'll happen though, if the tools get released.


>Battles tend to end after only killing a small amount of the enemy and then they just run away, even when they have roughly equatable forces. The morale system is more of a hindrance to this game than a benefit.

This is one place where I disagree.
The games morale systems is awesome.
I suggest playing more.


>The loss of the ability in Dominions 1 to target enemy mages and/or enemy commanders specifically seems rather strange...

I'm still not sure if I like or dislike this.


>Almost forgot... the game devs could have definitely chosen a better image pattern to make the basic game interface with. If you don't have an art budget, keep it simple.

Without doubt.


>I shall delay my final judgement on the game until after reading some responses...


Even with all it's failings... it's a great game. <sigh>

Play it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

[ January 12, 2004, 00:00: Message edited by: apoger ]

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Generally agreed. This is about the only thing I find really disappointing in Doms I and II.

Quote:

Mages miss way too often in this game. They need much higher precision scores. All of them. Unless right next to their targets, my mages tend to hit targets less than 20% of the time.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This should be tweaked in many, but not all, cases. Some of them are too inaccurate. In general, the effect of low accuracy (on both missile weapons and spells) shouldn't be to miss entire formations - it should just make it hard to hit specific targets at long range.

Some spells and casters are accurate enough, though.

Quote:

The automatic casting choices are a bit strange. My mages will sometimes cast low level weak damaging spells, rather than higher level ones that can do a lot more damage. Sometimes they make smart choices.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">True. Longer spell scripts would be nice. AI does pretty well in most cases IMO considering the staggering variety of possible spells, targets, and other factors.

Quote:

Storming castles is rather strange as well. I attacked Pangaea's castle with 10 commanders (some mages, some priests, some chiefs) and nearly 100 troops while playing as Machaka. I had 60 archer type units, the rest light infantry or spiders (the expensive ones). The enemy had 2 troops (a minotaur and a centaur) and 4 commanders. I lost 20 troops and 4 commanders, they lost 2 troops. Yeah, that makes perfect sense. You'd think that repeated storms of arrows would do something to these guys, but apparently not.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I disagree. Storming a medieval fortification the hard way should be difficult and costly, even with only a few defenders. Firing storms of arrows at defenders high on a castle wall protected by narrow stone arrow slits generally has very little effect. There are many historical examples of very small garrisons holding off massive numbers of attackers. This is a large part of why anyone bothered to build them, despite the staggering costs and build times.

As for game balance arguments, there are many ways to overcome castle defenses in Dominions. But castles are supposed to present strong obstacles to many. However you can always just take the province and not storm the castle, and starve them out (assuming they are something that needs to eat...).

Quote:

The mountain citadel is 100% useles. It is the same as the dark citadel in every way, except that it has only 10 admin instead of 20.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Untrue. See thread on subject. Dark Citadel is only available to some, and lacks any built-in firepower.

Quote:

The way some of these units have costs scaled is not very well designed. Often, there will be very small increases in a few stats over the cheaper troop, for 3x as much gold and 2x the resources. Balance and a sense of scale seem to be lacking. ...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Seems to me there is almost always a considered reason for the costs, even if it isn't obvious at first.

Quote:

Battles tend to end after only killing a small amount of the enemy and then they just run away, even when they have roughly equatable forces. The morale system is more of a hindrance to this game than a benefit.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe with low-morale units and fright-inducing effects (such as dead leaders, fighting monsters, etc), but that's intended. There are many spells, unit types, items, etc. which will very effectively reduce routing. I find the morale system extremely welcome and quite well-done. It would be a lot less interesting and less appropriate if everyone fought to the death regardless of circumstances. Terror and the ability to resist it is a major factor in war, especially when dragons and undead elephants are involved, etc...

Quote:

The loss of the ability in Dominions 1 to target enemy mages and/or enemy commanders specifically seems rather strange...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Some would say that the ability in Doms 1 for units to see an entire enemy army and automatically determine whom the commanders and/or mages were and target them is much more strange. It makes much more sense that such targets would not always be immediately identifiable. It also makes for more interesting battles if it is not so easy to target just the few best enemy units with some of the more powerful attacks. Otherwise it can be an annoying weenie chase. Groups on "Attack Rearmost" give a nicely-unpredictable chance of hunting down commanders and mages hiding behind the lines.

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

> Adding the display of the nations' name to the territories they control will help a lot.
Thers a option in map-fliter,just have to press 9,8,7....till u found it.


> The game needs a strategy that makes archers stop firing on units that are in melee combat with your own melee units
some cheap way to avoid friendly fire:
Air Magic: Aim,Wind Guide.
Nature Magic: Eagle Eye.
in the other hand,i hope a "Fire and hold" order appears in the new patch 2... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

> I don't know what Illwinter was thinking.
"Perhaps the players will enjoy missing often?"

maybe,just a guess,
"We should force them to forge EYES artifact."
^^"

> The automatic casting choices are a bit strange. My mages will sometimes cast low level weak damaging spells, rather than higher level ones that can do a lot more damage. Sometimes they make smart choices.

120% Agree.
Their Favorites is to cast "Caster Protection" magic.Personal Luck,Astral shield,Mistform,Barkskin...
Hope devs add a "Banned-battlefield magic" list later.
'repeat Last cast' is a good choice too ^^

>I shall delay my final judgement on the game until after reading some responses...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">say sorry for my poor english. my first language & second are not english...

^^

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

@Imperator Fyron :

So you played the Demo .. twice? Or three times?
You did read the newbie guides and FAQs available here?
So you really know what you're talking about?

No, you don't - or at least you're sounding like it. But than again you're talking 'bout DOM1, as if you played that, too.

So I wonder, what the purpose of your rant is?

Basically, the combat system is the same as in DOM1, and it works well for years now. Storming castles is ment to be costly (as it was historically, as someone already mentioned). Obviously you even didn't notice that different castles have different layouts, and that there are "build-in" archers/ballistae/slingers in those turrets, numbers and placement depending not only on castle type but on the nation as well.

Concerning the targeting I must say I wonder if a bug has crept into the range formula - sometimes spells that have multiple effects "spray" all over the battlefield as if fired at max range, while they are in fact aimed at a much nearer squad (judging from the average range at which the effects appear). Found this especially true with spells of 0 or less accuracy, what is a good hint that there's a bug in the calculations. But that's not of great concern - the developers are known for their willingness to support their product. The first patch is due in short time and might already fix this issue. Until then, use mages with prec15 or more, eyes of aiming and spells with high precision (3+)

Speaking of spells - there are spells which give improved accuracy to mages and troops for the length of battle, as well as morale-boosting ones which will make your troops fight much longer, as well as the opposite.

In contrast to most, if not all similar games out there, most of those toops, respectivly troop types, actually are different from each other, have a purpose and are quite well-balanced. In fact, most of them have been taken over from DOM1, and the developers did a good job integrating the new types.

And the interface isn't "clunky", it's only different. Therefore it takes some time to get used too. I would agree, though, that there are some minor improvements to be made ... .

I don't want to go too much into detail here, but e.g. the boxes are quite o.k.. Why? Because they give a hint at army strength, not numbers (at least they are suppose to I think). Giving a single number for commanders/soldiers each would be absolutly useless, as there are so much different types of each with much different combat strength. (Milita vs. IceDevil ..)

Ok, that doesn't leave much of the points you mentioned, and I have other things to do ..

A.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Then the layout needs to be made painfully obvious when selecting your castle type while designing your "player."

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Hmm... they were not even close to the wall, but well behind it in the court yard. There were other hidden troops at the wall firing those arrows at me... That is too much of a stretch for me. So is the fact that seiging only seems to open the gate, not scratch the walls.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Or if they have a commander with Nature magic... each level feeds 5 units per turn. Of course, starving them out is not very practical when you have a 40 turn limit in the demo.

Other than flying units, how do you overcome castle defenses?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For some units, yes. But there are several Machaka and Jotunheim (the two nations I tried) units that increase in cost too drastically for what you get compared to the next weaker troop they have.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But when you have no units with terror, they still route far too quickly...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nope. None of those got the nation name. There is an option to display the territory name, but not the name of the nation controlling it.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree with this too. I don't have a problem with hidden information and self-discovery but this info is too important to leave out. It's dumb to make a critical error before the game even starts because of poor documentation.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I find that just using extrodinary amounts of numbers works fine. 100+ units should do fine in most cases before turn 40, but you are at the whim of the morale checks. If their god with Fear is inside the castle you most likely aren't going to have much success. Maybe capturing all the land around the castle and starving out the god's Dominion will make him weak enough to conquer. When I played the demo I just massed up for a final assault on turn 40 since the game was over anyway.

I don't think the demo was supposed to give you a complete game so this isn't really a fair criticism.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For some units, yes. But there are several Machaka and Jotunheim (the two nations I tried) units that increase in cost too drastically for what you get compared to the next weaker troop they have.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I agree too. I play with abysia, and I do fine with just hordes of the weakest infantry. Having huge numbers of them makes it easy to route the enemy and to keep their own morale which outweighs the added morale of the units that cost 3x as much. Only problem is starving when in enemy territory, but I usually don't hang around in one province with a huge army for long.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Again, I think having all your guys into one or two really big squads helps with this. Only time my infantry route is when they get torn up by crossbowmen, but by that time, the second line of infantry (or fast troops like salamanders or nightmares) have reached the crossbowmen and have routed the enemy frontlines already. Number of units is the key thing in early game I have found after a couple dozen games. Later on, huge summoned creatures like Iron Dragons totally destroy all infantry so that strategy goes out the window http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif If you play a nation like Jotulheim that uses small amount of troops, you rely on priests to keep casting Boost Morale, which doesn't seem to really help all that much, so you're screwed IMO when going up against huge armies of weak infrantry.

And, I agree about the GUI and graphics, but I don't think it takes away from the gameplay enough to worry about it. I just discovered the F1 screen and it really helps with managing the Unrest/Tax situation.

Pretty good review, but you really need to read a LOT of forum Posts to learn the hidden info to make truly informed opinions about many features.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">This is really confusing to me about missile attacks and magic attacks. For example, is a Fireball a missle attack that uses the caster's precision stat OR does it use another formula to determine hit/miss? I assume level of the caster matters, like Fire9 mage should hit more with his fireball than a Fire2 mage right? Or does that just let him cast more fireballs in one battle?

The manual and in-game documentation isn't too clear about how to make your mages connect more often with their long-range attacks. I thought precision only matters for archers?

In terms of archery, I find the friendly-fire too much of a drawback that I don't even use any kind of archers or crossbowmen at all. Just hordes of infantry from now on, and I'm doing great with it. I hardly ever lose a battle with just ranks and ranks of infantry with some fast mounted troops and magical creatures that tear into the enemy line before the enemy archers have time to kill too many of my guys. Fast melee units seem to be the key to beating archer armies, and if you don't use any archers yourself, your casualities will be pretty low in general.

Friendly fire usually does more damage than good in my experience, so I don't even waste the resources on building ranged units. I use Abysia because their armies are immune to fire, so they don't get harmed by stray fireballs or poorly placed Clouds of Fire by my own casters http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

If they patched it so friendly fire isn't as MUCH of a drawback as it is now, then I'd change my strategies around that, but with the current implementation, I find it more effeicient to totally leave out missle troops from my armies.

[ January 12, 2004, 03:45: Message edited by: sergex ]

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Between Machaka hoplites and Spider warriors/knights? Or between hoplites and normal warriors? For the spiders, it's because that spider comes with a ranged web attack, is fast, has two normal attacks, one of which has death poison. Then when the rider gets killed the spider hangs around for the rest of the fight. For the black hunters you get a spider that is blessable and hangs around even riderless for many turns. Spider knights are also almost twice as fast as infantry, which lets them outflank their enemies.

Machaka hoplites on the other hand are excellent heavy infantry, with both good morale, excellent protection, a defense of 14 against arrows, a hgih damage weapon, and escellent attack and defense skills. Remember that a single point difference can have a very large effect with the rolls as seen on the charts in this thread.
Die roll charts

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Every targeted battlefield spell is treated as a missile attack that always hits a target in the square where it lands. Some spells have a precision boost of 100 which means that the mage will essentially always hit the target they aim for. Spells use the mage's precision stat as the basis for determining the spread as they travel. A precision on the mage of 15 is pretty much necessary to make spells like fireball useful, which indicates that the effects might need to be looked at a bit.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That just affects the statistics that have "+" or "-" symbols after them in the spell description, as well as the penetration bonus to overcome magic resistance for those spells which can be negated by such.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

I agree with Imperator Fyron on most parts. Especially the combat situation where your archers kills your own unit. I would like to see some additional orders for archers "fire at closest enemy NOT in melee" and so on. That would really be great.

However I do think Fyron is to quick to judge the unit situation. I love the fact that there is so much different units to choose from. I think that if we would ask a group of veterans which units they use for a specific nation I bet we would see a spread out result among most units and perhaps one or two Favorites.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That just affects the statistics that have "+" or "-" symbols after them in the spell description, as well as the penetration bonus to overcome magic resistance for those spells which can be negated by such. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Extra magic skill also divides down the fatigue cost, making it possible to cast many more spells with less effect on the caster.

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Saarud,

The problem with "fire at closest enemy not in melee" is that it would probably develop into a "fire at commanders" order.

I would actually be satisfied with an order to "fire at closest non-commander not dangerously close to a lot of my own troops but especially not in direct melee with them and under no circumstances fire into a melee that it looks like I will win without archer support. Just stand still and do nothing if you don't have a valid target."

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Fliers are good. A few other ways:

* Lots of cannon fodder (e.g. militia, tribals, mercenaries, undead).

* Units which are resistant to the defenders' weapons.

* Spells which protect powerfully against missiles.

* Other effective battlefield spells.

* Assassinate the commanders.

* Kill the defenders with ritual spells.

* If the Last enemy stronghold, sweep away their dominion and banish their god, and the men will give up.

Quote:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Seems to me there is almost always a considered reason for the costs, even if it isn't obvious at first.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For some units, yes. But there are several Machaka and Jotunheim (the two nations I tried) units that increase in cost too drastically for what you get compared to the next weaker troop they have.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've only been addicted to this game for oh, half a year or so, and I haven't even gotten around to playing either Jotunheim or Machaka. (I've only played six of the seventeen nations, and only one variant flavor of one of those, so far, just to give you a hint of how much gameplay there is...).

However I think you're probably just not aware of the reasons behind the costs. For example, holy units have major advantages such as being blessable and only costing half as much to maintain (so their true cost is nearly half-off if they survive). Having fought Jotunheim a lot, I know that the little guys can complement the giants in a combined arms fashion, particularly because they can sneak in between the giants to increase the attack of a front, and also to distract attacks from the giants. Or, they can do a quick flank/rear attack, or block one.

Quote:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe with low-morale units and fright-inducing effects (such as dead leaders, fighting monsters, etc), but that's intended. There are many spells, unit types, items, etc. which will very effectively reduce routing. I find the morale system extremely welcome and quite well-done. It would be a lot less interesting and less appropriate if everyone fought to the death regardless of circumstances. Terror and the ability to resist it is a major factor in war, especially when dragons and undead elephants are involved, etc...

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But when you have no units with terror, they still route far too quickly...</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe a matter of taste, or your particulars and inexperience. Having played a lot and watched all the battle replays, I think the morale system works really well.

...

And yes, all the castle stats should be available on start-up. That's an omission, though the fans of course have posted a nice table.

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Spells like fireball, etc. are a lot more accurate if you place your mages close to the front lines. Distance from target makes a big difference.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

>> But when you have no units with terror, they still route far too quickly...


Well sometimes morale system causes some odd results. I was fighting with Ermor (Ashen Empire) against Niefelheim. My province had about 150 ordinary longdeads, 3 mound kings and 1 arch bishop. Enemy had Son of Niefel and about 15 niefel giants. Those giants kept destroying my units until I had only 1 longdead, 1 mound king and the arch bishop left. Then those mighty giants decided to run away!
In that hilarious battle I managed to kill just one or two NGs long before enemy routed.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Don't overestimate the logic of fear. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It gives me the ability to seige and storm a castle, so it most certainly is. I seiged it for 4 turns before the gates were broken, then failed several times over the next 10 turns to take out the meagre defenses of the castle with seemingly overwhelming forces before hitting the demo turn limit.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That is silly. It makes separating them into multiple squads to have greater tactical flexibility a bad idea. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Basic info on how to play a game successfully should not be hidden. Advanced features, maybe, but not the basics.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is a really poor game design decision, and one of the reasons I will not be purchasing Dominions 2 at this time.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is much more a problem with Jotunheim than with Machaka. And no, I was certainly not comparing infantry with cavalry there. That would be silly.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I would not call the differences from 1 point listed on that thread very large effects, certainly not for the extreme increase in cost to get that point.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I tried that, actually... my assassin with Machaka just got slaughtered by a centaur commander. Do those regular troops that look like the assassin commander participate in the assassination battles?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Probably a matter of taste. I find it absurd that so many units will just run like hell after taking small losses when they are defending their homeland. Units should only very rarely be routed when defending their homeland (such as with independants), and even then it should just be a few units routed, not the entire army.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes, and I was not really considering holy units, especially for Jotunheim. I haven't tried other nations than them and Machaka, but then, I can't try most of them in the demo.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That is silly. It makes separating them into multiple squads to have greater tactical flexibility a bad idea. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Multiple squads is very useful in the "outdoor" battles. But having one huge troop of foot soldiers under your best commander seems to work best for the castle assault. I do use multiple Groups during the assault, but only for flyers and mages.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which is a really poor game design decision, and one of the reasons I will not be purchasing Dominions 2 at this time.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Despite flaws like this, the game is exceptionally intriguing and well worth the effort of playing. So don't use archers. (I don't.) It's not an insurmountable issue.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I disagree. I've been playing Jotunheim exclusively, both the demo for about 4 days, and the full game for another 4 days. I don't think it's such a big deal. I only use 1/3-1/2 of the full variety of Jotunheim units. But that's my play style. I think you're nit-picking rather than looking to see the myriad possibilities of what you can do with what's been given to you. Unlike many games that I could name, Dom 2 is excellent despite its flaws, flaws which in no way make the game unplayable or even unenjoyable.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I hardly think it's "extreme".

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Agreed. Units at "home" should get a morale bonus. Tie the morale boost to a combination of dominion score and province ownership.


Cheers!

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That is silly. It makes separating them into multiple squads to have greater tactical flexibility a bad idea. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">No it doesn't. It just provides you with choices that have trade-offs. Sometimes larger Groups make sense, sometimes smaller ones are good, usually an intelligently-deployed mix is best, etc.

Quote:

... </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">* Assassinate the commanders.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I tried that, actually... my assassin with Machaka just got slaughtered by a centaur commander. Do those regular troops that look like the assassin commander participate in the assassination battles?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'm not familiar with the details of Machakan assassins yet, but no I expect they attack alone. In some cases, naturally they will fail, particularly against tough targets. Assassins are usually pretty dangerous, and combat in Dominions is never a certain thing. It's not that assassins aren't a good idea (they can be very effective), but they aren't sure to work, as no one would want them to be. So, use more assassins, or different types of assassins, or give them equipment that will tip the scales, or be content with killing the weaker targets using assassins, or try any of the other techniques, or a combination.

Quote:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Maybe a matter of taste, or your particulars and inexperience. Having played a lot and watched all the battle replays, I think the morale system works really well.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Probably a matter of taste. I find it absurd that so many units will just run like hell after taking small losses when they are defending their homeland. Units should only very rarely be routed when defending their homeland (such as with independants), and even then it should just be a few units routed, not the entire army.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Another thing which is a matter of taste, but which I really enjoy, is that few outcomes are certain in Dominions. There is a morale bonus for defending in home territory, and in friendly dominion, but they aren't a guarantee. Similarly, units can and do rout in small Groups sometimes - there are morale checks both for Groups and for armies.

For those interested in military history, morale was a major part of historical ancient/medieval combat, as well. Frequently, most of the killing in a battle was done after one side routed.

Furthermore, retreating can often be a good thing. If a small group routs, it is often beaten up, fatigued, and about to die, and having it withdraw to fight another day can be a very good thing. Same is often true for an army. Fighting to the death when overpowered is often a bad idea, and you need to start running before its decided, to have a reasonable chance of escape.

It's also more interesting to play a game where a reasonable number of the defeated side are able to continue to fight in later battles, instead of being wiped out in all-or-nothing battles. It makes wars much more strategically interesting than if it were like, say, SE4, where entire wars are frequently decided by single to-the-death-despite-the-odds bloodbaths. It's also a lot of fun to have both friendly and enemy characters and armies re-appear in multiple battles, even after being defeated.

...

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Units do get a morale bonus of +1 in their home province. And an additional one from their home dominion. This might seem like it wouldn't have much effect but it does. Same goes for many of the other seemingly low bonuses, such as the stat increases on elite units that I assume is what Fyron is belittling. Just because the values doesn't look that impressive doesn't mean they are insignificant. I will assume that Fyron is reffering to Jotun Hirdmen vs ordinary Jotun giants. In this case I certianly think they are worth their cost increase in many cases. If you need a hard hitting center to storm a castle, has more money than resources or facing an opponent with above average defense on his troops. Do not dismiss missile troops just because of friendly fire incidents, while you may feel the casualties from tfriendly fire is to high they are, under many circumstances, very useful, and you would do yourself a disservice in competitive play if you dismissed them completely.

[ January 13, 2004, 00:23: Message edited by: johan osterman ]

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well said!

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I was thinking of something a bit more. Instead of +1 while in dominion, say +1 per 3 dominion levels (rounded down), but only in friendly-controlled provinces. No bonus at all if outside of your own "borders".


Cheers!

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is for me. I like having realistic armies with combined arms. Having missile weapons so deadly to your own units greatly reduces the strategic options of the game.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">As it should be, unless your play style is to play weaker than you could.

Here is an example: Jotun Spearman compared to Jotun Huskarl with spear: 18 prot. vs. 15 prot.; 10 def. vs. 11 def.; 6 fatigue vs. 5 fatigue; 12 combat move vs. 13 combat move. Now for cost: 30 gold/32 res vs. 35 gold/23 resources.

That 5 gold extra has rarely been a determining factor; it is the 9 fewer resources that often allow more of the Huskarls to be built, which are roughly as strong as the Spearmen indivually. Not very balanced here it would seem.

The same sort of oddities appear with Axemen and the axe-wielding Huskarls.

The Hirdman are not that much stronger than the other melee units, save their longswords being slightly better than axes. And yet they cost a lot more, as they have high gold and resource costs.

I have not noticed the Woodsman or Neifel Giants being that much more effective when lead by a Gode or a Herse. Maybe those blessings just need much better priests or some such to be effective.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well lets see.. nit-picking is vital to determining whether a game is right for you or not. The details are everything.

Now as for the other part... I have most certainly considered hte myriad of possibilities, and the bizarreness of how the unit costs work limits them.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">For you.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I never said that a morale system was bad. It is a good thing for games to have. I have just said that the way the morale system works in Dominions 2 is a bit strange (or more than a bit in some cases).

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I don't know what kind of games you have played, but I have frequently seen people come back after losing such a battle, and have done so myself on more than one occasion.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I was thinking of something a bit more. Instead of +1 while in dominion, say +1 per 3 dominion levels (rounded down), but only in friendly-controlled provinces. No bonus at all if outside of your own "borders".</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Yes... +1 does not make a whole lot of difference.

Another note on morale... please explain to me how half of my army routing AFTER the enemy had routed, save an infantry or two, is at all realistic, historically accurate, or good for gameplay. I have seen this happen more than once.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think you underestimate prot 18 vs prot 15. I can't do precise calculations right now, but +3 prot in that range makes a big difference against most units. First of all with prot of 18 units won't be damaged very often, given typical strength of the opponents. Even when the damage be dealt, it will be 3hp less (most probably something in 1-3 range against 4-6 with prot 15).
This way spearmen will get much less afflictions and they will Last much longer. On average they will probably can take 3-4 times more hits.

Spearmen have slightly worse defense, so they'll be hit a bit more often, but not anywhere close to 3-4 times. So, if anything I'd think that spearmen are more efficient in most cases, but often decision is made depending whether the gold or resources are in shortage

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I've never found them to be that much of a problem unless you are using completely unarmored troops, or you have your archers a long ways away from the front lines. Archers are very good for dealing with high defense units like Van, knights and such, as they are much easier to hit this way.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I woud disagree with you here. The spearmen are usually better than the huskarls as they don't get hurt nearly as often. 18 protection is much better than 15 protection as there are very few weapons with a damage greater than 9, but there are a quite a few weapons with a damage of 5. As the protection value becomes equal to and exceeds the damage from a weapon your chance of ignoring most hits increases dramatically. A 15 prot huskarl has a 45% chance of taking damage from a shortsword (damage 5) in the hands of a strength 10 human. The 18 prot spearman has a 23.7% chance of taking at least a point of damage from the same attacker.

You should try out Saber Cherry's combat simulator, overall, the JO spearmen are just slightly ahead of most of their other units

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Their longswords are considerably better than axes, because they do not cause a defense reduction. Their defense is also much better at 13 than at 11, because it means that they can be attacked by three units per round without their defense dropping below 10, unlike the 1 of other giants. Giants are most vulnerable to mobs of troops wearing their defense down and thereby allowing them to be hit often.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Blessings are entirely dependant on the magic you choose at pretender creation. If you don't pick high magic scales of some type, then you won't see much use out of sacred troops other than their reduced maintenance. Nature 9 or 10 works very well with giants, as they can take a single hit and then regenerate it.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I think it's more a matter that you don't fully understand how much difference a single point can make in a unit's combat performance when averaged over many units and many dice rolls.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The casualties that a unit can take without routing are often almost too high. After all, most ancient battles ended with a rout long before even 10% of a side might be killed. After all, that's a decimated force. It's only when you have extremely elite troops that people will stand and fight in the face of appreciable casualties.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is for me. I like having realistic armies with combined arms.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Then may I suggest a more "realistic" game such as Stronghold or Lords of the Realm. No one has claimed this game is "realistic". While more accuracy from archers would be nice, they would also become far more deadly and thus imbalance the game because they are cheap compared to armored troops. As was the case historically in the real world, for two armies that "cost" the same, the army with the archers will beat the army with the armored troops almost always.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The Spearmen have 3 more protection. The game is consistent in that increasing armor costs a lot. It makes perfect sense. However, I have found in my own play, that the Huskarl is more cost-effective. Which is what you have seen too. But complaining about it makes little sense. At least to me. My own opinion is that you just don't quite understand the design criteria that has been used by the devs for the game. Or if you do, you just can't accept it. Fair enough. But don't expect a change; it's not broken.

By the way, you can also hire 2 Huskarls for the cost of 1 heavy cav. The giants are by far more useful ...

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It is for me. I like having realistic armies with combined arms.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">You might be interested then in this game:

http://www.hpssims.com/Pages/products/POA2/POA2b.html

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Not to argue about which is best, but the costs make a lot of sense.

According to what I have seen thus far, the gold cost of an unit is more or less tied to its quality, professionalism and special powers, regardless of equipment (at least, when comparing units of the same nation/theme) : thus, units with higher morale, higher base attack, defense, hit points, berserking, or beeing sacred will cost higher.

The ressource cost of an unit is entirely dependant on its equipment, the heavier the armor and the weapons, the more it costs, and every additional items (helms, shields, additional missile attacks ...) add to the cost.

Gold and ressource cost do not have to be tied to each other. That's just why mages leaders costs a huge amount of gold and a very low amount of ressources, heh. Putting an heavy armor on a militia will cost the same (in resource) as putting the same armor on a seasoned soldier. A grizzled veteran will need to be paid more (in gold) than a blue militia

Considering that, the cost of spearmens vs huscarls are completely understandable. Huscarls are quality, elite troops, with higher morale and base (unmodified by equipment) combat stats, but more lightly armored (scale vs chain) than regular spearmen. Thus, a higher gold cost, and a lower ressource cost.

PS : you also forgot upkeep costs (in gold). Huscarls will overall cost you more in the long run, because their wages are directly poportional to their base cost.

Now, anyone is entitled to his opinion about whether *you* value pure protection or better overall prowess more (or whether Jotunheim should have recieved an elite AND heavily armored unit or not), considering the always highly situational choices you have to make (sometimes you are starved for ressources, sometimes for gold). But the costs are completely logical, not bizarre, when you know what resource and gold costs are supposed to represent.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Another thing to consider with gold cost vs resource cost is that upkeep is dependant on gold. I will often build Huskarls early on when it's important to raise an army quickly. However, recruiting lots of gold expensive troops every turn isn't a good idea, since the upkeep will choke your economy.

With heavily armored low gold cost troops you can maintain a larger, tougher, army, even though it takes longer to build it up.

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Stronghold is terribly unrealistic. Couldn't stand all the silly unrealistic things in that one, unfortunately. (RTS time scale from hell, spearmen easily dismantling stone walls, etc.)

PvK

[ January 14, 2004, 18:16: Message edited by: PvK ]

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Stronghold is terribly unrealistic. Couldn't stand all the silly unrealistic things in that one, unfortunately. (RTS time scale from hell, spearmen easily dismantling stone walls, etc.)

PvK </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's why I put realistic in quotes. I was being sarcastic. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

The moment someone playing a game like Dom starts spouting words like realism you know the conversation has taken a turn into the twilight zone. I'll never understand how people can play fantasy games and expect anything other than ... fantasy.

Well, time to go see what lovely critter my Starspawn has summoned this turn.


Cheers!

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Heh, better watch out how you use the term 'realism' around here. PvK and I have already crossed swords on this one once. Its not so much realism as it implies real world realism, as it is realism as it implies a logical order or a logical method. In the latter case there need be no influance from the history of the real world.

Anyway, the game mechanics should come first, the more 'logical realism' that can fit in the better, but historical arguements pro or con have no bearing on the final say of the game mechanics. Or at least they shouldn't... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

People keep forgetting the most basic rule of gaming:

Game balance trumps realism

How much fun would it be to play a nation that is famous for its mounted, armored troops (that cost a bundle to make and keep up), and then run across an opponent that has an army 3-6x the size of yours, armed with crossbows, that cost him the same amount and watch your precious knights die in a hail of bolts? Answer: not much at all (unless you're a masochist).

How much fun is it to play east front WW2 scenarios where the Germans have low-grade troops, low ammunition and very few tanks, versus Russians with veritable hordes of battle-hardened troops, near-limitless ammo, artillery, tanks, and aircraft? Realistic? You bet. But hardly fun. Unless your whole idea is to see how long it takes you to get wiped out. Which is why most historical wargames eschew reality for balance. They strive for accurate mechanics, but then skew the scenarios so that both players have a chance to win.

So how does this relate to Dom? Simple. Since you cannot make the archers cost what they need to cost to be "balanced" (not without giving you same people that are complaining now something new to gripe about), they keep the cost low and make them inaccurate. Realistic? No. Balanced? Yes.

Don't like having your own archers killing your troops? I agree it's annoying but life's tough. Deal with it. Understanding the game design will go a long way towards getting over your frustrations and seeing the beauty of the game.


Cheers! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Don't forget the other truism:

All truisms are false.

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

I think it's more important to realise that both gameplay and sensibility are important in any game that represents a situation, at least to many players.

A realistic mounted cavalry game could be fun if done well enough that there were ways to effectively play any force type offered to the players. Game designers who sacrifice realism as soon as they see any kind of difficulty seem pretty weak to me. After all, medieval knights were a very effective unit type for a very long time, for reasons which were very real. One doesn't have to nerf crossbows to make a game where the same would be true - it can also be done by correcting whatever was ahistorical about the game situation.

If one really doesn't care about realism, why even play representational games at all?

There are too many games out there where the design apparently starts out as "let's do a game about an interesting setting like X" and then as soon as anything gets in the way of fun, an arbitrary and illogical change is made, without even trying to find a logical change, even if all they'd have to do is ask someone who knows what the actual historical reason for something was.

In this case, there is no need to force missile units to have such a large chance of killing their own men. Even from a pure "fun" perspective, it's not fun to excessively kill your own men in silly circumstance, like when there is one limping enemy spearman running away and your archers kill a dozen of your own elite pursuers by taking pot shots at long range. That problem isn't helping anything.

The solution which has been suggested many times increases fun, reduces micromanagement, makes sense, is realistic and even historically accurate: Have archers only shoot when they will have near-zero chance of killing their own men!

It would also be possible to reduce the entire-army-missing spread of missile attacks, and have the chance of affecting a target in the hit square reduced - it would look a lot less silly, reduce unintended casualties, without making the weapons more effective than intended.

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Very well said. I agree with you 100%, oddly enough. And thanks for the reasoned and polite response.


Cheers!

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Exactly what I was talking about...

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Yes, that's the one complaint of yours that I agree is an important issue, and the only thing I find really problematic in Dominions. There are some ways to avoid friendly fire, but it's still a hassle and a problem.

Aside from the issues of taste, you made some other good points too of course (e.g. castle defense stats should be clearly shown from the selection list) but those I agree with fall under "there are tons of details to be learned, many of which aren't (well) documented, but part of the fun is the continuous and unending adventure of discovering the enormous quantity of details."

PvK

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Fyron, when will we get the score?

Re: Dominions 2 Demo Review
 

Still have not decided yet...