The Illogic of Flight

Psientist · #1 May 29th, 2007, 12:37 PM

I understand a lot of the logic behind the game regarding flying units. In order to attack melee, a flying unit must come within range of its enemy... thus, "flying" really is just a way to "blink" to an enemy's proximity.

But what about flying mages and ranged-weapon units? Why should a flying mage ever be in range of a melee / infantry unit? It just doesn't seem to fit any sense of battle-logic to me, and I'd be interested to hear what the the game's designers' thoughts were about this.

It would seem more sense to have flying ranged/magic units actually be placed vertically above the battlefield, and attackable only by other magic/ranged units. I can see how this would add a level of complexity to programming, however.

llamabeast · #2 May 29th, 2007, 12:38 PM

I reckon they can't fire bows/do magic when they're flying. Too much flapping around going on. So they have to land to do anything.

B0rsuk · #3 May 29th, 2007, 01:06 PM

Flying units who really fly are hard to balance, as Master of Magic shows us. Especially in a game where you don't have direct control over your units.

Sombre · #4 May 29th, 2007, 01:32 PM

You could represent the defensive properties of flight by giving ranged fliers a bonus to their defense, or a shield armor called 'wing buffet' or something.

Ironhawk · #5 May 29th, 2007, 01:47 PM

Yeah its not about whats "realistic" (if that term can even be applied to dominions), its about what plays well. Having flying units the way they are maintains balance.

Kristoffer O · #6 May 29th, 2007, 02:32 PM

Also, the flying mechanic was added in the game when it was still dom1 where there was no way of zooming around and inspecting things from different angles. It would have been rather difficult to see where and what flyers were doing. The mechanic has stayed as they are, even though I have played with the idea of hoovering units. I guess JK who would have to program it would be less interested as the current system works ok in most situations.

K · #7 May 29th, 2007, 02:46 PM

Fliers would then also have to have a mechanic for getting hit in the wing and then falling to their deaths...

Really, there is a point where additional complexity and "realism" just makes things more complicated but not better.

I'm much happier with the idea that fliers have to land to do anything rather than mess with the realities of flight.

BigDisAwesome · #8 May 29th, 2007, 02:59 PM

I'm gonna have to agree with K on this one myself.

Gandalf Parker · #9 May 29th, 2007, 03:47 PM

If we had map commands for terrains that only allow certain travel it might be interesting. That way a map could have a passage that is only open to flyers, and combat would only occur between flyers. Same for deep water, or maybe a magma tunnel.

Xietor · #10 May 29th, 2007, 04:23 PM

My only issue with flight, is that i think they should be immune to trample. I raised this in an earlier thread.

Natural flying units that use claws or beaks to attack have to be very skilled flying fighters, and i am sure they would likely attack from behind. To imagine a bird getting trampled by an animal is hard for me. I just do not see an elephant having the requisite skill with its trunk to grab a bird in midair and throw it underfoot to trample.

Scenarios are theoretically possible(ie the trunk hits the bird and knocks it to the ground), but i would think this to be the exception rahter than the rule.