suggestion about commanders

Mortifer · #1 September 29th, 2003, 05:21 PM

Hm...well, I think that upgrading forts/castles arent really economic..its just adds more strategical feeling/value, IMHO.

Aristoteles · #2 September 29th, 2003, 05:27 PM

Upgrading forts is a good idea. I would like it.
Maybe upgradings should give military bonuses only?

Nerfix · #3 September 29th, 2003, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by johan osterman:

quote:
Originally posted by Mortifer:
Johan - I think, that there is a very good idea.
The possibility to upgrade the castles/towers etc.
Each castle/keep etc. should give additional bonuses, after they have been upgraded.
Example? You are upgrading a fortified city -> Population will grow faster. You upgrade it again -> More and lot stronger militia or other + bonuses, etc.
I think that would be awesome!

Why is it a good idea? I understand that they could be made to add different bonuses but unlike the formations or the sea battles I do not see the appeal. To me it adding more economic improvements would just be adding an additional hassle to the game that would not add to the gameplay and be potentionally detrimental to it, like adding resource management to chess.

Well, the economic improvements could help if you get a tiny starting province, surrounded mostly by sea and poor provinces...
(been there...)

Also, if you decide for some reason to allow the fort upgrades, i would like to have them as a Kohan-esque "you can't get everything", I.E, you can upgrade a Castle to have either Bonus A or Bonus B.

[ September 29, 2003, 16:35: Message edited by: Nerfix ]

licker · #4 September 29th, 2003, 05:41 PM

I think I agree with Johan on this one. Adding more upgrades and buildings just does not seem to fit into the general scheme of Dom. Already you can upgrade your defense of a province with your castle type, and by uping the defense value of the province. Adding more 'junk' would only complicate matters for the AI I think, and while it may confer some kind of 'cool' feeling to the game, it doesn't really add much to the overall gameplay. Any changes to the system should be kept on a very macro level I think, like the defense for a province. One simple solution would be to split the defense from the castles to the province and call it 'fortification' which could be increased in the same way the local milita is, and give some kind of crude defensive barriers for the defenders to use (pits, trenches, crude wooden walls, ...). The presense of a castle would still give the stone walls and allow for seiges though.

As to ships... I always hate them in every strategy game I play, it is seemingly impossible to get their mechanics right, so I say don't add them in... ever!

Army formations are all fine and well, but I think it would be better to expand the scripting power, add a few more commands (harass from another thread is a good one), and allow for units to also get stackable orders ala commanders, or allow units to follow the commanders orders (more than gaurd commander anyway).

Anyway, I think mostly from a SP viewpoint, and I don't like complications for complications sake, that may improve the feel of an MP game, but wind up shafting the AI because it becomes more difficult for it to keep up with all the new variables.

Nerfix · #5 September 29th, 2003, 05:46 PM

I was just bringing out the facts at the issue of economic buildings. I realy wouldn't like complications either...

I would like to see ships, not nescesarily ship combats, but it seems pretty illogical that Ulm or Marignon can't cross a simple sea province...
Are Vans the only ones who can make ships in the whole world?

Sige engines could be like some abstraction during siege, perhaps like a militia, but with effect that adds to the abstract "siege power" of the attackers? Of course, the "sticks and stones" nations would not have siege engines... And not Jotunheim...

[ September 29, 2003, 16:51: Message edited by: Nerfix ]

st.patrik · #6 September 29th, 2003, 05:52 PM

I'm sad to hear that formations aren't a possibility - Troop positioning is so important as it is, it seems that formations would only enhance what is one of the most strategic aspects of the game.

It's attractive for 2 reasons (to me at least):

one, because troops with any kind of 'attack' order run in a ragged horde toward the enemy, which makes certain things impossible (like leaving a gap in the middle of your line for potentially routing elephants). I would *love* my troops to stay together a little more

two, defense benefits to certain formations is a *great* idea (although I accept probably very difficult to add). I mean, there's a reason why the romans defeated all the Celtic (not to mention Germanic) tribes in Europe - formations! the Celtic tribes fought essentially as individuals, whereas the Romans teamed up using formations. ok, technology was a factor too, and attacking each tribe one at a time, but formations were (and are) a tremendously important part of strategy.

Having said all that, if it's not going to happen, it's not going to happen, and Dom II will still be a really great game.

Nerfix · #7 September 29th, 2003, 05:56 PM

I would also like to see formations.
But Dominions II will be a great game, nevertheless.

Hmmmm... If we would start to design formations and their effects... And how to put them in to the game...

[ September 29, 2003, 16:58: Message edited by: Nerfix ]