idea about newbie guide . plz share your opinions

[Boron]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boron:
in every rpg i know you only get xp for KILLING units not hitting them .

Which is the single largest problem with Fantasy based strategy games like AOW. There you have to do silly things like save weakened units for your heroes to kill so that you get the most benefit out of the fight.

---

i would this call rather a feature than a silly thing .
you have to chose whether to risk your hero or not . i liked that in aow and especially in aow 2 shadow magic .
in aow + aow 2 until a patch heros were too strong but in aow 2 shadow magic balance is a bit better .

but aow 2 shadow magic is not good anymore since i know dominions 2 .
only 2 uses for aow 2 shadow magic that come to my mind after knowing dominions 2 :

you can play it if you are really sick ( like flu ) and dominion 2 is too exhausting but want to have at least the feel to play something similiar to dominions .
you can let you small children play aow 2 as a preparation and practice for dominions 2 .
like duplo then lego

[Boron]

Originally posted by Arryn:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boron:
really amazed if this is really true

Get over it. You have to learn to accept that Dom 2 is not Diablo or any/all other games.

Frankly, the idea that you only get experience for killing is stupid, and it leads to game play abuses. First, in the real world, you learn by doing. If you were practicing martial arts, or marksmanship, or whatever, you do really learn by trying to hit an opponent. If you only learned by defeating them, no one would ever learn anything, because beginners could never defeat experts. As for the gameplay abuses, it's not fair that one character gets all the XPs because they were lucky enough (or in MP, aggressive/sneaky enough) to land the Last blow, regardless of whether someone else did 99% of the work to kill the target. Which was one of the things I liked about the SWG MMORPG: you got XPs proportionally based on your share of the damage that was inflicted when you gang-banged an enemy.

---

well in diablo 2 party play expierience in party was shared too if the members were in the same area ( something like 1 screen ) .
but the one who killed the target got 10% bonus .

and getting xp only for killing would delay getting xp that would be good .
you get xp far to quick .
if i really get for every hit one xp than after smashing 2-3 indie provinces my sc pretender has already 5 stars .
have never paid much attention to that but at least my vq's were always quite quick 5 star .

if the sc only gets xp for kills he would much slower reach the 5ths level .

the downside of that would be of course that for non sc's it would be almost impossible to reach a higher level than lvl 2-3 .

but it would make sense logical . a sc is always a very mighty being either a pretender or a mighty demon etc. so they do get more expierience because of their already higher power and semi divinity compared to mortals like knights .
makes sense from fantasy view points or ?

[Cainehill]

[quote]Originally posted by Boron:

strange .
in every rpg i know you only get xp for KILLING units not hitting them .
just look at diablo 2 e.g.
if you hit baal 1 million times with fists for fun but don't kill him you still get no exp.

First - Dom2 isn't an RPG. Second, in Diablo 2 (which also isn't an RPG), you bloody well do get experience without killing anything. Join a party and leech mega experience without ever swinging a weapon.

so really amazed that dominions should be the only fantasy game so far where this is not the case .
afaik no other fantasy game rewards you for just hitting someone and not killing him.

Most certainly Dom2 is _NOT_ the only fantasy game to do so. The Disciples line of fantasy turn based strategy games (ie, the exact same genre as Dom2) units got experience for hitting opponents, meaning that you had to work to ensure that units actually got to do some damage.

A console RPG that did the same - Final Fantasy VIII or IX or X or some such - it was a _huge_ PITA because if you want your people to level up, you had to swap each of them in long enough to take an action.

Paper and Pencil RPGs such as Runequest, AD&D and the like certainly never insisted that a character make a kill to get experience, or 1st level mages would never reach lvl 2; similarly, support characters such as clerics would rarely.

I'd suggest that your exposure to RPGs, and to computer games, is somewhat more limitted than you might like to believe.

[atul]

Originally posted by Cainehill:
A console RPG that did the same - Final Fantasy VIII or IX or X or some such - it was a _huge_ PITA because if you want your people to level up, you had to swap each of them in long enough to take an action.

Arcanum? The amount of xp for kill was so minor compared to the one you got for bashing the critter up you could leave them lie unconscious if you were the kind type (and without followers, as they butchered without mercy).

Originally posted by Cainehill:

Paper and Pencil RPGs such as Runequest, AD&D and the like certainly never insisted that a character make a kill to get experience, or 1st level mages would never reach lvl 2; similarly, support characters such as clerics would rarely.

I really liked RoleMaster series (and MERP) in the sense you could actually level up from all the xp you gained for getting hit yourself. All those imaginative criticals yielded tons of xp when felt in first person.

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Boron:
you have to chose whether to risk your hero or not .

You aren't choosing whether to risk your hero. You are using extremely gamey tactics to make sure that your most valuable units always act Last, and are the only ones to kill any other units so as to maximize your experience. If experience was granted for damage dealt, then you would at least have to fight lots to gain levels. If it was granted for some kind of spellcasting, then your casting heroes would be more useful as well.

[Boron]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boron:
you have to chose whether to risk your hero or not .

You aren't choosing whether to risk your hero. You are using extremely gamey tactics to make sure that your most valuable units always act Last, and are the only ones to kill any other units so as to maximize your experience. If experience was granted for damage dealt, then you would at least have to fight lots to gain levels. If it was granted for some kind of spellcasting, then your casting heroes would be more useful as well.

---

you could get spell casting 1-5 in age of wonders 2 as levelup reward .

age of wonders 2 had tactical combat where you had full battle control .
in dom 2 you can only give very limited battle orders .

so the ability to exploit that is quite limited .
and it would reward those killing something more
i assume hitting something by damage shields counts as hitting too or ?
don't you agree that pretender sc's which conquer indies get maximum xp level too fast ?

so with xp for killing only your weak and almost worthless troops like militia would get almost no expierience while knights and other good troops would get some .
furthermore a sc wouldn't get max xp as quick as he does now .

you have to see expierience more abstract : authority/respect also matters .

if you look at any "barbarian" tribes in real history like the germans at the time of the roman empire there battle prowess and valor were very important .
only the most fierce and strong and successful warriors ( those who killed most enemies ) had a chance to become leaders , later kings .
there are many examples in history of warrior kings which rose from common , but brave soldiers to generals and finally kings .
even in rome there was the time of soldier kings .

so how else should you prove your valor and bravery in battle than by killing as much enemies as possible ?
war is not about hitting as many enemies as possible but killing as many as possible .
one hit , no kill is always a bad option .
was even in ancient times suboptimal .

a shortbow archer can hit a heavy armored soldier 10 times but he doesn't even scratch him . then the armored soldier is in range and kills the archer .

so i still can't see why getting xp only for killing doesn't make sense in pc games

[Boron]

Originally posted by atul:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cainehill:
A console RPG that did the same - Final Fantasy VIII or IX or X or some such - it was a _huge_ PITA because if you want your people to level up, you had to swap each of them in long enough to take an action.

Arcanum? The amount of xp for kill was so minor compared to the one you got for bashing the critter up you could leave them lie unconscious if you were the kind type (and without followers, as they butchered without mercy).

---

oh yeah i played arcanum too . i have to admit that i enjoyed it very much .
i exploited that by using a low damage gun . this way i got more xp .

since dominion is the game i ever wanted i am forgetting almost all my gaming expierience from former games lol although it is only about 1 year ago when i played arcanum .

but still xp for killing is better than for hitting

@ cainehill : yeah that party joining and leeching was great

just rush to hell difficulty in 1 hour , join cowruns , leech and have a lvl 80 char in 2 days or even faster if you would have played nonstop .
loved that times

edit : me and a friend even offered that service for sojs
we got 1 soj for shuffling to hell ( complete ) and about 4-5 for even leveling up to lvl 80 .

was quite profitable .

ah well diablo was great you could betray the new and unexpierienced . and they even thanked you . so great and funny

[ July 29, 2004, 22:48: Message edited by: Boron ]