.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

The Falklands War: 1982- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 27th, 2006, 07:56 PM

curtadams curtadams is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: California
Posts: 159
Thanks: 5
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
curtadams is on a distinguished road
Default Re: The problem of low hit points on humans

There seem to be some straw man arguments going on. Has ANYBODY suggested human melee commanders should be able to take on dragons, high-end summons, or real giants (not Jotunheim chaff) with a nontrivial chance of success? I can't find anybody who's said that but there seems to be a lot of people arguing human heros shouldn't get another 5-10 hp because they'd be able to trash dragons.

On a side note, it's an overdone fear anyway. My last effort at human melee commanders was with EA Ulm. With a forge bonus, earth, and 16 hp commanders, they are as good for human melee commanders as you'll ever see. And, against the human nations, scripted to fight along with the troops, with about 4 items each, they were acceptable and didn't die too much, although still distinctly inferior to commanders with artillery gear in terms of bang for the buck and the PITA factor of setting them up. However, even against Jotumheim chaff, they started getting squished in droves.

Based on my experience, 16 hp human melee commanders is about right - not 10. They survive well against human-level troops, and poorly against superhuman troops, which is about what a top fighter should do. I actually think they should be a sniff better than that, to make meleeing commanders more competitive with artillery commanders. 10 hp is way too little.

Part of the problem is that, in spite of some claims here the Dom melee system is not realistic. In particular, humans are far tougher than the game gives them credit for. A single dagger blow by an ordinary person on an unarmored man will usually kill in Dom - and that's way too easy. Even a sword blow will not usually really kill somebody although it will probably result in a nasty wound (i.e., an affliction). There are legit game reasons for this variation, mostly that fights don't take so long, and with disposable units the inaccuracies are pretty ignorable. But when we're talking about a kitted out melee commander, the inaccuracies are pretty noticeable. 15 to 20 hp would much better model how much punishment it takes to kill somebody - a single weapon blow, unreduced by armor, can, but usually won't.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old November 27th, 2006, 08:15 PM

GwyrgynBlood GwyrgynBlood is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 24
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
GwyrgynBlood is on a distinguished road
Default Re: The problem of low hit points on humans

Quote:
UninspiredName said:
First-off, I fail to see how Dominions 3 was 'dumbed down' compared to 2. All I can think of off the top of my head is the inability to choose a Pretender's castle, (I'll admit, that was a neat feature, but I find it restricted the flow of the game. You shouldn't have to build an ultra-expensive citadel as a defensive precaution on the frontlines that will be abandoned soon enough, or a low-admin Mausoleum where you want to crank out former Independent Knights.) special dominions being replaced with ritual spells and new ages, (I'm sort of indifferent on this one, honestly) and auto-setting the taxes (Which I'll assume you weren't referring to).
I think the intension was to replace the castle choice with the awakening choice. I always thought having a 'national castle type' was pretty weird. I like the way Dom3 does it better personally, and I like the idea behind the choice of awakening. I think there's a big problem here due to balance though ... with Dormant being overpowered in a lot of cases.

In general, when one (or a few) simple strategies are the most effective, a game has a lot less depth and interest to it. But much of this is just balance issues right now, which can be fixed over time.


Quote:
But you forget one thing, that commanders command. Commanders may be elite warriors, yes, but that's not what most people recruit them as. Most people just prefer recruiting elite warriors to serve as elite warriors. One can recruit battle mages instead of commanders, but then battle mages would be all you have. Maybe a few men as well, but it would be a small enough amount that it wouldn't be able to hold off a commander or two with any respectable amount of men. Commanders will always have that talent, which Battle Mages can never take.
I think part of the issue here is people not distinguishing between 'Troop Commanders' and 'Heroes' and 'Melee Commanders' enough. Being able to command a large number of troops doesn't necessarily mean you are any tougher than the troops you command. In the real world, troop commanders tend to stay out of the way of harm when possible so that they can keep the troops organized and issue orders.

Perhaps these 'troop commanders' who aren't anything special physically could stand to be improved in the commanding department. More commanders with the Standard ability, and perhaps increase the effect of the Standard (or otherwise increase the morale effect of 'troop commanders' as compared to other commanders, like mages or SCs).

Mages can make for powerful and effective battle mages. Troop commanders can lead large numbers of troops and inspire them. But there is no real melee commander unit to recruit.

I would see this as a difference in the races though ... humans would need to use other strategies because they couldn't use normal recruitable commanders as super melee units. They could rely more on summons or avoid using super melee units in general.

Differences in the races are a good thing, as long as it works. You have to consider Balance first of all... if a race performs poorly, then they need improvements. You also have to consider depth and width of strategy... a race that does exactly 1 thing from start to finish is boring, even if it is effective. A race who only has 1 potential game plan is limited, and probably will have a lot of bad matchups too.

'Heroes' are a different story, they are supposed to be heroic in some way. For them, they SHOULD be substantially better/stronger or more able to survive, depending on what makes them special.


Quote:
curtadams said:
There seem to be some straw man arguments going on. Has ANYBODY suggested human melee commanders should be able to take on dragons, high-end summons, or real giants (not Jotunheim chaff) with a nontrivial chance of success? I can't find anybody who's said that but there seems to be a lot of people arguing human heroes shouldn't get another 5-10 hp because they'd be able to trash dragons.
Yes, I agree with this. Like I said, humans don't (and shouldn't) have recruitable melee commanders of considerable strength. But a hero should be someone who has been through a lot and is a lot more experience than an ordinary commander. You could, for example, think of a hero as a commander who already has 5+ stars of experience, and thus would already have his stat bonuses from those.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.