What are your most wanted features in Doms II

[PvK]

I'm pretty sure numbers do play a part in morale. It's just that there is some uncertainty involved, and other factors, which makes perfect sense.

What I'd like to see though is an option to retreat sooner if losing.

PvK

[HJ]

Sorry to do this, but it's not moral, it's morale...

[Pocus]

Originally posted by HJ:
Sorry to do this, but it's not moral, it's morale...

which is kinda annoying for us french, as your 'morale' is translated to 'moral' in our country, but your 'moral' is translated to 'morale'!

ouch

Heman : I'm honored that you ask me my opinion, but I'm just a lambda player amongst many others. It is perhaps to Daynarr or the devs to answer if they find your features of interests.

[Pocus]

Originally posted by HEMAN:
Hi fellow warriors ,im new to dom 2.I enjoy games like HOMM & ROTK, Ive downloaded Dom 1 Its a great game. What features i want in Dom 2 are;

#1 Castle upgrades expansion and add-ons . Like HOMM.
#2 Option to controll Only my god in battle with unites .Feel.
In Dom 1 i feel giving orders to comds is like, Well (rolling the dice cross your fingers) JITTERS.
I had a enemy come at me with 150 unites of (souless long dead) skeltons etc. attacking my castle of 50 unites including god.( Reminds me of LOTR the 2 towers battle. Which i lost the defending castle by a mere 40 enemy unites.

my personal opinion

1) the game is not a remake of civilization, or HoMM. Adding building would mostly be detrimental to the focus of the game, by bogging him down. The buildings in doms already represents military installations, priestly powers, magical structures. This is the Grand Scheme. Why would adding a barrack, war academy, etc. be better than having a castle?

2) cant be done in multiplay. In solo it could have been done, but you are asking to introduce direct control in the tac engine, which is only driven by scripts or AI decisions. Thats imply putting some hundred hours of coding just for control of the god in battle, a bit too much dont you think so?

[Pocus]

Originally posted by PvK:
I'm pretty sure numbers do play a part in morale. It's just that there is some uncertainty involved, and other factors, which makes perfect sense.

What I'd like to see though is an option to retreat sooner if losing.

PvK

define loosing then

Am I loosing when a single mage teleport against an enemy, cast rain of stones to kill 10 enemy mystics, and then return immediatly because a ritual of returning trigger because he is wounded in the process?

[PvK]

"Loosing" is the gerund form of "to loose", as in "to let loose".

As for "losing", it could be defined in various ways. Ideally I'd like a list of setting for each group or leader, and for an entire army, which determines the way they decide when to retreat. As you say, this could vary from "when outnumbered by X degree", "when outmatched by X degree", "when wounded", "when seriously wounded". However that's a lot more control than is really needed, or than I would expect to get in Doms II.

What I think is missing and would be relatively easy to implement, though, would be one or two tactics not seen in Doms I, such as:

"Skirmish" (for light infantry and light cavalry and fliers, for instance - meaning to attack when and where the group has an advantage in range, numbers, or position which allows it to remain mostly out of reach of being greatly hurt in a counter-attack)

"Retreat if endangered" (simply retreat as if you had morale 9 or so - the complex mechanics are already there, but not the option to voluntarily avoid fighting until nearly dead - perhaps the best compromise in Doms I is "fight then flee", but that'll have you flee even if you're winning easily)

PvK

[HJ]

Originally posted by Pocus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by HJ:
Sorry to do this, but it's not moral, it's morale...

which is kinda annoying for us french, as your 'morale' is translated to 'moral' in our country, but your 'moral' is translated to 'morale'!

ouch

---

It's cool, and I'm not a native speaker either, I was just saying something along the lines of "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone".

Back on topic:
I know it can't be done in DomII, but I don't see why would the introduction of a tactical engine for battles be considered as heresy? I see a lot of requests for better control over the battles, even from people who are not advocating it diredtly, and all this could be done with full tactical control over the battles. Two reasons against it are given:

1) It would hamper the multiplayer - well, not if you still have the option to autoresolve battles. I play only SP, and I really miss additional control. It's slightly depressing to see that everything is already over once the turn starts, and there's nothing you can do about it. I hate relinguishing control of my hard-earned army to the AI's competence.

2) The AI would lose big time - and yet, on the other hand, people are praising the AI, and saying that it's good enough to do battles on its own. If it's so good as you say, then it should have not problems against the player either. It needs no further scripting, the only thing that needs to be scripted is the tactical control for the player. But if it's not so good to do that, that's yet another reason why I don't want to relinguish the control over my units to it.

In other words, I know it's not going to be there for the Doms II, but it would be a shame to discard the idea altogether for the future. Maybe in an addon, a future edition of the game, or an offshoot game based on the general Dominions engine this would be worth considering?

[ October 04, 2003, 16:49: Message edited by: HJ ]

[licker]

Always gotta be a wise guy ehh?

"Sorry to do this, but it's not moral, it's morale... "

Which is why I said I hated to correct grammer in the first place, knowing full well that I'm as succeptable to making an error as the next guy.

But... its one thing to make a typo on one word. Its another to misspell the same word over and over in multiple Posts (and other words besides).

Now I'm not critisizing anyone, just hoping that the correction to the most annoying error (in my eyes anyway) would be taken as constructive by the initial poster so that he can improve his english.

I should know... I'm enjoying an all French PBEM at the moment, and my french is certainly not up to par, just ask Pocus Oh well its all in the spirit of trying to improve oneself, oh and others...

[HJ]

Sorry, couldn't resist it...
You did notice the smilies, right?

[licker]

Originally posted by HJ:
Sorry, couldn't resist it...
You did notice the smilies, right?

Smilies? What smilies?