Player controlled battles???

[Gandalf Parker]

Whoa, a whole lot of anti-critique critiques.... Which can be summed up as "Shuddup, especially if you haven't been here as long as we have, and you're not a buddy of the devs". This is the kind of atmosphere I was refering to as it feels very inflexible and somewhat hostile.

I am not married to the devs to care where and what they spend their time on.

I will try not to read anything into YOUR comment but in general Im alittle afraid we might be seeing some of the pros and cons of going "professional". With Dom 1 we had the feeling of a garage business by friends of ours. With Dom 2 I think we are going to see more "if I pay this much for a game then....." arguments.

Also, dont necessarily take things as being snide. The fact that things have been discussed to death before IS a fact. One which it would be good to know. Especially with reference to googling for the old conversations. And the fact that there is a large contingent of players who loved Dom 1 shouldnt be a surprise so suggestions that turning Dom 2 into something else could almost (ALMOST) be considered trolling if not done delicately.

[ October 24, 2003, 19:34: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

[MythicalMino]

but...so far, i have pretty much only seen why you want something, and why some others don't...

how are we being anti-anything? you state your opinion, I state mine....you state yours, i state mine....isn't that what a discussion is?

When you give your reasons for having something in the game, and someone else gives their reasons not to have that something in the game...why do you take offense to it? Or, why do you suspect a hostile atmosphere? At least we are not attacking you and trying to force you otu of the forums...

So far, I see your suggestions...then someone else's counter-suggestions....then you post that there is a bad atmosphere....

It is understandable that you want player-controlled battles....and I really don't think anyone is calling you a heretic or anything because you want player controlled battles...BUT, just like you want others to read why there should be, you should also read why others don't think there should be.

You also keep asking why we say it will take a lot of work to redo, rewrite, write new code. Yoy say the devs are their own ppl...true....

But, we are telling you why it will most likely not be implemented...it is a lot of work...and it is something that the devs have basically said they do not think it needs to be in the game...for one reason, it is a lot of work. Another reason, there is no "fore-see-able" need for it....It was dropped, abandoned....

Now, I am not telling you to stop posting this stuff...go somewhere else, play another game, leave us alone....

Actually, what has happened here, is you posted a suggestion, I have posted why it will more than likely not happen....

[Wendigo]

*Boggle*...I am not buddy with the devs & neither are most of the posters, you are making unfair assumptions about the other posters that oppose your point & that doesn't help your side of the argument.

I don't know what kind of forums you have been before in, but as others have said the only way of having a debate is having people posting different points of view and adding arguments to back them.

I have reviewed the past answers you got and all of them were pretty polite and argumented, you might chose to ignore the points made and make it personal but it's not. Those Posts are just the opinions of people that disagree with you, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Would you prefer to be ignored? would you prefer a lie of the type 'we take note of your valuable contribution and will do our best about it'. I would rather prefer the honest opinions expressed in a polite way that you got.

Do not look for conspirations & old buddies clubs where there are none. I do not know most of the previous posters, and those I know, I do from facing each other in the battlefield and making each other's life difficult...hardly a love story.

If there's one thing I am glad about the Dom playerbase is the fact that it's very open to newcomers. When I started playing I did so by joining a group of players that already knew each other from a previous game, yet I was not particularly singled out & ganged on because of it, and was even granted my nation of choice. I have tried to act the same when I have been the one creating the game, and received no complaints on this instance to date.

Try MP with the established crew, they are all a pretty likeable bunch & you will be received with open arms. It's not a matter of us & you, so long as you do not make it so...there are no entry barriers here.

[Pocus]

very instructive post for my english level HJ.

Originally posted by HJ:
Whoa, a whole lot of anti-critique critiques.... Which can be summed up as "Shuddup, especially if you haven't been here as long as we have, and you're not a buddy of the devs". This is the kind of atmosphere I was refering to as it feels very inflexible and somewhat hostile.

I dont know who implied that you should shut up, but it didnt work apparently

(snip some things I dont have comments for)

As far as "if it ain't broken, don't fix it". Well, we are talking about a new game here, and not a patch to an existing one. Sure it's based on the Doms I, but the emphasis is on "based". Not all things are the same, and there is room for additions and changes.

yes sure, there is room for change. But should you not try to play either doms I or doms II some time before saying that the mechanisms dont fit you?

You dont seem to perceive, or dont want to, that when the devs 'fix' something which is already working (lets say 'upgrade' to give a positive tone to the modification you ask), then they wont spend this time on something else, perhaps more urgent (wow, how can it be?). There is a trade off you see.

Who knows, maybe for possible Doms III if not for this incarnation. And the view itself whether something is "broken" or not is subjective, as are all views.

yes that subjective, our view, your view too. Few things are not. So the point is?

It doesn't have to be broken per se for someone to be able to envision something that would be more enjoyable for some.

refine versus create, sure. I still think the devs should concentrate on missing features. My opinion is personal, but is as worthy as your. Thats called discussion I suppose.

[Pocus]

Originally posted by Wendigo:
Do not look for conspirations & old buddies clubs where there are none. I do not know most of the previous posters, and those I know, I do from facing each other in the battlefield and making each other's life difficult...hardly a love story.

I remember well my biggest defeat since I play the game, and it was you on the giving end. Something like 8 father illearths, some archdevils and pazuzus, 40 priests and 300 units killed. I think you lost some zombies, and had your pretender slightly fatigued for the rest of the day.
Thats was a brutal introduction into the doms I world

[licker]

This whole thread is starting to mimic the old "New Weapons System" thread, and I don't mean that in a good way

Anyway, I like the suggestions made about adding in control over tactical combat, even though I don't care to see it implemented in the game. What I don't understand (and didn't in the other thread either) is why anyone who disagreed with the suggestion was told to shut up because they were talking for the devs, or beacuse the new addition wouldn't hurt them (assuming that it was optional).


Look everyone is welcome to their opinion, and these Boards are a good place to make suggestions, just don't get so hung up on your personal whims that you can't stand to see them criticised. No one here is saying that more control is de facto a bad thing, just that it doesn't fit into their view of how dom should work (the PBEM problems aside), that's the same as in the Weapons System thread, great and interesting idea, but maybe it doesn't fit in to Dom, or maybe it detracts from Dom in some other way.

As I said before, I play almost exclusively a SP game, I could really care less what the PBEM people want for PBEM and what improvements could be made for MP, but (and this is important) the Devs have stated several times that Dom is first and foremost a MP game, to get things added that would only be applicable to SP is going to be an uphill battle, and is going to meet with a fair amount of criticism. Thats unfortunate in my mind, as the majority of game time spent in Dom will be SP, but that's how it is. I really believe the best tactic for the people who want 'radical' additions or changes is to pursue the ability to mod, and either make the changes themselves, or hope someone else makes something close to what they want.

Doubtful that modders will be able to add tac combat though. Still it shouldn't be a lost cause, and there's no reason not to continue to ask for it in some incarnation, however, I think that understanding the view point of the devs is key, once you accept that they are more concerned with the MP crowd (as they've said) then you'll come to realize that some battles will not be won, especailly for Dom2 (which is gold now anyway, so I wouldn't expect any 'radical' addations).

Finally, lets answer this question. Why do you want tac control over battles? Is it simply because its 'cool'? Is it because you can't stand to watch your forces get slaughtered when you didn't script them appropriately (or at all)? Is it because you need to be more in control of every aspect of the game?

Now I realize those questions are a bit insulting, they are supposed to be, they are the same questions I asked myself when I decided that I don't want Tac control in the game (and I've been playing Dom for less than a month, so don't lump me into any jaded old timer catagory please). Look at the questions seriously, look at your answers seriously, and hopefully, if you still want tac control in the game you'll have a better answer than any of those above.

[ October 24, 2003, 20:39: Message edited by: licker ]

[HJ]

First of all, my post wasn't intended against anyone in particular, and it wasn't based solely on comments made in this particular thread. I was expressing something of a general feeling I have gotten so far about the discussions, and those at the same time stem from the arguments, not from people. I also stated that I am addressing *some* of the arguments, not all of them, as I don't find all of them contributed to the feeling I was expressing.

I see that a lot of people got hooked on my little exaggeration with which I opened my post. By saying that it's an exaggeration, I admit I overstated things, but I also admit it was intentional. In literature this is called hyperbole, if I'm not mistaken, and is used to overstate things so as to emphasize them, and is not intended to be taken literally.

As far as the rest of my post is concerned, as I said, I have every intention to rest my case. I think I pretty much said what I wanted to say in that post and the one preceeding it, and to continue would be a pointless tug-of-war. What I actually want to say now is thanks for consideration. In addition, the majority of the Posts that followed my own have a very different tone than the one I described in it, and I'm glad to see that they have.

Cheers,

[ October 24, 2003, 20:59: Message edited by: HJ ]

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by HJ:
Ah, full control of the battles... What a great wish...

Something like a Total War system, where you can autoresolve battles or choose to fight them out yourself, would be ideal - and please everyone.

No it wouldnt. Or well, maybe it could but I dont see how even an option for controlling the battles can possibly NOT affect the game. If nothing else the tremendous amount of time and effort to put it in. Sorry but Id rather NOT see anything along this line. More options for scripting commanders, or using formations, would be great but not combat control.

Its a PBEM game. One that is done by uploading your turn file. And its one of the few excellent long-living games out there that do it. Im usually diplomatic and middle-ground on things but here Id have to say something that might kindof rude.... there are plenty of those games out there already, please dont turn this into one. Id rather see Dominion continue to be an excellent PBEM game than to see it become a mediocre RTS game.

[WraithLord]

I do prefer the battle control the way it's implemented now.
Sure, small improvements to this system are welcomed. however I really don't want tac combat.
This will shift the emphasis from strategically to tactical, allow AI exploits and will hurt/kill pbem.
DOM-I is a great game. I would like to see it improve in Depth (more units, spells, nation etc) and less Micromanagement.

[Zerger]

Originally posted by izaqyos:
I do prefer the battle control the way it's implemented now.
Sure, small improvements to this system are welcomed. however I really don't want tac combat.
This will shift the emphasis from strategically to tactical, allow AI exploits and will hurt/kill pbem.
DOM-I is a great game. I would like to see it improve in Depth (more units, spells, nation etc) and less Micromanagement.

Actually Dom 1. is far from great. It is average.
It is a very simple wargame. More units and spells wont make it more complex.
IMHO with a diplomacy system, or with that weapon / armor system the game would have more potential. It is just a simple wargame now, as it is.
1000 different units? Seriously who cares? You wont use 90% of the units at all.
I dont really understand IW. Instead of the +400 new units they should add diplomacy just for example. Or anything strategical addition would be lot better than +400 units. (Yes, including the wep-arm system.]
This is why I wont order the game. I will try the demo, and wait for some add-on packs. If there will be any..
Right now I dont feel that I must preorder this game.