Whatever interests me at the moment

Kudos to Brad. The tactical AI was much improved in version .86 of the beta. I felt that the AI did a much better job of challenging the player but there are some areas that I feel could make a difference on both sides of game. Some of these recomendations touch on unit design.

  • When tactical battle is between the AI custom factions and the player, tactical battle fields need to be the largest tactical field that is currently used. In many of the battles, the two sides start out too close together and this is a bigger disadvantage to the AI than it is to the player. Since the player usually waits to get first strike or casts haste and then gets an immediate 2nd turn and is at the AI players front line. The battle field needs to be designed so that a player unit is still out of range of the AI battle line even after haste has been used.
  • Trees absolutely NEED to block LOS attacks! The already are considered blocking tiles because you can't go through them, make them more useful by allowing damaged units or unprotected units to use them for cover or partial cover.
  • Spell Casting Times are not a fun gameplay mechanic - I have played two games under .86 and several more under prior betas and almost NEVER use a spell that has a tactical casting time. Tactical battles happen far too fast to waste several turns attempting a high mana spell that may not even be useful. Also, the AI never uses them either. I would scrap the whole casting time dynamic, and change it so that all spells are cast immediately. This is more fun and the AI then can choose from a greater selection of spells. As to counterspell, I would change this to some thing like spell disruption which when successfully cast on a target keeps them from from using a spell for 1 to 2 turns. 
  • Spells that create movement and LOS blocking are needed. Things like a fire, water, air or earth walls that can be cast to wall off movement and block LOS attacks would be a lot more fun in tactical battles, allowing the player (and the AI) to create a choke point in order to use melee units to advantage or something to hide a damaged unit behind in order to give it a chance to use a heal.
  • Do attacks from the flank or rear get additional bonus to accuracy or damage? If flank or rear attacks get a bonus, could we get a floating message for a moment that says 'Flank Attack' or 'Rear Attack'. If this mechanic is not in the game, is there a reason why not? Swarming a unit with multiple units is great way to take down a high HP unit and this a good reward for units that take that chance.

 

  • AI heroes never MOVE and then cast so they wasting a potential tactical advantage. While there is certainly a reason not to use movement, usually you want to move before you cast your spell. For example, in a tactical battle, my hero will maximize it's movement toward the enemy, cast HASTE at the end of the movement and usually moves again. This time right to the enemy line where I can attack first at a important or vulnerable unit.
  • AI never seems to use HASTE (I have seen it done rarely, but not too often) and they never use it on other units, only themselves. Movement is a big part of a tactical battle and this spell, if available should be used more often by the AI.
  • The AI almost never goes first (or 2nd or 3rd for that matter). I've had battles where every unit in my army has had at least one attack and sometimes two before the AI even gets a turn. Either this is a bug or the AI isn't maximizing using initiative.
  • The AI doesn't seem to maximize or even use unit traits very often. The AI should be maximizing the unit design and use every trait slot available, especially ones that concentrate on movement and initiative.
  • Maybe you don't want to use this mechanic for the player, but AI designed units should always use the ability to upgrade weapons at the very least. Late in the game, I'm coming at units with magic weapons and I'm still facing experienced AI units with clubs or basic spears. Unit weapon upgrades are very cheap and the AI should look to do that as often as it can.
  • I rarely see AI horsed units, but often see AI warg units. I wonder if this is a bug where the AI is not seeing that they have horse units available?
  • I never see AI units with a defense greater than 9, so either they are not focusing on getting better armor beyond leather or if they do get it, they are not designing units to use it. 

 

Just some of my thoughts, but it's my strong opinion that Spell Casting times need to go. Actually this play mechanic belongs in the Strategic area but it just doesn't work in tactical battles.


Comments
on Feb 26, 2012

Ironically ... if the two armies start out far apart this can also be a huge advantage to the player

(more time for spells and ranged attacks)

on Feb 26, 2012


Just some of my thoughts, but it's my strong opinion that Spell Casting times need to go. Actually this play mechanic belongs in the Strategic area but it just doesn't work in tactical battles.

I think spell-casting times are fine ... but it shouldn't be handled by what we perceive as initiative.

It should be handled by "magical initiative" and I think that this should be the intelligence stat.

(Maybe Monk's robes could then provide + Intelligence rather than +initiative.

on Feb 26, 2012

Tasunke,

 

In my experience, using a Fireball (a 3 turn casting time) is almost useless because 3 turns later, the enemy is not usually grouped together to make it cost effective and either you or the enemy is almost dead.

Besides, the AI never uses spells that have a casting time, at least I have not seen it in my two .86 games. So this penalizes the AI more than it does the player.

JMO. 

 

on Feb 26, 2012

 

I have the same issue with cast time in spell casting.  For an area of affect spell I would much rather do a spell like Shockwave (everyone around me and instant).  The turns spent preparing that spell I would much rather spend getting into the mix and could cause just as much damage with a combination of melee and single unit spells.

As for your ideas on flank, units in tactical battles don't really have a "direction" set though their animation shows one.  That direction changes as they respond to incoming attacks so what a "rear" attack would be does not seem like something that could be defined with the current engine.  Swarmed is something that could be defined.  I am not sure how I feel about that though.  It would make you hesitate before making a lone hero charge into a full stack of low level mobs, but with the current army limits and zones of control for movement in tactical battles I think its usefulness would be limited and I do not think it would add much to the battles.  In most cases units that partially swarm a unit are partially swarmed themselves or one side only has a single unit left.

on Feb 26, 2012

You just have to level a certain way to use casting times well. Impulsive+special high initiative dagger+every initiative trait+Evoker III+ Fireshard=Fireball before enemy archers can move. That is a game winning button in my experience. 

on Feb 26, 2012

I think the casting times are good how they are now, I would be a big fan  of trees and other obstacles blocking line of sight skills

on Feb 26, 2012

I think casting times are a good way to temper a fireball. A "Mage" Champion with a few levels under her belt melts mobs with fireball. If you could drop one every turn, or even sooner, if you had a lot of initiative it would be even more murderous than it already is.

on Feb 26, 2012

I don't think its bad that a high level caster can melt mobs with AOE ... but I think we should consider what said caster is levelling in.

Is it spell power? Intelligence? Evokation? No, not necessarily.

It is initiative. The highest initiative caster usually does the most damage.

 

And its not even all that hard to get to either. Just select impulsive in Sovereign creation, wear a dagger, and get a couple +initiative traits if thats not enough.

Personally I think Intelligence should be linked to casting times ... not 'physical' initiative.

on Feb 26, 2012

dont forget mana though last game i played i was going good but in the end i lost for lack of mana

 

i had a full champion army but mostly magic based and no real tank so i had to summon often mid game until i researched the good army and by then i was sadly oom

 

also 2 ai both focused on me and destroyed all my shard so in the end initiative made my champions party very strong  but also not very enduring

on Feb 26, 2012

Tasunke
I don't think its bad that a high level caster can melt mobs with AOE ... but I think we should consider what said caster is levelling in.

Is it spell power? Intelligence? Evokation? No, not necessarily.

It is initiative. The highest initiative caster usually does the most damage.

 

And its not even all that hard to get to either. Just select impulsive in Sovereign creation, wear a dagger, and get a couple +initiative traits if thats not enough.

Personally I think Intelligence should be linked to casting times ... not 'physical' initiative.

This. All so true.

on Feb 26, 2012

I think the reason some spells were given higher casting times was to allow counters. But like you said, by the time you actually get to cast, the benefit/effect is lost.

As another idea/mechanic, they could consider allowing spells to be distributed when the cast is attacked. Seems like a reasonable mechanic to throw in there even independent of the casting time. That way some lower level/faster spells could be more valuable if you have to be concerned about not being able to cast a spell.

on Feb 26, 2012

Maybe counter spells should be specific to the spell that they counter ... and they could be enchantments.

So you could have an anti-blizzard and anti-fireball counter-spell enchantments on one Champion ... for the upkeep cost of 2 mana per turn.

What it does is when the enemy casts fireball, it cancels it.

Therefore you also lose the enchantment.

So he casts Fireball, it cancels, then if you want you can cast "Fireball counter" AGAIN so that you re-buff yourself with the appropriate counter if he wants to use the spell again.

 

With this system, casting times are irrevelant (except with a slow casting time for Fireball there is no reason the enemy would cast fireball again)