Age of Wonders 3

[adddeed]

It's the same in AoW1, units do not lose effectiveness.

 

[Eyeball]

Don't really see the point in getting this pussysore about it NOW, then. By the 3rd installment, you should pretty much expect such a basic mechanism to stay in place.

 

[adddeed]

People are complaining because they went from a single unit representation to a squad. And members of these squads die off as the health decreases, and one would assume that less units in the squad means less damage, when in fact the whole squad is really just a single unit.

 

[Martius]

Don't really see the point in getting this pussysore about it NOW, then. By the 3rd installment, you should pretty much expect such a basic mechanism to stay in place.

I think people would just prefer if it was same as in AoW2. For me its bit strange to change thing like that in every installment.

 

[Angthoron]

Yeah, the stacks not losing strength had me confused until the first time my unit got hit by enemy unit, then I was like "Oh, so they don't lose strength, okay". How many times can one get confused by it once it happened once already?

 

[Snozgobler]

Yeah, the stacks not losing strength had me confused until the first time my unit got hit by enemy unit, then I was like "Oh, so they don't lose strength, okay". How many times can one get confused by it once it happened once already?

I don't think it's hard to identify how it works once you get hit/hit an enemy, but the first few fights I wasn't paying the closest attention and based on my assumption on how the system worked I specifically aimed at maximising damage to reduce enemy squad numbers rather than finishing off individual units.

Needless to say I became much more effective, and fights became much easier, when I started playing "properly" and killing of units one at a time instead of spreading damage between units.

 

[octavius]

So, has the the concept of height advantage for missile attacks been ditched? Looked like it on Total Biscuit's review. If so, that is disturbing.

 

[whatevername]

The game doesnt demand you played perfectly. I finished most of KB games at hardest difficulty with huge losses I didnt give shit about and a lot of gold to spare. Only assburgers feel the need to avoid losses at all. Me I even liked losing units because I had to use other types available locally for a breath of fresh air in my army.

And WHO the fuck would you blame for not having enough speed? Of course its your damn fault. Or was that a rhetoric question.

This should explain it to you better than I would http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_handicap

 

[Misconnected]

Specifically, he loves the fact that even though units visually go down in numbers, they are 100% effective until they die.

Seems he doesn't know what anisotropic filtering is :D

 

[ricolikesrice]

i m still really liking the game but is has big balance problems and how those will be fixed will ultimativly determine whether game is on the way to become a new classic (after some patching and one or two solid expansions) or not.

its all over the AOW3 forums and the devs aknowledged it as an issue already: you can get tier 4 (and tier3) units way too fast and they are spammable .... combine this with limited army slots and really powerful stats and there just is no reason to field anything else.

it has wide-reaching consequences for the entire singleplayer game:

-of course unit diversity (of which there is actually a lot in tier 1-3) looks crap when most of it is obsolete a few turns after you researched it - especially racial diversity which is all spread over tier 1/2 is completely eliminated save for the one special racial tier 3 unit.
-exploration just aint fun if every monster den is free loot and xp ( because when you meet your first tier 4 monster you already have 2 or more of your own ... )

Overpowered units rendering the rest of the units obsolete certainly isnt anything new to the genre. especially warlock, legendary heroes but also MoM and AOW2 also have a late game where its (unfortunately) more or less pointless to field early game units.
in AOW3 however its stand out much more because you get them so early (and therefore spend even less time with early game units)

at the end of the day however its an issue that hopefully gets fixed via patching. personally i think tier 4 monsters stats should not be nerfed but either the economy needs a drastic overhaul ( i m swimming in mana to summon eldritch horrors with ...) or those units need some hard limits of how many of them you can field at once. and most importantly it should take a while to get access to tier 3 and 4 units. in the second map of the commonwealth campaign i think i was summoning eldritch horrors before i had my second city ....if AOW3 fixes the problem by not only making tier3/4 later appear but also finds a way to still keep tier 1/2 releveant late game (something the competition fails at....) i ll be in heaven.

anyway apart from the balance issues i think its a great game but can ofcourse understand how such issues make it hard to appreciate right now. graphics are mostly gorgeous - dont get the 3D hate. i was in the boat when it was infinity engine versus NWN but nowadays i m glad to get good looking games with 3d engines. if anything AOW3 needs more animations - i d love stuff like eldrich horrors grabbing enemies with their tentacles etc. - yes its useless for gameplay purposes but unless gameplay has to suffer (which i dont think it has to) i m quite fond of good eyecandy.

 

[Stefan Vujovic]

What i REALLY hate about AOW3 is the way cities are nothing more then Units/Mana factory and that everything takes about 2 turns to complete, and even then you can just rush the production. That being said i almost NEVER build lower level tier units since there is no point when you can rush facility production to highest tier units in about 10 turns, or even less. The tactical layer is NON existent. Only saving grace is decent battle system, but even then when with minimal unit diversity and brain dead AI who waits till i slaughter every melee unit inside his fortress refusing to leave it cause of that one tier1 archer making 1dmg per round. Questing system is at least nice, NOT, since all its built around is independent cities asking to kill pack of random units so they can join your empire, yey, one more mana factory. I really get the feel AOW3 is built for smaller maps, where you can actually pretend there is some tactical layer in this game, but even campaign forces you into this HUGE maps with filthy cheating AI that if you don't blitzkrieg you are DEAD cause he gonna unit spam you till you are DEAD. Let's not talk that you have to have every fucking city with at least 2 of your highest tier unit, cause that one flying AI summoned unit gonna take over all of your towns, don't even bother with defending outposts/forts. I almost immediately regreted my decision going the "GOOD" path, since its much easier just fucking razing every city then bothering getting it to highest tier, cause the chance is by the time you even try its going to be taken by AI.

Presentation is nice, i dig the art style, bug it works like shit, even on high end pc, and yeah I like hero leveling system till i remember how simplistic unit/hero system actually is. All being said how is this any improvement over 23y (dear god has it been that much) old MOM, yeah i know its series in its own but its shit, and i don't get all the hype it gets. Funny thing is how AOW3 made me appreciate Fallen Enchantress more, at least its having some complexity to its bones.

 

[cvv]

^You mean strategic layer?

Gotta agree with the gist of it, can't get into the game at all. It really seems too shallow, dull and simplistic even compared to FE. And unlike most ppl here I don't dig the combat either. I don't know why, it's not downright bad but it seems slow, grindy and I'd much prefer alternating moves with some kind of initiative system.

Can't say too much about the AI though, not enough playtime. It's weird because some people praise it, some completely trash it.

 

[ricolikesrice]

^You mean strategic layer?

Gotta agree with the gist of it, can't get into the game at all. It really seems too shallow, dull and simplistic even compared to FE. And unlike most ppl here I don't dig the combat either. I don't know why, it's not downright bad but it seems slow, grindy and I'd much prefer alternating moves with some kind of initiative system.

Can't say too much about the AI though, not enough playtime. It's weird because some people praise it, some completely trash it.

you seem like a reasonable guy unlike the complete moron above you so my advice is to try the game again in a few weeks and then it might click.

i remember i didnt get what the fuzz was about in my first few hours with fall from heaven and almost stopped playing .... then it "clicked" and i fell in love. might be similar with you and AOW3 . i played lots of FE:legendary heroes and while the initiative system looks good on paper (and so do many other things about this game) its all really meh in the end. i never get the hate FE:LH got here on the Codex while warlock got a free pass but neither game is in the same league as i think AOW3 will be after the first patches (Tier 4 Problem hopefully solved). for that one huge Balance flaw AOW3 has , FE:LH and Warlock have at least 3 comparable and those never got fixed in years..... whereas Triumph already acknowledged the Tier 4 fuckup and have a beta patch out that tries dealing with it 4 days after release.

 

[adddeed]

Nah, game is great fun. But then again i spend my time playing not nitpicking.

 

[Galdred]

^You mean strategic layer?

Gotta agree with the gist of it, can't get into the game at all. It really seems too shallow, dull and simplistic even compared to FE. And unlike most ppl here I don't dig the combat either. I don't know why, it's not downright bad but it seems slow, grindy and I'd much prefer alternating moves with some kind of initiative system.

Can't say too much about the AI though, not enough playtime. It's weird because some people praise it, some completely trash it.

The initiative system does not work too well in battles with lots of guy.In FE, it was a mess because you could not advance in formation (even in Natuk and its 8 character party, I hated not being able to move my guys in formation), but then with heroes roflstomping parties, it was not a big issue (I have not played the latest iteration much, though).

 

[ricolikesrice]

regarding the AI i m pretty happy btw: it s far from perfect but its often a (good) pain in the ass using proper spells at the right time in ways i ve never seen in Warlock/FE:LH. finally charmed that Tier 3 cavalry ? Mr. Warlock wouldnt do crap about it and Mr.Legendary Hero would nuke your unit with the highest hp for pitiful dmg instead of doing something usefull .... Mr. AoW3 uses .... dispel. and that no-longer charmed Tier 3 cav charges my hero and kills it =/

... and thats one of many examples where i was quite suprised how capable it CAN be. of course there s also some pretty dumb moments but hey imho its miles above the competition though that aint hard.

there s one thing i d say warlock & FE:LH do better: its exploring the map and fighting Monsters. Because in AOW3 you currently get to tier3/4 Units so quick the Monsters simply pose no challenge - and the loot i ve seen is pretty boring as well.

so playing "run around killing stuff and gaining new loot & xp" in AOW3 is shit whereas its fun in FE:LH/warlock - infact i enjoyed those game a lot after i no longer thought of them as stategy games. AOW3 meanwhile more than makes up by giving me tons of battles against a somewhat capable AI - even when i have the upper Hand i m still constantly losing units (including tier4). such a thing is unthinkable in FE:LH / warlocks (against other factions at least , not counting stuff like dremer, i.e. superunits playing by different rules).

 

[Stefan Vujovic]

^You mean strategic layer?

Gotta agree with the gist of it, can't get into the game at all. It really seems too shallow, dull and simplistic even compared to FE. And unlike most ppl here I don't dig the combat either. I don't know why, it's not downright bad but it seems slow, grindy and I'd much prefer alternating moves with some kind of initiative system.

Can't say too much about the AI though, not enough playtime. It's weird because some people praise it, some completely trash it.

Yeah, strategic ^_^ . How hard is it to make a proper MOM clone with some additions. FE after 2 expansions is semi decent but god damn would i fire that art director of theirs, so uninspiring races (mostly different type of humans), character models, creatures...

The shame shit is happening with space 4X games. Not a single one nailed it right and they had perfect formula for almost 20 years with Moo2.

Worlds of Magic seems promising, but it's gonna take a while till its finished.

Any other Fantasy 4x game in the making that looks promising?

 

[Suicidal]

What I would really love to see in this game at some point in the future are units you can get access to through race-class combinations. It's pretty disappointing that currently whichever race you pick, your leader type will give you the same units every time. I think it would be pretty cool that if you were a goblin dreadnought, for example, you would get some kind of catapult that would launch explosive-strapped goblins at the enemy, or an infantry unit which throws gas grenades, while being a dwarf dreadnought would grant you some sort of drill tank.

Also I think that should some races should be restricted from picking certain leader types. I just can't imagine an elven or orc dreadnought, since the dreadnought is an anti-nature, technology and progress embracing leader, while elves love forests and orcs are stoopid and would rather hit their opponents with large sticks.

 

[InspectorRumpole]

I feel about the same way as cvv, i just really can't get into it. I'll keep playing it some more though, but as it is now i had a lot more fun with Eador:Genesis.

 

[cvv]

i fire that art director of theirs, so uninspiring races (mostly different type of humans), character models, creatures...

The shame shit is happening with space 4X games. Not a single one nailed it right and they had perfect formula for almost 20 years with Moo2.

I think you hit the nail on the head here - I feel the chief problem with the current 4X games is not the mechanics, it's the art and creativity. Most of them are mechanically fine, they're just a bit dull, flavourless and not very exciting. It's almost as if they were meticulously assembled by engineers instead of designed by artists.

And you're absolutely right with Moo2, that's a perfect combination of art and mechanics. But then we got games like GalCiv or Endless Space which are not exactly bad but look and play like a spreadsheet strategy (I'm exaggerating here but you got my point). I've been harping for years about this tendency of 4X developers to scorn art, graphic, animation, lore, races and all that "fluff". Unfortunately even many players don't think these things are important for a quality strategy game but they absolutely are.

I don't think AoW3 is a typical example of this, for instance the overland map looks positively beautiful in my eyes, but I just find it lackng in creativity. It almost comes over as a game designed by a committee or a focus group - nothing's really offensive or bad but nothing's really outstanding either. Warlock in comparison is bursting with so much flair and charm and sheer fun that it's ultimately a better game for me personally, even though mechanically and AI-wise is more flawed that AoW3.

 

[J_C]

Have you guys played hot seat? I tried to set up one, but I don't know how can I do that. The manual says that I just have to host a local multiplayer, where I set classic turns, and after that I should be able to set up several human players. But I can only set up AI opponents. What do I miss?

 

[Groof]

Have you guys played hot seat? I tried to set up one, but I don't know how can I do that. The manual says that I just have to host a local multiplayer, where I set classic turns, and after that I should be able to set up several human players. But I can only set up AI opponents. What do I miss?

Seems to work for me. From the main menu, pick New Scenario or New Random Map (not Online Multiplayer). When you get to Map Setup, set it to Classic Turns, and you should be able to set as many leaders to Human as you'd like (like, click where it says AI Knight, and pick Human instead)...

 

[J_C]

Got it. I started a multiplayer game, instead of a singleplayer, that's why I couldn't do it.

 

[Blaine]

So, is this game any good? I'm looking for a curt consensus here, not thirty-five pages of squabbling.

More specifically, is it good enough that I wouldn't rather just replay a classic or predecessor instead?

 

[Emily]

For me, it is improved version of Shadow magic, but it needs more work/balance for it to shine. And devs are already working on the balancing issues