Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

FIELD OF GLORY: KINGDOMS!!

Galdred

Studio Draconis
Patron
Developer
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
4,318
Location
Middle Empire
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
I'm super hyped! I "just" hope for good siege mechanisms, and a better import/export than in FOG:E when it comes to units (ie, the mapping of your own units between FoG:E and Fog2 felt inconsistent).
 

Young_Hollow

Liturgist
Joined
Nov 1, 2017
Messages
1,104
Rather than releasing and re-releasing thousands of spreadsheet managers, why not release just one of these with real time battles like the total war series? Surely people are tired of buying these trial versions that break every time one of their thousand pieces of DLC are released?
 

Comte_II

Guest
i assume they eventually want to make a AA budget "total war" title. Budget title that costs $80 though
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,433
Field of Glory Empires was awesome, probably the best strategy game made in the year it was released.
I hope Kingdoms has a better/more optimized engine (that engine was dogshit) and more and smaller provinces.
I hope they remember that you know, feudalism is a thing. Give me TB CK-lite and I will be happy.
I also hope they support it way more than FOG:E. FOG:E feels like they abandoned a game with immense potential.

Depending on how good it is, I might actually... urgggh, its hard to say it... B-B-BUY IT... so I can play on PBEM.

(how come no one ever did FOG:E PBEMs on Codex?)

Wonder how big the map is going to be, imagine if they went nuts and expanded it China? Mongol Horde playthrough, baby!

Well you gotta remember that the devs on FOG games are nowhere near the level of Paradox. They can't run distinct teams for every game.
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,433
Btw, am I the only one who doesn't care for going after the other games for manual battles and likes the combat system of FOG:E? I feel like its a nice little combat system, you could easily work something like that into a Paradox game and it could work. Better and more transparent than Pdox's model for sure.

Like many other aspects of Paradox games they are heavily limited by being multiplayer focused and real time as far as the battle system.
 

man-erg

Novice
Joined
Dec 18, 2015
Messages
39
Btw, am I the only one who doesn't care for going after the other games for manual battles and likes the combat system of FOG:E? I feel like its a nice little combat system, you could easily work something like that into a Paradox game and it could work. Better and more transparent than Pdox's model for sure.

You're not the only one. I like the in game system, too. Funny, because much is made of the game being a wrapper for FOG2 battles, but in the end, I stopped using them completely. Totally agree, Paradox could use something like it. It is fast - only takes a minute or 2- and you get to see the impact of the different unit types and leaders. Also, I've always thought that historical battles were way more decisive than as portrayed in Paradox games. Might be months of trying to find each other, building the armies, but when the armies met, that would be the end of it for the loser. Would take years to rebuild. FOG system does a better job of portraying this. As well as leader skills and land type having a stronger influence such that a heavily outnumbered force can win, if they have a brilliant leader and choose the right terrain.
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,433
Btw, am I the only one who doesn't care for going after the other games for manual battles and likes the combat system of FOG:E? I feel like its a nice little combat system, you could easily work something like that into a Paradox game and it could work. Better and more transparent than Pdox's model for sure.

You're not the only one. I like the in game system, too. Funny, because much is made of the game being a wrapper for FOG2 battles, but in the end, I stopped using them completely. Totally agree, Paradox could use something like it. It is fast - only takes a minute or 2- and you get to see the impact of the different unit types and leaders. Also, I've always thought that historical battles were way more decisive than as portrayed in Paradox games. Might be months of trying to find each other, building the armies, but when the armies met, that would be the end of it for the loser. Would take years to rebuild. FOG system does a better job of portraying this. As well as leader skills and land type having a stronger influence such that a heavily outnumbered force can win, if they have a brilliant leader and choose the right terrain.
Paradox can't do battles that way. You can't reinforce a FoGE battle, because the game is turn based.
 

Harthwain

Magister
Joined
Dec 13, 2019
Messages
4,614
Are they still using the scheme in which you need to buy a separate game in order to play tactical battles?
 

Axioms

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Jul 11, 2019
Messages
1,433
Are they still using the scheme in which you need to buy a separate game in order to play tactical battles?
Yeah and it is 10x cheaper than a Paradox game overall so...
Can't actually argue against that. The only problem is the lack of seamless integration. Not sure if that's on the table with the new FoG tho (probably not).
It isn't seemless and it is a bit lol because of that but time wise you slip out and in in a few seconds.
 

Galdred

Studio Draconis
Patron
Developer
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
4,318
Location
Middle Empire
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Are they still using the scheme in which you need to buy a separate game in order to play tactical battles?
Yeah and it is 10x cheaper than a Paradox game overall so...
Can't actually argue against that. The only problem is the lack of seamless integration. Not sure if that's on the table with the new FoG tho (probably not).
That's true, but it was still faster than waiting for your turn in Total War: Mortal Empires.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom