Is the combat as unsatisfying as the game play videos make it look?

[Darth Teddy Bear]

Hi all,

At the City building level Fallen Enchantress: Legendary Heroes looks good in the game play videos I have seen.

The combat however looks downright depressing and without much in the way tactics and options.

After seeing the combat in Age of Wonders III I find myself even closer to taking FE: LH off my wish list. Sadly it looks to me that the AoW III City building is as depressing as FE : LH combat.

Combat always underpins the 4x game and yet so often the combat is a joke.

Are there any redeeming qualities to FE : LH combat?

As a side note, why is it that if they do one well they always do the other poorly?


Cheers,

Darth Teddy Bear

[Ronnie]

Hey Darth It reminds me of people some have good qualities and bad that is life. LH has deep play and I think unlimited levels.... Fancy combat with no deep play is like a shiny object with no life. I think LH does enough right to keep folks coming back for more but with time I believe they are dedicated to improving this game likely in future sequel then a addon to the game.

[Ronnie]

Personally I find myself playing LH more then Aow3 I never got in that game for long it gets old fast. For LH the random world events and level system makes for a great game of course with time I'm sure they could make it better. If they turned this game into the players having a option for real time combat like a mini spell force or warlords battle cry it would make this game far better. Give people the option for real time combat & turn based. Look at Warcraft 3 and Age of Empires they did not have deep play but it was a good game .... I have never seen a deep game with real time strategy maybe someday! It would be a lot of work but it would be a pioneer in gaming.

[Ronnie]

The only game that gave somewhat deep play + real time combat was Warlords battlecry 3 i my eyes that game was top notch since u could take your hero to the next battle.

[karmavirus]

I enjoy how each weapon your unit or championc arries has its own benefits. Axes let you do a three tile sweep and allow a reroll if you miss the first shot. Swords allow use of shields and a return strike when you get attacked. Spears pierce through armor better and you can attack the guy in front of you and the one behind him at once. And clubs have the chance of knocking your opponent down for a round. You mix and match your units for the best survivability and can create custom units as you go along. The graphics may not be as flashy, but I enjoy FE way more than AOW3.

[ Darth Chocula ☠]

game sucks

[Ronnie]

AoW3 is just a shiny game no real depth to the game LH has depth and many random events this game was better designed then AoW3.... LH all the way!

[Sarger]

Played both, prefer FE. FE have deeper combat system for me, more in squad combining than in battle itself. Also all these researches that give you more and more options for combining, unit leveling up after battles, squads contained from heroes and monsters like in some kind of RPG... Lot of nice things, really. An loot, oh my..

[Mark]

The OP sounds so depressing that I don't think any game could make him happy! :)

[Cleril]

AoW3 is not a 4x game.

FE:LH is.

Apples and oranges.

[Ronnie]

I don't think I ever got excited about hunting mobs except for This game and Asherons call hunting Tuskers - The Lord Warrior was a old legend

[Jonesy]

LH is a blessing among a dry dessert of 4x failures! Not have I had this much fun since Master of Magic, and Civ 5.

[Ronnie]

I agree, kinda disturbs me as I only beat the game one time out of a year playing it lol a assassin archer the faction was called The Silent Ones found a brutal bow and did massive damage to armored units is insanely powerful. Trying my challenge with other leader types giving the defender a go as gilden faction is called the Ironbeard Warriors pretty cool name :)

[Lance]

The OP has a valid point.

The city building is good, the unit designer is excellent. But combat is pretty mediocre. It's mostly about how generic the combat maps are combined with the unlimited range of archers/mages.

You set out to defend your high level fortress. But instead of sitting up on your walls and pounding the enemy, you just open the gate and let them walk into the town square.. where you will face them on the exact same map ( with purely cosmetic reskinning of obstacles ) you'd see if you fought them some random forest. Which is the same map you'd face them on if you fought them in a dungon. Which is the same map you'd fact them in if you fought them in a swamp. The only differences are purely cosmetic.

The hard part is that the foundation for a very good combat system is there, it just gets undermined by a couple poor design decisions.

Still a pretty enjoyable game, even if it is ridiculously easy.

[Temper]

Originally posted by Lance:

The OP has a valid point.

The city building is good, the unit designer is excellent. But combat is pretty mediocre. It's mostly about how generic the combat maps are combined with the unlimited range of archers/mages.

You set out to defend your high level fortress. But instead of sitting up on your walls and pounding the enemy, you just open the gate and let them walk into the town square.. where you will face them on the exact same map ( with purely cosmetic reskinning of obstacles ) you'd see if you fought them some random forest. Which is the same map you'd face them on if you fought them in a dungon. Which is the same map you'd fact them in if you fought them in a swamp. The only differences are purely cosmetic.

The hard part is that the foundation for a very good combat system is there, it just gets undermined by a couple poor design decisions.

Still a pretty enjoyable game, even if it is ridiculously easy.

Pretty much agree.

I'm a fan of larger combats and one stack battles was kinda disapointing.

Still,it's a good game with the amount of strategic depth and faction/unit/building customization on offer .... just that one stack combat ... grr

=)

[Xerberus86]

Originally posted by ronniebranch:

AoW3 is just a shiny game no real depth to the game LH has depth and many random events this game was better designed then AoW3.... LH all the way!

sorry but that is just pure textbook fanboy'ism! in the design of AoW3 is nothing wrong, the developers re-introduced the classic age of wonders series with some streamlined mechanics and shiny graphics in our todays world. exactly that what the fans (and their sponsor, the minecraft guy) were hoping for.

FE:LH is a great game with still some very rough edges. combat is quite weak compared to AoW3. faction diversity and the meaning of different units is weak compared to AoW3. graphics are also quite weak but that is a personal preference. the spells or magic system is weak compared to AoW3. could go on.