Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
For a start, not so many units have stunning abilities anymore. Domination skills have also been limited a lot.
As for mass summons - recently we have added a chance of breaking free to every summon (10% per level). I hope it should nerf it.
also, my personal preference is smaller number of units. so more "warband" rather than "army" -
something like frostgrave's 10 units per side works really well imo... but that might not fit with what you guys are going for.
and the more mechanics of the tabletop games you can incorporate imo, the better... so things like "pile on" bonuses, activation mechanics where maybe you can't actually move every unit every round, routing and death if unable to route, etc... for me, the key to this genre is interesting rules that have a very particular take on modeling battle.
and you guys seem to have a running description of what's happening in the text display in the upper left and i know a lot of games do that but another fun thing about these kinds of tactics games is to see the result of the "roll"... so in tabletop games, everyone basically yells out what just happened but it would add to the experience of the game if the results of the roll were displayed in text (colored, cool font, etc) on the battlefield. so things like "Drax casts fireball!", "stunned!", "critical hit!"... these effects are a critical part of the tactics and it's a shame that it's buried in text in the upper left.
i'd personally love to see the rolls as well but i understand if you guys are not inclined to go that way.
whether it's with the AoF series of games or you guys come out with another series, i really do hope you guys do something that's even more closer to what the tabletop miniatures games do, little less rpg, little more skirmish campaign (again, i think in recent times frostgrave is a great example and does a fantastic job), simple stat lines for characters with few attributes with limited upgrading for units and just buy better units. i'd rather really understand a few traits and character types instead of have a vague grasp of a thousand.
anyway, this is just what i'm looking for. it may not align with what you guys are trying to do so ignore and dismiss as necessary.
best of luck!
We will definitely try to incorporate more table-top mechanics :-)
I am just not convinced towards stripping RPG elements.
Answer in points below:
Let me know what you think,
Les
BTW, have you tried Battle Lore: Command?
actually but the way that you've implemented it with fewer hero units and more base units - that's a really great compromise. that's what i loved about frostgrave - the only real configurability lies with the wizard and his apprentice. all the other guys are just bought with gold and are more or less generic (though you can do limited leveling up and giving them better weapons). so enough depth of choice to be interesting but not so deep that you'll never understand everything.
i have tried battlelore and i really disliked the digital version. they made it too video gamey and took away the charm of the board game. it's part of the COMMAND AND COLORS line of strategy games and that's a really great series but i think it really does depend on having visible cards and dice. they kinda made those elements hidden and that really took away from gameplay for me.
(same problem with mordheim which is pretty faithful in its adaptation of the minis game but they had to adopt a third person tomb raider like camera and refused to give us an overhead view where you can actually play [you get a map that you can see but can't make decisions on]. and again, all the boardgame elements like dice rolls are hidden and effects like getting stunned are shown [badly] with animation rather than having prominent onscreen text just tell me what happened)
also, the animated units really bugged me. the animations were bog standard and imo, it would have been much better to have really well textured, hires models that were literally game pieces that moved around or rotated - this is my same criticism of PARADOX strategy games like crusader kings 2. those animations are TERRIBLE... i'd much prefer if they showed pewter figurines that were beautiful and completely static.
in this regard, your games work much better for me because it's top down and the animations are not all over the place. makes it feel much more like a miniatures game.
thanks for the tip about setting up my own skirmishes. that probably will fill the bill for what i'm looking for.
thanks again for being so open to feedback and feature requests. i'm very much looking forward to age of fear 3!
jin
Agree on that 110%!!
Eador series were having a big influence on Age of Fear series.
Some kind of bestiary or encyclopedia, right?
That would make sense, especially that we want to move toward Open World, with an option to change race along the way. Then some kind of bestiary will definitely be required...
Let me think of that. You are definitely right that with 6 races and two more are coming in AOF4, we need some quick summary what to expect from race.
Finish all optional missions and you will find it :-D
As for Gilrock - there is a secret upgrade too!
Steal Radiating Stone in tunnels vs Undead battle, equip it to Gilrock and open Skills menu. It also unlocks 2nd ending
I'm assuming this is a setting or something? Surely the game doesn't always have you winning? What fun would that be? :)