Mike

[Mike]

It is far from useless, it’s just not as vital as some others, nor does it provide a linear benefit akin to melee or ranged skill – it really depends on the equipment and role of a character. While lightly-armored characters can consistently go first with some investment frontliners with heavy gear will benefit less, and – more importantly – they have higher priorities.

blackteapie wrote:

the initiative figure have a very little chance to change the tide of battle

Me and my archers/crossbowmen respectfully disagree. Being able to quickly snipe key targets (enemy crossbowmen, necromancers, shamans) before they can act can dictate the flow from turn one. As can breaking enemy’s morale even before they reach melee. Are they already in melee? Even if you can’t kill them outright it’s sure nice to stun or injure a heavy-hitter before he gets a swing at your bros.
Speaking of morale, if some of your brothers get routed you better hope that your captain can act first and rally them before they get themselves chopped.

I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point.

If you’d like a good turn-based tactical combat where you can overwhelm your enemies with speed matrix-style I recommend Fallout 1 & 2, it’s quite easy to pull there.

[Mike]

PsenBattle wrote:

I think we can get away with adding the horns

Hello Paul,

I think that the issue with horns is that they suddenly appear “out of nowhere”, as if the creature suddenly transformed completely instead of gradually growing.
In the freshly added “old ghoul” set even the smallest one has some minuscule “spikes” on its head, so the next phases look more likely.

Maybe think about adding something similar to the other “starting size”? This way there would be no confusion about where the horns came from.

Regardless of that small issue, most impressive work. Keep at it :)
Cheers!

[Mike]

I very much enjoy the update, mostly the banishment of numerous ridiculously OP shenanigans (“machinegun-bows”, I’m looking at you).
“Freeing” the perks from trees was a great decision, I love the newly-acquired flexibility in tailoring each brother to his role.
While I’m all for the new injury system I think it needs some deeper development – right now it feels quite random and easy (new “Hold out”) to circumvent on the part of company.
“Special” equipment is sadly random too, with numerous examples given for how it can flop in a hilariously spectacular way.
That beeing said, going in good direction!

EDIT:

RusBear wrote:

i think chance of hitting by bow and crossbow in the back of team- brother should be at least lower than the enemy…

Why so? If we assume the melee is dynamic, it’s quite impossible to predict where each combatant will be when the shot lands. If we assume the static formation is kept, your men are actually shielding the enemy from the archer standing behind their backs. Either manouver your men to give them a clear line of sight or aim at people further back. Or switch to melee weapons.
There’s a good reason why aside from hollywood stunts nobody in their right mind tries to shoot into hand-to-hand involving their own, even with modern firearms which are infinitely more acuurate than a bow or x-bow.

Anonymous wrote:

– While you have a “support” item on your guy (such as bandage or antidote) […] I think it could be nice if this kind of ability would always come at last

+1
Speaking of support items, I think there should be at least 2 slots for them. We can lug up to 4 halberds on our back – and equip them instantly, no less – but cannot keep both a bandage and antidote vial on our belt? Plain silly… Make it require a perk if you have to (would make sense to include it into “bags and belts” IMO) but add more slots.

[Mike]

I think that’d be too much to put in a single perk – but I do like the idea of adding a separate perk, say “Offensive shield”, upping the potential of shield bash, maybe giving it a chance to either stun of stagger the enemy.

I think this topic could be a nice source of inspiration for further suggestions: http://historum.com/ancient-history/73949-using-shield-offensive-attack.html

[Mike]

+1

Makes perfect sense that brothers would be happier with high-quality food and booze, and some of them – like the adventurous noble – would flat-out refuse to eat stuff like unidentifiable meat scavenged from dead orks.

I would very much like to see that idea incorporated in a wider camping and company-management expansion, where you could meddle with the size of rations, allowance of alcohol, etc. I’m a little concerned though that some players might find such level of micro-management unwelcome…

[Mike]

-1

I was supporter of more levels back when perks were divided into trees as we were pretty much forced to pick at least some that we didn’t want. With the latest update the system is very flexible and there is just enough points to make various specialists without going into OP territory.

Wargasm wrote:

I want at least 20 perks or ideally unlimited perks […] all upgrades should at least be +3 […] at least 4 attributes each time.

Would you also like an “I win button” added? Seems like a logical conclusion ;]
On a more serious note a lot of the actual game is making decision on how to spend limited resources, perks and attributes included. Removing those limits would undermine all the efforts at making a challenging and interesting game. If you would simply like to test your ideas I think such unlimited development of characters would belong to some kind of a separate “sanbox” or “custom scenario” mode.

[Mike]

Anchar wrote:

add “charge” ability to them, and after sucessfully charge, enemy should fall (or simply stunned)

Sky wrote:

I’d like to have the ability to point my dog towards specific targets

+1

Honestly I like most of the ideas in this thread but those 2 things seem like the easiest to implement and would make the dogs very valuable assets regardless of the opponent faced.

BUT!

The biggest problem I’m having with dogs right now is that they are sadly disposable (which would also undermine adding stuff like exp etc. to them).
I propose the houndmaster background having an additional trait: “Has a chance to save company dogs felled in battle from death” – a slain dog would have a chance, say 66%, to appear back in the company stash as “Wounded dog”, needing a couple of days to recover and be usable in battle again.

P.S. I also strongly agree with dogs needing food. Adds immersion.

[Mike]

+1

IMO options to customize the experience to one’s liking are always welcome in single-player games.

[Mike]

I very much like the idea of adding other races in future mods/expansions, and the two you proposed seem to blend in nicely with the feel of the game (kudos for the images).

That being said have you given considration to how they would be different tactic-wise? Would they utilize some new tricks and require a different approach to beat, just like goblins behave different than orcs?
From the brief (meant mostly from flavour, I assume) description I don’t see how the Burrow-Men are more than a reskin of bandits, and Fay Piper & Ent combo sounds like it would require exact same tactic as necromancer, i.e. “madly dash to slice/snipe him NOW before touching anything else” (at least that’s how I deal with them ;]).

I do find the Sprite interesting, seeing as big swarms of weak opponents would encourage brothers to use either sweeping AOEs or quick daggers (or even dogs). It would be interesting if other proposed mobs had their own quirks to both make them interesting and justify their addition to the game.

Keep up the good work! :)

[Author]

Posts