Login
Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
RapKeymasterThere are already weather effects on the tactical maps – rain and fog with different intensities. It’s pouring down in the ‘Defend the Hill’ scenario of the combat demo, for example. There’s no thunderstorm yet but it’s on the todo list. Weather currently doesn’t have an actual gameplay effect (though nighttime does), but like Jago quoted, it’s something we want to do as well.
RapKeymasterFlies actually do spawn already as corpses lie on the ground for a long while (10 rounds? I don’t remember exactly), buzzing around and crawling all over them. That is, unless it’s raining.
I experimented with wind moving through trees around the same time I added the flies but it didn’t look very convincing. Maybe I’ll look into it again at some point.
Breath effects in the cold is a pretty cool idea, definitely going to try that. As we add more terrain types, we’ll also add some more fitting weather effects, like dust storms in the wastelands, snowing in the north, and such.
RapKeymasterRapKeymasterSo… I remember early into development you guys had penciled in four enemy factions, the undead, the green skins, the bandits, and the beasts. As of now, we’ve seen some of the first three in action, but the final one has been conspicuously absent.
It’s just by chance that the beast faction hasn’t been featured in any of the newer LPs – packs of werewolves actually roam the forests on the map, proving to be quite a challenge for the player in the beginning. As they terrorize villages, there’s also sometimes a contract offered to take them down.
That being said, it’s quite true that the beast faction is the one that has received the least amount of attention from us so far, for no particular reason other than being short on time. They only have a single entry in their roster, the werewolf. We even decided on a minor rework for the werewolf some time ago but didn’t yet find the time to implement it.
Anyway, I’ll try get to the point. The Witcher games focus a lot on monster hunter (especially the third entry judging from the trailers and previews). I think that the ‘beast faction’ – if it does eventually constitute a faction – would add a lot of variety to game.
I don’t know where these larger fantasy creatures fit into your vision or philosophy – I know the game is very medieval inspired – but with orcs, goblins, vampires, and the undead already on the menu. I very much doubt that trolls, wyverns and other such creatures would feel out of place.Absolutely! Having beasts roam the lands is something we wanted to do from the beginning. I agree that hunting them could feel quite Witcher-esque, but I think it fits very well into this low power fantasy world where, in the absence of a mutant monster hunter, you’d hire a whole group of grizzled mercenaries to take down those menacing beasts.
When developing any enemy we want both the particular type of enemy (say, a zombie) and the whole of the faction (say, the undead) to have a clear theme and a distinct feel when fighting against. The same would be true for any kind of beast in that they should all feel distinct. Having the odd large beast is something we definately want to do, and I agree that it would provide for an interesting change, but we don’t want to limit the beast faction to only having those towering hulks. Additionally, having enemies occupy more than one hex complicates things a lot on a technical level (pathfinding etc.). We may end up with a few seriously large creatures in one way or another, but most will be limited to one hex, which could still make their figurine like twice the size of a Battle Brother.
I like your idea about having heads as trophies. We added werewolf pelts a while ago and would add similar loot for other beasts as well.
Certain creatures could inhabit certain areas of the map. For example up in the north, the snowy vast landscape could be home to dire wolves and the fabled yeti. In the forests to south packs of wolves could roam, and be particularly active along the roads at night.
Yep. Werewolves already roam the forests of the land, leaving them only to chase prey or to cross into another forest. As we add more types of beasts they should get their own matching habitats and worldmap behavior as well, especially as we also add additional terrain types.
I suggested single four- or seven-hex enemies to the team before. But since you mention the “European” orientation of the game, what would a Yeti (Asian) be doing there? If anything, Norse mythology has Frost giants.
Personally I am against cramming everything into games, all possible manner of monsters and game/movie clichés, but instead prefer when they stick to some concept. Even if it’s a mythological concept, it better be thought out and consistent…The game has an even narrower orientation than a European one: A German / Scandinavian one. This is mostly reflected in the names of characters and places so far, but we want to also extend this to our bestiary to give the game a bit more ‘cultural identity’ instead of being just another random fantasy world. In this spirit we’re looking into both rebranding some of the enemies already in the game (like Zombies, because of their Voodoo / Carribbean connotations, even though the name has evolved beyond that by now, I suppose) as well as making sure that any future creatures fit in. That doesn’t mean that we’ll now work through a list of mythical scandinavian creatures and check them off, but we’ll think twice before adding creatures which very obviously stem from another cultural background. Finally, while having some popular fantasy creatures star in the game is nice (and gave us a good starting point in the past) we also want to add creations of our own to spice things up. The beast faction is a great place to add creatures that haven’t been featured in other games already but are unique to our world.
RapKeymasterWe’re at a stage now where we feel we have the minimum variety of what a worldmap should have in order to work. Different terrain is something we’ll definately add, but as with most things, time is the limiting factor. It’s always a trade-off; do we want more interesting contracts first? Do we add more enemy types? Do we invest into different worldmap terrain? The ocean is indeed something we’ve planned, as are unique sights peppered across the lands, like an active vulcano. Mountains can already be crossed, albeit very slowly and using more provisions than normal to keep your men healthy.
It’s obviously a bit early to talk about DLC, but indeed, just from a general perspective, a ‘Seafaring DLC’ would be what we’d like to add. A chunky expansion that adds a whole new dimension to gameplay. Another popular vague DLC concept is the ‘Oriental DLC’ which would add medieval-age oriental equipment, character backgrounds, story events, monsters and southern terrain-types like desert. Like you touched on, Jago, the introduction of just a new terrain type opens up a lot of possibilities for neutral beasts that would roam on that specific terrain, for example in the desert.
It’s pretty much the same with the assets for tactical combat. We’re going to add a lot more of them – for dungeons, caves, ruins, villages and other locations present on the worldmap. This is likely going to be one of the things we’ll tackle relatively soonish after the Early Access release, not least because we’re a bit sick of the green plains ourselves by now.
The image showing the shack above is not a screenshot but a mockup, i.e. something composed in photoshop to test things out. Adding the shack to the tactical combat maps in a satisfying manner proved difficult because of the hex-based nature of the maps and we didn’t find the time yet to really work out a good solution. Hopefully, if the game sells well enough, we’ll be able to start working fulltime on Battle Brothers and really make some progress :)
RapKeymasterRapKeymasterIt’s entries with a black-and-white sketch portraying the enemy, their stats (as far as they’re known; they’re uncovered the more you fight them) and a lore entry about their place in the world.
I rather like it and can see something like this working for Battle Brothers as well in the future.
RapKeymasterWe support this with various perks in the utility tree. For example, the aptly named ‘Captain’ perk increases the bravery of nearby characters based on the captain’s own bravery. The ‘Rally the Troops’ and ‘Inspiring Presence’ perks are two more ways to build characters into leaders that improve the performance of others and make sure they don’t turn tail and run in the heat of battle. We don’t restrict you to have a captain, though – you’re free to have none, one, or several captains and lieutenants depending on your playstyle.
Basing the worldmap figurine on a character the player selects isn’t a bad idea.
RapKeymasterRapKeymasterYes, the limit of 12 Battle Brothers is still in place. It’ll probably stay around that for battles but we want to remove or at least double the hard limit on how many men you can have with you on the worldmap once we have the time to do a proper UI for roster selection (think starting line up for a football/soccer team). Having more than 12 men available will become more important as we expand the injury system in the future, as this will allow you to rotate injured Battle Brothers who need a bit of time to recover from their wounds.
I actually had that same idea about being able to buy a round or two of beer for your Battle Brothers in a tavern for a chance to raise their moale in the short-term. Trying this too often would run the risk of them suffering from the negative effects of alcohol. Sadly I wasn’t able to convince anyone that this spectacular feature was worth investing time into for the Early Access release ;)
A renown system is something we’re considering to add later on as it would open up a bunch of new gameplay possibilities and solve some minor balancing problems for us.
RapKeymasterThanks. I like your suggestion and it’s an interesting idea also with the Battle Brothers able to teach each other. It would make the locations more unique as well, which is something they’re lacking in currently. However, it’s not something we’ll do for now. We may consider this again at a later point in development.
RapKeymasterRapKeymasterYes. The plan is to have characters gain additional traits based on what they experience. As a basic example, some guy who has slain a dozen orcs could get an ‘Orcslayer’ trait which gives him some bonus when fighting them. On the other hand, characters could also collect permanent injuries, like losing an eye, or psychological trauma if they’re the sole survivor of a slaughter. Those features are not in the game yet and will be added some time after the initial EA release.
RapKeymasterHey there!
There are no plans currently to add cavalry or artillery for the player. We have a faction in the works that does in fact have a cavalry unit, albeit not in the traditional sense, but it is unique for now. I can also see AoE ranged attacks coming for one or two enemy types, if that’s what you’re thinking of regarding artillery – but again, not in the traditional sense with cannons and such.
We absolutely want to have distinct locations, like caves, dungeons, bridges, camps and such, eventually be present on the tactical maps as well. However, it will take us some time to implement them and they’ll have to wait until more important things have made it into the game. Can’t give you an ETA here but it will be after the initial EA release.
We also want to have semi-random events. If you’ve played any Paradox games, you should have a pretty good idea on what to expect. Maybe your Battle Brother with the thief background is held by the authorities of the city you’re just in and you’ll have to make a decision on how to deal with it. Maybe you just met a group of pilgrims that share a bit of lore about the world’s pantheon. Those events will be where we’ll handle most of the interaction between individual Battle Brothers. This as well will be added after the initial EA release.
Thanks for your support! :)
-
AuthorPosts
