• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I know it's going to be added, but I might have to wait for the victory conditions before I pick up this game. I really liked the demo, but my problem is just that I really enjoy being able to explore and not feel rushed. I always pick the huge world with epic timescale on the hardest difficulty. So, in the case of this game, I wouldn't want to feel as though I have to worry about the AI achieving one of the conditions like casting unity or summoning the avatar unless there is some way to stop it from happening. Does counterspell work on unity? Can you stop the AI from summoning the avatar? I'm much less worried about the holy sites and conquest, since I'd probably be losing anyways if the AI managed to achieve one of those. If the AI randomly won simply because I was taking my time and enjoying the game, it would pretty much ruin it for me. I would also greatly like the option to keep playing after winning.

I doubt you will feel rushed on the largest maps, with the hardest difficulty and the most factions. But I dont know what you're expecting in terms of turns. 250+/game. Because any the victory cond. on the largest of the settings arent going to be easy to achieve.
 
I doubt you will feel rushed on the largest maps, with the hardest difficulty and the most factions. But I dont know what you're expecting in terms of turns. 250+/game. Because any the victory cond. on the largest of the settings arent going to be easy to achieve.

Of course I'm not sure what to expect as far as number of turns as I haven't played the full game. In a lot of games with victory conditions that the AI can achieve without interaction with the player, on a large world on the hardest difficulty, you can easily lose unless you actively go after all the AI players fairly quickly. I feel like this takes a lot of strategy out of the game as far as diplomacy. Is there any ETA on the patch that will add victory conditions? For example, is it going to be within a month or longer?
 
I do felt rushed on the largest map on challenging. I had a really cool and hard won wars against 3AI and four still to go, i just entered successfully into alternative world and then good bye, game over.
I have to admit that there was a warning that one of guys started to research a spell, but i did not even yet know its position, and even if i knew, i would be hard pressed to move my armies there and to take enough of his cities to slow his progress significantly ...
And there is no other way to stop guy from researching it.
Total: 210 turns.
 
Isn't this somewhat similar to the Space Wonder in Civ? There were many times when I was too late to stop it because I dilly dallied too much.

I think some pressure to move on is good, even though options to turn it off is all okay with me.
 
Isn't this somewhat similar to the Space Wonder in Civ? There were many times when I was too late to stop it because I dilly dallied too much.

I think some pressure to move on is good, even though options to turn it off is all okay with me.

Everyone enjoys the game differently, so I love options. It seems like a lot of game companies have been removing options these days, however.
 
Options make it harder to test the game (both for bugs and balance), because they have to test it with all the possible settings. But in this case I think the options to disable victory conditions are really needed.
 
Brad Wardell, the designer of Fallen Enchantress wrote an interesting article about how modding options could in fact hinder good AI. He is one of the greatest
experts on game AI so he if anyone should know. Options could indeed make a game worse.
 
Brad Wardell, the designer of Fallen Enchantress wrote an interesting article about how modding options could in fact hinder good AI. He is one of the greatest
experts on game AI so he if anyone should know. Options could indeed make a game worse.

In this case we are talking about game-breaking experience option. I have no clue how could it make game worse.
If i start a new game now on huge map on challenging or higher difficulty YOU no alternative (that is if you want to win) but to pursue spell victory. Reason is simple, you will never have enough time to beat all your opponents in time, nor make peace with them. The only way to win is to be first to spell. For me this for a game that is so focused on war it is game-breaking. It becomes a research game and not war or empire building game.


Answer: there is no spell that can stop AI from researching game-ending spell.
 
For me the biggest patch "worry" is that when multiplayer is added the balance watchdogs will demand too many changes. Then, slowly the single player game will get nerfed and beaten into a boring, "fun tricks are neutralized" kind of game. Seriously, I've seen it happen, and I hope it doesn't happen here.
 
For me the biggest patch "worry" is that when multiplayer is added the balance watchdogs will demand too many changes. Then, slowly the single player game will get nerfed and beaten into a boring, "fun tricks are neutralized" kind of game. Seriously, I've seen it happen, and I hope it doesn't happen here.

There will be a few voices including mine shouting out for this to be avoided! Im sure though that the devs will consider everything before applying any changes.
 
Last edited:
For me the biggest patch "worry" is that when multiplayer is added the balance watchdogs will demand too many changes. Then, slowly the single player game will get nerfed and beaten into a boring, "fun tricks are neutralized" kind of game. Seriously, I've seen it happen, and I hope it doesn't happen here.

Right, because multiplayer will be a laugh a minute when every last person uses the exact same race, build order, perks, and strategy.

Of course balance will be scrutinized more closely once multiplayer is added.

FYI, the single player needs some serious attention as it is.

Those "fun tricks" are just stupid. They aren't that creative and they don't even add to singplayer, let alone multi.

There will be a few voices including mine shouting out for this to be avoid! Im sure though that the devs will consider everything before applying any changes.

Sorry, you can always install an older version if you want to fingerpaint. This game needs some serious rebalancing. I would think so even if multiplayer was never coming.
 
Brad Wardell, the designer of Fallen Enchantress wrote an interesting article about how modding options could in fact hinder good AI. He is one of the greatest
experts on game AI so he if anyone should know. Options could indeed make a game worse.

Well, it's not like AI is good here, though they do plan to improve it, but again, they plan to add victory conditions at the same time.
 
It is not total crap either. Better than AOW and MOM before patches in my book.

AoW never did have decent combat AI, and AI was never a strength at Simtex. So with respect, you're really setting the bar pretty low, here. :)

That said, I do agree that the tactical combat AI is already pretty decent in Warlock. It doesn't handle strategic combat--organizing for and controlling a war--well, and the diplomatic rules set causes very odd results. I suggest giving the game time, like you. It should have had all this taken care of (and more) before release, but the basics are very solid underneath.
 
Largest map on impossible ends around turn 200 thanks to the unity victory condition. By that time noone has been conquered or great empires have emerged, so the unity happens several hundred turns before the other victory conditions.