Age of Wonder 4: what i would keep and trash from AOW3 and planetfall.

[mbuh]

You raise very interesting points there about sectors.

Honestly, i'm a bit torn between the sector and non sector systems. I lean toward sector system though, like you said it force differentiation between cities.

But i think the sector system need to be modified a bit though, like making its area more flexible. Right now it totally dictated by the map.

By flexible here i mean for example, map are still divided by portion of area, each one has climate/terrain, like the current one. But we can draw our own boundary of sector, i know this will be very complicated mechanics because it will allow a kind of sector where it will have two different terrain/climate, like arid/mountain and arcadian/fertile plains. One can still hope though. About the limitation of boundary, probably can be tied to city center capabilities, which is measured by a combined measure of population, resources output, infrastructures, and other things.

About water regions, i also agree that currently it's not because ships are not good enough, but there is not many incentives to protect our water regions, it's quite a different story in map with lots of water terrain though. I think the take on water is quite almost spot on right now, it just need like water colonies, or if not possible then water bases/outpost, can be underwater if underwater layer is added (which i hope it will be).

This is unrelated to sector mechanic. It's about battle mechanic. I hope that there will be multihex size units. Shouldn't be too hard or complicated to be realized.

 

[Draxynnic]

"Distinctiveness is always going to be relative". This is why we will continuely disagree, because actually Distinctiveness is only relative to the context, in the same context, there is clear definition of it. As one of the few who actually understand what i said so far, i'm pretty sure you understand what i mean here.

My focus is not unit roles first, but ability first, unit roles second. It was not me who made it stray.

'Relative to the context' was, essentially, the kind of relativity I had in mind. When discussing whether units have lost distinctiveness due to mods, it's worth looking at how distinctiveness has changed. Planetfall units certainly don't feel less distinct than AoW3 racial units which were bound to the racial template. They also stand up fairly well in distinctiveness to racial units in previous AoW games which didn't have the strict template that AoW3 races had (but still had some roles that were common to nearly all races). The introduction of mods hasn't worsened anything there.

The argument could be made that certain unit abilities feel less distinctive if there are mods that can replicate them. For instance, a unit with a 'chaining' attack feels a little less special if you can just slap Arc Extension onto any unit with an Arc weapon. However, I think it makes sense that if a particular effect is achievable with technology or training, it would be possible to provide that technology or training to more than one single type of unit, and the mod system reflects this. Units which have the ability naturally can still outperform the mod, provide some combination that mods don't (Watchers have a chaining Entropy attack, for instance, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a mod that allows you to get chaining Entropy attacks otherwise) or simply free up space to use another mod instead.

While i agree with that, it is not the reduction to limitations that i mean. I mean this is fiction, we have higher degree of creativity to partially neglect the real limitations of our real world counterpart. Specifically how, i don't know, it falls to the game designer team to think.

Except that the game designers were specifically looking to find ways to discourage doomstacking, since most people find it more interesting to fight with and against combined-arms armies than armies formed entirely out of one top-end unit.

Broadly speaking, I don't think any real-world, science fiction, or even fantasy military would find it beneficial to go all-in on whatever their most capable unit is, be it battleships or dragons or floating ships with giant lightning cannons or whatever, even if they did have functionally unlimited resources. It often works in strategy games, to be sure, but that's because strategy games often fail to properly reflect the weaknesses of top-tier units, and/or there's some arbitrary game mechanics limit that reduces the utility of large numbers of low-tier units. As an example, in Planetfall it's common wisdom that if stack limits weren't a thing, a large number of low-tier units is generally a more efficient use of resources than going to high-tier, but diminishing returns start to kick in once you've gone over a stack, and definitely if you go over three or four stacks. Cosmite upkeep is a relatively crude way of limiting tier 4s in Planetfall... but it works, and believe me, it is entirely possible to justify each tier 4 requiring a constant upkeep of cosmite on a case-by-case basis. Generally speaking, what happens when you doomstack in most strategy games is that you're squeezing as many resources as possible into the units-per-battle limit of the game engine. Real life doesn't have a units-per-battle limit. Build a fleet of all battleships, and you can expect to lose to the guy who invested the same resources into building enough battleships to keep your battleships occupied... and a swarm of cheap submarines or even surface torpedo boats to swarm your battleships on all sides.

At the bottom line, though, most people just find balanced armies more interesting than fighting doomstacks of one powerful unit all the time. It's interesting when it happens a few times, but not when it becomes every battle you fight.

 

[mbuh]

'Relative to the context' was, essentially, the kind of relativity I had in mind. When discussing whether units have lost distinctiveness due to mods, it's worth looking at how distinctiveness has changed. Planetfall units certainly don't feel less distinct than AoW3 racial units which were bound to the racial template. They also stand up fairly well in distinctiveness to racial units in previous AoW games which didn't have the strict template that AoW3 races had (but still had some roles that were common to nearly all races). The introduction of mods hasn't worsened anything there.

The argument could be made that certain unit abilities feel less distinctive if there are mods that can replicate them. For instance, a unit with a 'chaining' attack feels a little less special if you can just slap Arc Extension onto any unit with an Arc weapon. However, I think it makes sense that if a particular effect is achievable with technology or training, it would be possible to provide that technology or training to more than one single type of unit, and the mod system reflects this. Units which have the ability naturally can still outperform the mod, provide some combination that mods don't (Watchers have a chaining Entropy attack, for instance, and I'm pretty sure there isn't a mod that allows you to get chaining Entropy attacks otherwise) or simply free up space to use another mod instead.

True, i completely agree.

Here, i'm not trying to argue, because well there is a degree of relativity in each of us, and also while i dislike some aspects of planetfall in regards of game mechanics, but lorewise and game design wise i agree with those same aspect, i know there is a contradiction, but do we not all always contain some degree of contradiction. In regard of relativity, each one of us can be considered wrong or right relative to each other, so arguing further without regarding the same base point (like definition of distinct) is quite pointless i think.

So here, i'm just explaining and clearing some missunderstanding. The reason why i consider AoW3 has more disctinctive abilities than planetfall is most probably if not certainly because of how i make my comparison, i mean the method i use, and from what i read so far, it seems that many missunderstand the method, i admit i never explained in details so far. So the two reasons of our disagreements here comes from that and how we each define distinction. As for how i compare, i was just making a overall total comparison of abilities available with almost all the combinations possible that i can think of in planetfall, and group them into the same group if the essence is similar. This is not just from units, and mods and combinations of them, also not just racial, but also secret tech, also ops, doctrines, overall abilities, including in landmark or dungeon. The result is measured in how many grouping i get. I repeat this process in AoW3, result is measured with the same measurement. In AoW3 case though, i also include specializations, because this is an all out comparison. I come out with less amount of group in total in planetfall compared to in AoW3. Higher amount of group in total means greater amount of disctinction.

But i understand there are two points here that make this method flawed, first is my definition of distinct can be different to other people, so how each abilities are grouped by what, this what is relative, i mean the essence of each abilities that i keep talking about can be different from one people to another. Before other posted their disagreement, i thought we all have the same definition of that, or at least similar, but turns out the difference in this alone is too far. Furthermore, the other reason is i'm not sure if i have truly compile all the possible combinations, i only compile the most possible combinations that i can think of at that time, i have no time to really compile everything at this moment, besides i know that it will be quite pointless endeavor if everyone is not on the same boat on the base.

Although i did check it again yesterday, and the difference of the results is quite small, i mean the total amount of groupings each game produce. It's possible that if everything compiled from each game, the amount of distinction can be considered equal (there is slight difference, but too small, you know what i mean), but again there is the flaw that not everyone is on the same boat on what those abilities are grouped by

Also planetfall have quite significantly more abilities in total, compared to AoW3, if we only count the amount of abilities, i mean if we pay no mind to distinction or groupings. Which is most probably the method's that most people here think i use, which cause total missunderstanding.

Worthy mentioning is there are some abilities unique only to each game.

So again, i still think it will be very hard to reach an agreement here, i'm sure you understand. And i respect everyone's opinion, and for these reasons, i think it's quite pointless to argue on this points any longer.

Except that the game designers were specifically looking to find ways to discourage doomstacking, since most people find it more interesting to fight with and against combined-arms armies than armies formed entirely out of one top-end unit.

Broadly speaking, I don't think any real-world, science fiction, or even fantasy military would find it beneficial to go all-in on whatever their most capable unit is, be it battleships or dragons or floating ships with giant lightning cannons or whatever, even if they did have functionally unlimited resources. It often works in strategy games, to be sure, but that's because strategy games often fail to properly reflect the weaknesses of top-tier units, and/or there's some arbitrary game mechanics limit that reduces the utility of large numbers of low-tier units. As an example, in Planetfall it's common wisdom that if stack limits weren't a thing, a large number of low-tier units is generally a more efficient use of resources than going to high-tier, but diminishing returns start to kick in once you've gone over a stack, and definitely if you go over three or four stacks. Cosmite upkeep is a relatively crude way of limiting tier 4s in Planetfall... but it works, and believe me, it is entirely possible to justify each tier 4 requiring a constant upkeep of cosmite on a case-by-case basis. Generally speaking, what happens when you doomstack in most strategy games is that you're squeezing as many resources as possible into the units-per-battle limit of the game engine. Real life doesn't have a units-per-battle limit. Build a fleet of all battleships, and you can expect to lose to the guy who invested the same resources into building enough battleships to keep your battleships occupied... and a swarm of cheap submarines or even surface torpedo boats to swarm your battleships on all sides.

At the bottom line, though, most people just find balanced armies more interesting than fighting doomstacks of one powerful unit all the time. It's interesting when it happens a few times, but not when it becomes every battle you fight.

Here, i also completely agree. This is what i meant that realistically and game mechanic wise, i agree with the game's current take on T4 limits, especially in reference to real world, but well, subjectively as i've said i like epic armies. Although about the dislike on fighting homogenous forces, this is also subjective, i'm sure you also understand this. But well, the majority consensus is favoring heterogenous forces, so that's why i did said that i can't really go against it, and i'll check how far modding can tailor this to suit my liking, thus without the expense of what the consensus's like, i'll still get what i like, but of course it all depends on how far the modding capabilities is, so far i haven't touch it. That is for planefall.

For AoW4, or next fantasy AoW, whatever tittle it will be, i'll again respect the consensus regarding that if the consensus once again favor heterogenous forces, which is what will most likely happen in the future if we look at how it is now. Though i hope the scale moves toward the middle ground in regard of homogenous forces vs heterogenous forces

 

[NINJEW]

Armies of varied t3s with occasional t4s are far more epic than an endless parade of the same face tbh, which is just visually super lame

 

[mbuh]

Armies of varied t3s with occasional t4s are far more epic than an endless parade of the same face tbh, which is just visually super lame

For most people including me, Epicness is all relative or subjective. For you that is your definition of epicness, for other peoples, it is different, however as i said repeatedly, none of us is wrong or right on this regard.

This is not directly related, i mean a bit off topic, but i can't help myself to point a fact, that there is a lot of cases in both real or in storytelling, where armies composed of things that invite awe (in a positive way or negative), are regarded as more epic, whether the impression is of hope (positive) or dread (negative). This is from the point of view of the viewers not the generals, meaning this has nothing to do with the functionality or performance of the army, because only the military leaders care about army efficiency, civilians for example is more superficial. This is not my opinion, but the conclusion of those who specialize and do research on the field of human psychology, perception.

Example in practice: civilians watch ten thousand peasant militia marching with what you can use gears which is far more crappier than elite forces gear. Compared to civilians watching, just three thousands elite soldiers with their best gear marching, possibly supported by some reasonable amount of machines of war (tanks, artillery, etc). The second scene will give more hope to the civilians, or dread if the civilian is on opposing side of that army.

Even though in practice that ten thousand militias can actually produce better results.

Other examples (fantasy this time): civilians watching 10000 finest elite cavalry, or elite archers, but in medieval cavalry is of often regarded the most elite. Compared to civilians watching 100 dragons flying, or even just 50. The second case will again cause more awe, be it fear or hope depends on which side the civilian are. Even though 10000 of elite forces can achieve more damage to a nation than a hundred dragon.

For the majority of humans, epicness is all a matter of perception and psychology, and perception is almost always subjective or relative. If anyone say otherwise then you people is confusing efficiency or functionality with epicness.

Don't believe those researchers? Then Ask 100 to 500 peoples that know nothing about military, warfare as samples, gather the data, ask them the scenes i present above, or make your own that is similar to that, their answers will prove what those researchers said

If you ask general, they will ask about the details, like what each unit group capabilities, etc. They care Nothing about epicness

 

[Ericridge]

Back then when planetfall haven't released yet, i hope we can make underwater colonies. It seems very plausible even for sci fi settings, and cetainly it is for high fantasy. Turns out it doesn't exist.

About ships, i don't want to repeat getting myself dragged to very long arguments about ships like what happens in the original AoW3 forum long time ago. But here in planetfall, my take on ship is the same as in AoW3, at least personally i think ships are good enough to those who actually has it, like vanguard and dvar for example, other races just have different way of naval warfare, this is similar to AoW3, which in my opinion is good asymmetry value. As in AoW3, in planetfall, some races prefer flying units (oathbound for example) that they can just neglect ships for naval warfare. Well if you imagine your enemy has massive flying battlesuits, they can just fly and arrive directly to engage your armada right.

So personally, i hope if we are to make water regions more relevant than in planetfall or AoW3 for AoW4, i hope for water colonies, or better underwater layer with water colonies. Although underground, underwater and normal ground layer is probably a bit too much, but one can still hope.

For Planetfall i could see flying units having their movement reduced + taking attrition damage by traveling in water sectors controlled by hostile warships. Them hostile warships is carrying lasers and antiair guns and even missiles.

But for AOW3, flying units can make a mockery of wooden sailing ships + dreadnoughts rightfully so. They lack weaponry for ship to air combat. They can just ignore the ships and fly right over. Unless a new ship is developed in response to flying threat. Magic ships. airships. Etc XD

 

[NINJEW]

For most people including me, Epicness is all relative or subjective. For you that is your definition of epicness, for other peoples, it is different, however as i said repeatedly, none of us is wrong or right on this regard.

you are typing a lot of words to justify your desire to be really lazy and not have to deal with more than one unit type in the end game

can't believe this entire discussion has happened and no one has said "what if each race had more than 1 t4 unit so there's some variety in the armies" like damn way to show your hand dude

 

[Ericridge]

Please no terraforming, it felt like work to click 15+ terrain hexes per turn converting them to plains/swamp/forest whatever, especially since first you needed to calculate exactly how many hexes it makes sense to convert given current city happiness and happiness per tile bonus.

Didn't have issues with terraforming, I just shaped the land until it looked exactly how i wanted it. It helps me make my empire look more beautiful. Charming, sophisticated. And a envy of all other empires.

If anything I wanted it to be more detailed on how I can create my land. As in creating a helms deep type of city and then many other different type of land set ups and i wanted a city surrounded by a lake and be very difficult to invade. and such XD

 

[NINJEW]

i rarely touched terraforming because it was outrageously tedious and in mp the lag made it basically impossible to do anyway

 

[mbuh]

you are typing a lot of words to justify your desire to be really lazy and not have to deal with more than one unit type in the end game

can't believe this entire discussion has happened and no one has said "what if each race had more than 1 t4 unit so there's some variety in the armies" like damn way to show your hand dude

Your first paragraph is presumptuous statement. Had i want that, i'll force my opinion to anyone here that t4 spam must happen. That i repeatedly said, in terms of game mechanics i actually like variety in the army, but subjectively i like seeing grandeur army. The word subjectively means that it only apply to me, it does not force anyone to be in the same view.

About those survey, that is actually real. And that conclusion actually disagree with us, yes those researchers conclusion also disagree with me. Because i consider epic as relative for each person, the conclusion says otherwise, but fact is fact, even if i do not like it, i have to accept it, and fine with it

About each race having more than one type of t4, this is good idea. Personally i really like it, again, here i don't force anyone, if in the end the consensus is against this, i'll respect it.

For Planetfall i could see flying units having their movement reduced + taking attrition damage by traveling in water sectors controlled by hostile warships. Them hostile warships is carrying lasers and antiair guns and even missiles.

But for AOW3, flying units can make a mockery of wooden sailing ships + dreadnoughts rightfully so. They lack weaponry for ship to air combat. They can just ignore the ships and fly right over. Unless a new ship is developed in response to flying threat. Magic ships. airships. Etc XD

Yes. If i remember correctly, i believe the dev said that there will be no penalties at all to flying units.

About anti air weaponry for ships. This is good idea. For now, probably if flying units attack ships within melee range to range 3, they suffer 5 damage (or higher). To illustrate flying units getting hit by anti air weapon of the ships

Terraforming is too much a hassle in AoW3 in my opinion. I mean the one that terraform one hex per click. The area version cost casting points, so not always used

 

[Sandman25DCSSS]

About each race having more than one type of t4, this is good idea. Personally i really like it, again, here i don't force anyone, if in the end the consensus is against this, i'll respect it.

I can't believe you are unaware of Chivalrous Intentions mod after playing 20k hours.

can't believe this entire discussion has happened and no one has said "what if each race had more than 1 t4 unit so there's some variety in the armies" like damn way to show your hand dude

It is hard to have a useful discussion when the guy replies with "I have my own opinion about meaning of words" in form of 5 paragraphs so I gave up.

 

[mbuh]

]

I can't believe you are unaware of Chivalrous Intentions mod after playing 20k hours.

That's because i don't use mods. Actually in all games i don't use mods, except aesthetics only mods. I don't know, i'm just one of the few people who dislike using mods, perhaps more like hate using mods. Although i have done some modding myself, but not that game changing. The last modding i did was in stellaris, minor one like boosting the rate of leviathans spawn rate, gamechanging sure but not a big mod

It is hard to have a useful discussion when the guy replies with "I have my own opinion about meaning of words" in form of 5 paragraphs so I gave up.

Why i get the feeling that you two are the same person, or close to each other. Anyway, never mind this.

Forums that i often visits, often have the same base first, and often each poster post from many perspectives, that in this forum it seems some prefer shallow discussion, honestly this surprise me, also that this forum is so dead, like almost no people other than several regular posters are active. I haven't check other planetfall communities like discord though. Still, the way you want to discuss is rather unusual in that it's just from few perspective. The only one so far who i like is discussing with Draxynic and Ericridge. They often made fair points with the reason. While you two often make your own assumptions first, even though your assumptions is wrong, presumptous assumptions is never healthy for any discussion, i don't know if in your real life you meet people like that but formal discussion often does not allow presumptous statements unless agreed by all parties. Here i often already describe my reasons why i reach that point, this is the important aspect of real discussion in every true forum, the conclusion can be altered based on this. Here in this thread, our base definition is different, unless we agree from the same base, then we cannot discuss anything, that is what is accepted in serious discussions, if this forum doesn't do that, then it's pointless to be serious here.

If you provide your base, what is your definitions, then i can understand your point, you don't explain any instead just keep attacking and making your own assumptions. I mean have a look at how drax and eric convey, i can see their points because they provide the steps of their reasoning

 

[Sandman25DCSSS]

]
That's because i don't use mods. Actually in all games i don't use mods, except aesthetics only mods. I don't know, i'm just one of the few people who dislike using mods, perhaps more like hate using mods. Although i have done some modding myself, but not that game changing. The last modding i did was in stellaris, minor one like boosting the rate of leviathans spawn rate, gamechanging sure but not a big mod

This mod is special, it adds 398 units. Those classes which can build tier 4 units, get several tier 4 units depending on race. It is a huge improvement of "epicness", even if we use your definition. Sorry, I am not interested to reply or even read the rest of your post, I realize we can just agree to disagree.

 

[mbuh]

This mod is special, it adds 398 units. Those classes which can build tier 4 units, get several tier 4 units depending on race. It is a huge improvement of "epicness", even if we use your definition. Sorry, I am not interested to reply or even read the rest of your post, I realize we can just agree to disagree.

Well, you just realized now? I was already doing it few posts before, but you and your friend there keep coming pointlessly that seemingly you two have it personal to me, while i keep trying to be indifferent to everyone, i was warned that paradox forum is full of people like this, it's very different from the old age of wonders 3 forum, they way people from those old forum discuss is different from here, now i remember why i like draxynic and ericridge, IIRC they are from the old forum if they are now the same people as back then. I regret not listened to those advice.

Now you realized that you can agree to disagree, we are on the same boat in this case.

About game modding, the thing is i dislike using game's mods in almost every game i played so far, except mods that has things with aesthetics only. Hmm, though what you said can probably convince me to check it, at least i'll check how much is altered there whether it is to my liking.

Regarding the definition of epicness. By the way it was not my definition, it is the globally accepted definition, must i refer to dictionaries here just to show it, i bet we both don't want that. But again, feel free to agree to disagree, we are on the same boat on this case

 

[NINJEW]

Was there seriously a sockpuppet accusation being made here lmao, please tell me why you think me and the sand guy are the same person

Your first paragraph is presumptuous statement. Had i want that, i'll force my opinion to anyone here that t4 spam must happen. That i repeatedly said, in terms of game mechanics i actually like variety in the army, but subjectively i like seeing grandeur army. The word subjectively means that it only apply to me, it does not force anyone to be in the same view.

About those survey, that is actually real. And that conclusion actually disagree with us, yes those researchers conclusion also disagree with me. Because i consider epic as relative for each person, the conclusion says otherwise, but fact is fact, even if i do not like it, i have to accept it, and fine with it

About each race having more than one type of t4, this is good idea. Personally i really like it, again, here i don't force anyone, if in the end the consensus is against this, i'll respect it.



Yes. If i remember correctly, i believe the dev said that there will be no penalties at all to flying units.

About anti air weaponry for ships. This is good idea. For now, probably if flying units attack ships within melee range to range 3, they suffer 5 damage (or higher). To illustrate flying units getting hit by anti air weapon of the ships

Terraforming is too much a hassle in AoW3 in my opinion. I mean the one that terraform one hex per click. The area version cost casting points, so not always used

Everyone knows what subjectivity is the accusation being made against you is that you're being disingenuous in your arguments. You keep trying to position yourself as "I won't force this opinion that i have" but also you keep trying to drown the entire thread in this singular opinion that I'm not sure anyone except you has voiced, which is effectively the same thing

 

[akinata]

could we not transform this thread in a pit fight please? ^^

 

[NINJEW]

I'd say the biggest improvements going from aow3 to pf are the sector system (the population assignment busywork stuff can be safely left in the dust though), the modding system, and tech trees.

As a way of defining city expansion the sectors are just a much more fun and thoughtful way of doing it, and as a system limiting city spam hopefully in another take they'll be able to figure something out that isn't infinite settler cost scaling. Release planetfall had a cityspam issue but it was child's play compared to what was going on in aow3, and that's thanks to sectors

I really hope they don't go back to aow3's tech system without doing some heavy modifications to it. Weird stuff like how sorcerer had incredibly good empire upgrades and how much of that was defined by "they don't have bad upgrades eating up slots that could have the desirable researches in them" was maddening. There was a game around choosing class/specialization combinations that didn't overly bloat certain sections of the tech book so you could get the stuff you needed consistently and that game sucked and I hate it.

 

[mbuh]

Was there seriously a sockpuppet accusation being made here lmao, please tell me why you think me and the sand guy are the same person

I'm not fully clear whether this is just sarcasm or not. I will assume you really want to know, well it's just a feeling and other reason is one of you said we. However i already said nevermind and my feeling is seemingly proven wrong

Everyone knows what subjectivity is the accusation being made against you is that you're being disingenuous in your arguments. You keep trying to position yourself as "I won't force this opinion that i have" but also you keep trying to drown the entire thread in this singular opinion that I'm not sure anyone except you has voiced, which is effectively the same thing

Some of that, i don't force it, instead some of that is just i merely say that the globally accepted definitions is like what i said, i find it weird that some people in this thread have their own definitions, in other forums, if agreement on the base definition is not stated, every parties assume the globally accepted is the one used. If we look back, none of us agreed on any basis, that's why i assume we all use the globally accepted one, until i found out that is not the case. That is why then we agreed to not continue any further because we don't have the same basis, it's pointless anyway because no consensus is ever going to be reached

Anyway, because i saw the OP wants this to stop, so in respect of him. I'll not discuss this point anymore, and go back to the scope of this thread

 

[mbuh]

In regards of sector.

I'm curious, what is your opinion about drawing sector boundaries manually vs the current one (tied to map area)?

About resources, what do you think about a little bit more type of resources? (not to many like civ series i mean)

 

[NINJEW]

I dunno what you mean by drawing manually but I like the current sector generation system

I feel like planetfall has the perfect number of resources. Maybe too many, even, if influence were done away with I cant say I would entirely bemoan its loss