Developer notes

[unmerged(493757)]

It's too early to speculate anything, but if you look at the developer, they develop fantasy war or elven legacy, maybe you should play it to look at how heroes/lords and artifact works in that game, i think lord and artifact in this game will be similar like that, with some MoM flavor of course. Heroes and items in fantasy war is fairly balanced. Units and perks in this game works nearly identical as perks in fantasy war/elven legacy.

 

[unmerged(170187)]

Furthermore,once there is MP in the game, there can be Non agression pacts and alliances between players which add further strategic depth.

Non-Aggression and Alliances serve no functional difference than the basic peace treaty. MP will not change this, using them only gives you the ability to lull a gullible player into thinking your more trust worth or give away the fact to other players that you plan to work as a team.

In fact the Non-Aggression treaty doesn't make sense as when your at peace you have already agreed to not attack each other which is by definition what a Non-Aggression pact is. In some other 4x games the Non-Aggression treaty is the treat that makes it so you don't freely attack each other.

If the game had actual functional differences for the treaties then it would matter. For example in many 4x games an Alliance means that should another player declare on either one of you then both of you go to war. As for Non-Aggression a mechanic I've seen in other games I think could work well here, which is the players agree to a penalty if it's broken. Thus is either one declares war on the other they are fined and the money given to the player getting attacked. The treaty also has a time limit as it's understood that war will eventual come since the game is 4x.

Yes,diplomacy is flawed at the moment but its there.Solely the fact that you cant attack someone before declaring war makes it a strategic content.
...
Yes,the spell system isnt optimal so far,but its still a decision to take which spell is researched first when there are 6 offered.
...
Races play different already + it will become strategically more important which special recruitment buildings are within reach to make a unit production city.
... snip

I didn't say the strategy elements were non-existent, just that they were shallow to the point that only a few of the options actually yield viable results.

 

[saroumana]

Hey Alexey, thanks for the updates so far. Are you still on track for end of the month? Also, can you comment on if the AI is being improved for the next update?

And what about the modding tools ?

 

[unmerged(493757)]

I didn't say the strategy elements were non-existent, just that they were shallow to the point that only a few of the options actually yield viable results.

Indeed, but if you play fantasy war or elven legacy, you won't be surprised about warlock, Warlock is more of a tactical war game than a pure 4x game, it is still a 4x game imo, because the 4x part still dominates the game more than the tactical aspect, that's why it's still 4x, just not pure 4x. The combat system of warlock is similar to fantasy war/elven legacy, imo even all Warlock game mechanic is similar to fantasy war/elven legacy except that warlock has 4x element.

Regarding lord and artifact, if you've ever played fantasy war/elven legacy, you are going to like lord and artifact in warlock.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Non-Aggression and Alliances serve no functional difference than the basic peace treaty. MP will not change this, using them only gives you the ability to lull a gullible player into thinking your more trust worth or give away the fact to other players that you plan to work as a team.

Actually, they do, for AI vs player interaction.

If non-aggression is signed, AI will never demand from you things.

If alliance is signed, there are no diplomatic penalties for trespassing AI borders.

Unlike other games, there are no "hard limits" what can you do and can not while in treaty. But for diplomatic treaties do shape AI opinion of you.

Usually, (even) without exploits I find it easy to pacify AIs to always like me.


Anyway, while there is no time expiration for treaty, AI always get tired of them after some time (since diplomatic points always decay over time), which I never consider as AI treachery, more like time when player should see if he needs those treaties again, or maybe prepare for future war.

 

[Mardagg]

Well, personally if I wanted the mechanics from those games, I'd be playing them instead of Warlock. I don't see the appeal in turning one game into a clone of another, personally; it's not like Elven Legacy and other hero-based games stopped existing.

The combat mechanic in Warlock is exactly like in those 2 games.And thats 1 of the main features of warlock and of FW/elegacy.

Elven Legacy and Fantasy wars are not hero based,they are unit based.You got perks and upgrades like you got in Warlock.heroes are just units with some extra abilities and most are not uber units,most heores there are more like support units.Artifacts are rare,iirc only 1 artifact at max per unit and dont give overpowered abilties,more like small stats changes.This is totally different to games like Heroes of might and magic where you could equip like a dozen items on a hero giving him godlike abilities.
Outside the combat system Fwars and Legacy play so much different to Warlock that its pretty obvious you have never really played these two when i read your comments about clones.
The Things you wouldnt like about these games compared to warlock would probably be:
-No city building,city upgrading and expanding at all
-your army is set before each scenario,you rarely buy units within a scenario
-no mana and no food,just gold
-games focuses solely on war and each scenario has a timer,if you are too slow you lose or dont get good rewards...which means its all about rushing and you cant play "out" the more difficult maps like you want(which is what i didnt like about them)
-no spell research
-....(many more)

 

[Mardagg]

.

In fact the Non-Aggression treaty doesn't make sense as when your at peace you have already agreed to not attack each other which is by definition what a Non-Aggression pact is. In some other 4x games the Non-Aggression treaty is the treat that makes it so you don't freely attack each other.

If the game had actual functional differences for the treaties then it would matter. For example in many 4x games an Alliance means that should another player declare on either one of you then both of you go to war. As for Non-Aggression a mechanic I've seen in other games I think could work well here, which is the players agree to a penalty if it's broken. Thus is either one declares war on the other they are fined and the money given to the player getting attacked. The treaty also has a time limit as it's understood that war will eventual come since the game is 4x.

I didn't say the strategy elements were non-existent, just that they were shallow to the point that only a few of the options actually yield viable results.

I agree that the distinction between the different states of diplomacy could need some work.
But thats what i meant by "its there",so i am positive we will get more out of it in the future.
I think btw that you cant break an NAP yourself and declare war on the same turn.This would mean that as of now,an NAP would give 1 extra turn to prepare for upcoming wars.And like already said,the AI treats the NAP different,in my games it often held like 15 turns and then another 8-10 turns until the AI demanded gold/mana for peace...which means it is already a strategical option.
Not sure about alliances in this game,never had one,but often players would share map view among other features in other games.Some features could already be implemented in this game.

Yes,you didnt say strategy elements were non existent.But me and others are basically saying that there already lots and lots of strategical decisions in this game,much more than in many other comparable games,and much more than you are willing to give it.
THe city mechanic alone,while a little gold centric,gives lots of room for strategic decisions:
-lots of special resources
-finite space
-other race penalty:do i raze it instantly,raze it once a settler pops out for free,or keep it for special buildings/resources/perks
-mana,gold,food,research or unit production center,considering perks are free if special resource belongs to that city

 

[Annex]

Hi!

Pair of days ago we have played our first multiplayer game in Warlock. Found several bugs, but overall it was fun, playing with human feels very different.
We are planning big update on the end of this month.

Any updates for us Alexey on a new ETA for the patch?

 

[Mardagg]

Well, personally if I wanted the mechanics from those games, I'd be playing them instead of Warlock. I don't see the appeal in turning one game into a clone of another, personally; it's not like Elven Legacy and other hero-based games stopped existing.


I never stated I had played them. Why would you assume that? I bought them in a sale, but I have yet to get around to them since they don't really interest me half as much as Warlock. My comment about clones was in response to someone saying that if we like Fantasy Wars and Elven Legacy, then we'd like the introduction of those mechanics into Warlock. Like I said, I personally don't understand the desire to turn one game into another. For those who enjoy the previous games, they're still there. Perhaps you should have read the post I was replying to.

You state Elven legacy is hero based without having played it.
You state you dont like the mechanics there without having played it.

Maybe,just maybe you should start playing Elven Legacy for some minutes come back here and tell us how you like the Heroes there.
Just a hint.

 

[Hassat Hunter]

How are heroes going to add "RPG"? Is that stated anywhere? I am going to assume they are just powerful units (like the temple) with the change that they can use artifacts instead of perks. Which would use the exact same values perks already do (like resistance, unit power, health, attack). So, pretty much temple units with a slight twist... hardly enough to suddenly go "RPG"...

I think while many of Spyre's suggestions are good (for example treaty in MP should mean declaring war should take several turns or/and have a penalty), I rather not bog the game down too much to be another civ. If I want civ, I play civ. You don't want "RPG", I don't want "super 4X"... which to please? The game as is is hovering between it. While you try to pull it one way, I do rather like it the other way. Which side is bigger? Or the devs? We don't know...

 

[Mardagg]

+1 to Hassat.Lords probably will be just units.More units is more content.Thats like adding extra recruitment buildings to the game or a new race.Given the mechanics of other games from same developer it can be assumed,that Lords wont be uber units.

Uh... no, I don't. And I'll thank you to stop putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say I didn't like the mechanics of Elven Legacy, or anything like it. I said I hadn't played the games because they don't interest me as much as Warlock, so how could I dislike the mechanics?

It doesn't seem like there's much point continuing to derail the thread by replying to you, because it seems you aren't actually reading my posts but instead assuming they say what you want them to, but I'm going to attempt one more time to uncross these wires.

The poster I was replying to said that if people enjoy the way heroes work in Elven Legacy and Fantasy Wars, they're likely to enjoy them in Warlock. I made an off-hand remark about the fact that I've never seen the point of "If you like this feature of game X, you'll love it in game Y!" If you like the features of game X, play game X. The fact that any feature works well in one game has no relevance to its function in another game, no matter what the similarities or differences between the games.

Clear now?

no,nothing is clear.
I as well hate to derail the thread repeating myself again.
I even did post your older comments to show what you did in my last post.
You said:"Well personally if i wanted the mechanics from those games i would play them instead",which implied to me at first that you know what you are talking about,i.e. the mechanics of Elgacy/FW and that you dont like them.Thats no off hand remark at all.But you are specifically talking about the mechanics without knowing what the mechanics are.
And by the way again this is just lol since you seem to like warlock and its combat mechanic which is the same in FW/elgacy.
Then you say"its not like Elven Legacy and other hero based games stopped existing",which clearly means to me that you think Elven Legacy is hero based.
But it isnt.Hero based are games like HoMM but not Elven legacy where heroes are just as powerful as units.And you make that comment again without ever having played the game.
Pls,mr stubborn knight,stop making wíld guesses on things you dont know and either wait for the new patch to playtest Lords or start playing ELegacy before talking about this matter again.

 

[Skyhunteren]

@Valishael
To me it seems pretty much like your dishing game mechanics in games you haven't played and then when people point out the oddnes in it, you get rather abusive <.<

@Spyre
I don't think you have to choose betwen tactics and strategy. You can have a game with both deep strategy and tactics at the same time. Having a single unit that increase the fighting ability of the army I accompies, when you have several fighting fronts become a matter of resource managment. That said I totally agree that the strategy side of the game can be improved and that the five ideas you have put down are great. The only thing they are missing from my point of view is an expansion that increase the other worlds feature.

 

[unmerged(493757)]

@Valishael
Mardagg and Skyhunteren is right, i know you reply to me, but why i stated that is because as said by Mardagg, the combat system of warlock is a clone of FW or elven legacy combat system, minus the heroes. You don't believe me? i can only suggest that you play that game.

 

[Mardagg]

Special opinion wasnt an attack at all.You overreacted first.Now I really hoped you would give it a rest but apparently you dont.You will never give it a rest instead you are trying to change your own opinion stated here in hindsight.The simple fact is that just dont want Lords in this game for whatever illogical or logical reasons you give us and not a single argument can apparantly change that because u either completely ignore them or simply try to make them fit your own needs.And we tried it very hard.And yes,you are extremely stubborn.

So well, you hate me and I hate you.Thats indeed a reason to use the ignore list.Good luck to you.
Now lets move on to the one thing we agree upon: Where is the Patch and whats the new ETA?

 

[unmerged(507009)]

Anyway this debate is fairly pointless - I imagine that Lords and Artifacts will be included as a DLC rather than as part of the patch so if its something that you don't feel like using then just don't buy it. If its included in the patch then you won't have that option but I'd surprised if its a free addition. On a personal level I'm looking forward to their inclusion - something like the Fantasy Wars/Elven Legacy implementation is very likely where they are similar to ordinary troops but have some unique powers and are slightly more powerful when levelled up. Hopefully the AI will be good enough to utilise them - we'll have to wait and see how it affects the balance of the game

 

[unmerged(170187)]

Month has ended where is the MP Patch?

And when are we getting Modding Tools?

 

[unmerged(489718)]

It probably is still a few days away yet. We all know how Russians love to celebrate the 4th of July. Modding tools are somewhat more problematic as it depends on how well the game is selling.

 

[GamingFather]

Hopefully the AI will be good enough to utilise them - we'll have to wait and see how it affects the balance of the game

This is the problem of Warlock at the moment. The base game is good, but the AI is too weak and ruins the game. If the patch/DLC doesnt improve the AI, then all addons are without merit for me.

 

[unmerged(170187)]

Modding tools are somewhat more problematic as it depends on how well the game is selling.

Uh, Modding tools tend to increase the longevity of a game and as such the number of number of sales. I know some games stayed around a lot longer then they otherwise would of without mods and people even bought the game just to play the mods.

 

[jk_bonn]

So why are no statements from the devs atm?

The patch was announced for end of june, nothing happened, even no more info here in the forum!

I don't want to wait much longer and will now play other games, it seems the devs don't really have learned to conversate with their costumers.