• 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.

Nestor73

Recruit
Jan 18, 2019
7
0
I posted this on Steam, too, but perhaps this is a more proper venue:

Needless to say AoW III is one of my favorite games of all time; the entire paper industry of China would run out of paper if I were to list all of its positives! However, this thread is about its negatives. So please understand this thread in its context; I am not bashing AoW III or the devs!

So here is my list of three negatives; please come up with your list of three as well - in case there is an AoW IV - for the devs to consider:

1. Small stack size (6 units, to be exact):

AoW III's stack size limit of 6 units represents a reduction from prior AoW games, where the limit was 8. 8 was already a bit small to give you a feel of proper army, and the further reduction to 6 felt almost incomprehensible. It was also arguably the most disliked change from AoW II: SM to AoW III among the general player-base.

Now, the only lucid argument I can find for it was that it would grow the MP player-base, by making games shorter. Of course, the problem is that complex, turn-based 4x games are by nature meant to appeal to SP players, and it appears that the vast majority of AoW III remain SP players who prefer long, leisurely games, if we go from a multitude of polls undertaken on the subject. So the MP encouragement experiment was a failure.

In the least, could the devs next consider an option to change stack size via checkable game settings - or at least make this element amenable to modding?

2. Units not losing offensive strength as they lose models:

Immersion is an important element in games of this nature, and it is obviously unrealistic if a unit with 1 figure remaining is as strong as a unit with 12 figures remaining. Fortunately, the rest of the industry has grasped this problem, and most games similar to AoW III have implemented a combat system where units lose offensive strength as they are damaged (Endless Legend, which is arguably the closest competitor to AoW III, is a sterling example). Yet, AoW III still retains this anachronistic, un-immersive combat system where the number of the figures are purely "cosmetic." Why on earth?

One response I recall given by a former dev was for "balance." More specifically, AoW has so many one-figure units (e.g. heroes and powerful monsters such as dragons or giants) that the balance would badly tilt against the multi-figure units. But this argument has an easy refutation: You can program single-figure units to lose offensive strength as they take damage, too. For instance, Eador is a good example of a game that implements a system where one-figure units have their strength reduced on the basis of how much HP is left.

Once again, can this type of a system be at least an option or amenable to modding?

3. Too few races:

Yes, I was spoiled by AoW II: SM, and its amazing racial variety. Now I understand that the class system in fact multiplied the combination of playable factions relative to AoW II: SM. Still, it's not the same thing. While I did not miss some races - e.g. the Nomads - I would love to have seen the (living) Archons and Syrons in particular.

The reason I assume these races were not included was that AoW III development stopped after 2 expansions (though I am not sure if the devs initially planned more). Here I cannot object too vigorously, because I do not know the motives of the devs in discontinuing the development of the game. In particular, they are absolutely within their discretion to pull the plug if the financial equation did not come out in their favor. Still, AoW III ultimately left a void in my experience, because it lacked the two very races - the aforementioned Archons and Syrons - who were my two go-to races in AoW II: SM.
 
Last edited:
  1. Limited to 1 spell per turn in combat:
    On top of doubling the cost if the leader isn't present, we have an artificial limit of 1 spell per turn that was clearly implemented out of lack of creativity and laziness. Most spells are garbage anyway, if you want to have less spell spam, make them cost more, eat 1.5x - 3x mana depending on strength.

  2. Buff/Debuff spells are temporary and can only be casted on a single target during battle:
    Don't call them spells, they are potions that last for X turns or until EOC. Why would I ever use any of these when doing straight up damage would be way better 99% of the time.

  3. Useless offensive overland spells.
 
AOW III Is very buggy compared to AOWSM. There are lots of CTD in my experience while the older one was quite impressive from that point of view.
Having said that thge 3 thngs that I dislike are
1) There are no Dark Elves
2) The Hero Menu is really annoying. If you have to pick up many objects you have to click individually on each of them (there should be a button to pick them all up and auto equip them, then of course details cold be changed) - If you need to send an object from one hero to another, just clicking on a portrait is not enough. Clicking on the portrait should instead open the other hero's window so that things could be managed from there, watching what the other hero needs instead than keep checking by going back and forth (also the hero window brings a memory leak and the PC starts slowing down after a while). Also the hero menu should close if I click on anything outside that window, instead than having to manually close it every time. Also there is a but that allows to shorten the receving time of items when you send them. (you drop it by switching the package in transit with a dropped item and them immediately send it to a hero nearby)
3) THE WORST BUG OF THEM ALL: When playing a huge map when a Rogue enemy casts age of despair there is simply nothing to do to survive. And believe me on a XL map very often you just don't have the time to beat them before they do. So if you play against a Rogue AI player, you just cannot win. Things should be done to tune down that spell. For example units stacked with heroes should be immune from deserting. Also the desertion problem sometimes becomes impossible to resolve even if not caused by age of deception, because one of the causes of bad morale is rebellion itself. So if some of your cities start to rebel, its like a chain, the more cities are rebellious the worse the morale of the other cities gets, until they all do. If you don't have that experience it's probably because you don't play as often as I do on a XL map. There should be some sort of countermeasure you cannot play 150 turns and then see everyone rebelling!!! REBELLION SHOULD NOT BE IN ITSELF A CAUSE OF REBELLION FOR OTHER CITIES.
4) Well in case bugs don't count this is a feature I don't like in AOWIII : Dragons and tier V units at some point end up ruling the map. It should not be possible to have stacks of 6 dragons roaming the map. One per stack should be the limit to tier V units. Also why can I always rush production of dragons EVERY TURN? Yes occasionally I get an "angry morale" face, but I can just wait one turn and then starting again. of course the map gets crowded with dragons in the end!! remember I talk about very big maps, but I suspect that's the case also for smaller ones.
 
1.the battle system
2.the Class system.Well,I think the Necromancer is the most well designed class,but I want more,such as Biochemical warlock or Shadow demon manipulator.Maybe it is 32bit game so it just restrict some further development.Hope,after the release of AOW:pF,AOW3 could get a republish with the new engine.
3.fantacy background
 
1. AI on strategic map can be dumb
2. In PBEM playing against AI, it is not possible to manually play defender battles against AI. I wish there was an option that makes this possible; say for all battles were more than X number of units on both sides are involved. Reason: important defender battles can be the reason to win or lose a game; to automatically resolve this feels bad.
3. Lack of challenge in playing against AI (teamed) on highest level.

For me the many great MODs keep the game interesting for me.
For instance, I want more map-options and luckily there is a mod that partly deals with this.
 
1. Game not tested for multiplayer (where it does matter, single player is tourist easy no matter what) majorly broken debuffs like stifen limbs and slayer's doubt
2. Mind control (the community still struggles with balancing this)
3. Units with evolve (another bright idea of a single player oriented 'design')
 
First one: game freezes ( due to overheating maybe, quite an oxymoron), no matter what I do. Lowered settings, hardware cleaning, drivers.. Nothing really works.

Second) game lacks some flavor.
Few races, average music (compared to aow3 ost).. There is less "wonder" in it..
And less dark elves, nomads, archons..

Third) lacks the global strategic depths of some competitors (like endless legend)
It's a minor flaw though, the game is explicitly focused in military, it's not a real 4x.
 
So here is my list of three negatives; please come up with your list of three as well - in case there is an AoW IV - for the devs to consider:

1. Small stack size (6 units, to be exact):

AoW III's stack size limit of 6 units represents a reduction from prior AoW games, where the limit was 8. 8 was already a bit small to give you a feel of proper army, and the further reduction to 6 felt almost incomprehensible.
Actually, it felt OK to me. It surprised me at first, but when I thought about those big battles with up to 56 units, the reduction to a maximum of 42 came as a relief. I've played AoW3 for some 800 hours now, and I don't miss the old stacks of 8.

Also, it's sort of a tradition for cRPGs to have parties of 6 characters. I like that tie-in. See more below.

2. Units not losing offensive strength as they lose models:

Immersion is an important element in games of this nature, and it is obviously unrealistic if a unit with 1 figure remaining is as strong as a unit with 12 figures remaining.
Yeah, that takes a bit of getting used to. But one does get used to it. And I think I'd be just as happy if there were no multi-figure units. That way, every stack would seem like the proverbial 6-character party of Baldur's Gate and other cRPGs. Early in the game, when you're just clearing sites and fulfilling quests, that would be immersive to me--the idea that a single party of adventurers is doing all that. Later in the game, I guess you do need those enormous Helm's Deep battles, and then the multi-figure units help give the impression of massive armies.

Anyhow, I like it when my 12-figure unit is down to 1 figure and can still pack as big a punch as ever. It'd suck if that unit was almost dead and too weak to do anything useful. If its last surviving hero can pull off something heroic, great!

3. Too few races:

Yes, I was spoiled by AoW II: SM, and its amazing racial variety. Now I understand that the class system in fact multiplied the combination of playable factions relative to AoW II: SM. Still, it's not the same thing.
I guess I'd have been similarly disappointed if I'd bought AoW3 when it first came out. But I just got it last September, along with both expansions, and it seems to me there are enough races.

My only mild complaint is that the Tigrans were chosen. I think I'd have preferred the Azracs. But maybe I'm just partial to humanoid races, and maybe Tigrans were a good choice after all.

Not sure what to think about class yet. Yeah, it multiplies the possibilities, but it also creates a lot of overlaps, watering down the distinctiveness of the various races. It also forces some tough player choices--e.g., do I build class-based units or race-based units?
 
I don't know if I could say what my least favorite aspects of AoW3 are, but here are three pet peeves:

1. Flanking. There's just way too much of it, and it makes some battles ridiculously chaotic, especially since so many units can use "sprint" or something to slip right through zones of control. I suppose somebody used the "this is just fantasy combat" excuse to justify the gross lack of realism, but I don't like it and can't find a good justification for it myself. I'd nerf it to the point of saying a unit can only be outflanked once per round; after the first flanking attack, other would-be flanking attacks don't get the bonus.

2. Charging. It bugs me that cavalry units can get a charge bonus even if they zigzag through a bunch of intervening units and terrain to reach their target. I like that they need room to build up momentum in order to make a big impact, but it should have to be in a straight line of hexes (or maybe only the last two have to be in a straight line). If they're dodging around obstacles, they're not really building momentum for a charge.

3. Game size and length. I'm probably an outlier here too, but I think the small map is almost too big, medium is definitely a bit big, and anything larger than that is so ridiculous I won't touch it. I love the game, but I don't want to be stuck in a single game for weeks or longer. And don't even think about playing with classic (instead of simultaneous) movement if there are more than two rivals in the game; the downtime between turns is unacceptable.
 
1) Units not losing offensive strength as they lose models...wouldn´t really want them to lose offensive strenght tough, I simply prefer the one model/unit approach of the elder games in the series, where this discrepancy between looks and mechanics didn´t exist.
2) movement skills like forestry or mounteneering don´t affect movement in tactical combat
3) all races and almost all "dwelling races" getting along too well with each other...where's the tension? the conflict? different values and ideals? history affecting relations? Still, I´d prefer something more asymetric, not just the good/neutral/evil blocks of the past games
4) too few short hair and beard styles for heroes/leaders, we get to choose between bald and shaggy ;-)
5) the cliffhanger we got instead of a satisfatory conclusion of the story

Despite all that, I still believe AoW3 to be the best game currently available^^
 
1) Frost Aura shrines. And any unit with frost aura or fearsome.
2) Units with a billion resistance to debuffs designed to handle units like them (cough elementals especially stalkers)
3) Banners. Even disabling them doesn't help because it is suddenly harder to know what has guard mode and what doesn't.

You can disable units dying as groups take damage by the way.
 
So far there is nothing i dislike about the game honestly..A bit angry and halflings but they are made amazingly nice since they are small and they have to have some annoyance about them .BUt i thikn the game overabuses the lucky system in the RNG ..You could get majorly fucked or win a decisive win based on Lucky RNG..Apart from that i dunno what else is bugging me.I think its very balanced.
i still cant beat 5 AI's on Empiror.I can beat 4 Ai's on Empiror just recently with some good rolls.Game can be challenging in highest difficulty and its very punishing if you mistime your attack ..I think for me the most punishing is to mistime my attacks and from that on my game is lost.I do not do re-rolls i only allow my self 2-3 quick saves per game and usually do not even use them.I lose an army i lose the game..That is for me most exciting.

Also the randomness of the games is amazing.This is a single game i pyt most hours in around 600 i think so far
 
#1 Taming the Khan scenario. Seriously I hate that orc so much. So it felt really good to finally kill him for once and all back in golden realms expansion.

#2 Juggernaughts + Flame tanks + Ironclad's nerfs of not being able to fire on turn 1 unless they have an engineer standing by to reload. Its unpleasant having my stuff being forced to flee on turn 1 then fire on turn 2 in battle.

#3 I can't think of something else that I dislike. x.x
 
Limited to 1 spell per turn in combat:

I often wonder why people have complaints but don't try to understand why something was done as it is. OK just imagine we have independent spell cast for every hero in battle. Just bring 3-4 heroes and focus any desired target with 3-4 direct damage spell or cast 3-4 extra spells like Sadism, Blood Bath and etc.

Speaking about classes. In fact if you want different play styles it means you want classes. And how it was in AoW 2. In AoW 2 WT the leaders had no race at all it was some strange sorcerers only AoW SM added pictures of racial sorcerers. The customization of the wizard included the ability to take one positive skill and research all remaining during the game or take negative skill and more positive. The second customization step was taking 6 spheres of 6 types of elemental magic. I don't say it was bad and in short PvP games taking War Mage + Earth sphere for superpowerfull Stoning spell or Constructor for fast production would be serious decision. But in long scenarios it's possible to research most of skills so everybody has everything. And the diversity magic is limited by elemental magic, secret magic and cosmos magic the last is just a buch of very common spells like Disenchantment which can't included in any other sphere (Enchant Weapon). This system is very limited and many spells and skills from AoW3 just wouldn't fit in.

What annoys me:
1) Knowledge mechanic and mana cap. This's really annoying and imbalanced. And may be I don't understand something but I don't see what problems can cause the elimination of mana cap.
2) Inability to specify the seed for RMG. It was in SM. Inability to generate scenario if not by patterns (as I understand even HoMM III can do that) but at least give some options how the players will be placed. Like spread them evenly around the map, teamed players close (that's how RMG works so 1 half of the map for you 1 half for 7 AIs) and etc.
3) Very few custom scenarios and inability to change official scenarios something I often did for AoW SM. And it's huge spit in Planetfall's side. I guess the disigners tought that RMG can totally satisfy the players. Well here the answer it's not enough. Even the best RMG will generate very similar maps.
4) Inability to do in map editor some very simple things like creating new equipment (only as new mod) which were availabe in AoW SM editor. In map editor I can't look to units' stats, items' stat, the race of the leaders. Really there're tens of them and I don't remember everybody's name and race. Hero editor. Let me make it straight it wouldn't take much time to make a preview. I'm programmer myself and I don't believe that it was too hard to implement.
5) Outdated engine. Huge drop of fps when unit panel is opened. And even now it can be problematic for low level configurations (GT 1030, RX 550, any integrated GPU). F. e. I play on 2 PCs with GTX 1060-6 and GTX 560Ti (it's better than GT 1030) and for the second card I would like to see better optimization. Make remake on Planetfall engine I'll buy it.
6) Production mechanic directly taken from AoW 2. It's was good enough for AoW 2 but in AoW 3 with it's hage variety between the cities because of trearure sites it's just outdated.
7) Give me my T3 unicorns from AoW 1!