Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 232

Thread: General New Game Discussion

  1. #31

    Default

    I don't think there should be shrubs without a way to clear them relatively easily. No one wants to play 1 hour games constantly.

  2. #32
    Wizzy
    Guest

    Default

    following this thread.. very cool to see. will try to come up with some ideas later maybe.

  3. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hulky View Post
    Yeah I just threw stuff together under Matt's size requirements to get the ball rolling. You can change names or anything.
    Ok coolio. I'm going to look over all the units you posted soon and try to post feedback soonish.

  4. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by |AFO| View Post
    I don't think there should be shrubs without a way to clear them relatively easily. No one wants to play 1 hour games constantly.
    Maybe 3 in a row instead of 5 in a cross would be better? Like 3 vertically, or horizontally instead of all 5 at once?

  5. #35

    Default

    Maybe. Another thought is having them "wilt" and disappear/die after a certain number of turns.

    Or having them simply slow units down by 1 movement or something, so that you can pass through them still.
    Last edited by |AFO|; 05-22-2016 at 08:23 PM.

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by |AFO| View Post
    Maybe. Another thought is having them "wilt" and disappear/die after a certain number of turns.

    Or having them simply slow units down by 1 movement or something, so that you can pass through them still.
    The slowing down was a popular unit idea on old CAU I think it was LT's unit. Something like tall grass that acted as a fog of war or slowed down I can't remember.

  7. #37

    Default

    The one unit I think was a classic of example of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" was the Scout. I like adding elements to the game, but I feel like the Archer unit should basically emulate that. It was a high skill unit that wasn't too OP and could be used well or poorly.

    The one unit I think got really porked was the Stone Golem. It was an awesome idea early on, and the centerpiece of the turtle formation. But the Mudquake decimated it, and it became a useless unit (which is one of the principle problems with how TAO was developed). I would LOVE to see units that were pure utility, but could remain effective without a GA throwing a hail mary over the entire map to render it useless.

    Edit: Point being, I feel like the main philosophical approach should be balance.

  8. #38

    Default

    Scout knight and cleric are great units. Change the stats to reflect game balance, but the concept behind them should be in any tbs that utilizes health movement and range. An infiltrator type unit l like the br/assassin is also a great standard unit concept.

  9. #39

    Default

    A few comments:

    I noticed that you've gone down to a 64-square board from TAO's 109. What's the reasoning for that? Note that it's going to start to resemble chess a lot if you use an 8x8 board instead of the old 7/9/11/11/11/11/11/11/11/9/7 TAO board.

    I think you might be trying to add too many units too quickly. It's going to be extremely hard to figure out balance/strategy/etc. when most of the testers are going to spend most of their time just trying to remember how all of the units work. It's also going to become increasingly likely that one unit is overpowered and beta tests will devolve into whomever can best use that one unit.

    I agree with Ach's suggestion: come up with a basic formation that involves the simplest of units (Priest, some Bladesmen, an Archer, a Horseman, and maybe one or two magic units), and do some playtesting between two identical starting formations. You'll quickly determine which units are under/overpowered, and whether formations need more offensive punch or more defensive capabilities.

    What I'm trying to say is I don't really want to provide feedback on "Giant Eagle" and "Pack of Rats" when I have no idea if the Priest, Bladesman and Archer are balanced yet or not. And the only way to determine that is hours and hours of playtesting.

  10. #40

    Default

    I'll make one other quick comment:

    One thing that I liked a lot about TAO was that there was a simple, "solid" formation, and most strategies revolved around how they compared to that formation.

    Here's my view of a "solid" formation:
    Knight x3, Cleric, Scout x2, Dragon, +1 other unit

    Grey solid formations would obviously lack the dragon and second scout, but make up for it with a witch, pyro, maybe a LW and enchantress, etc. And until the very end, grey games were fun, strategic, and had an immense amount of depth despite the lack of "cool" advanced units.

    But the point was, this formation was easy to play, none of the pieces were particularly complicated to use, and both a beginner and pro could use it with relative success.

    Then, strategy could be built on top of that by some additional, more complicated units. Defensive players could swap out a knight for a Furgy, offensive players could lose the cleric and add a DSM. Suddenly you have a wider range of formations.

    Why is this important? Well first of all, it helps with the learning curve. It's really hard to figure out how to use a wisp or furgon well, but knights and archers are pretty intuitive. So beginners can pick up the game pretty quickly without struggling to remember complicated attack patterns.
    Second, it helps to define the game as relatively strategic rather than both players all-out blitzing each other. If you have too many powerful/broken mage units, suddenly there's no sensible defensive play and both players simply rush each other every game. If the defensive resources are too good, the game becomes a stalemate.

    So start by coming up with a core formation of solid, simple units, make sure it's relatively balanced and fun, and then start to add defensive/offensive resources as needed.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Account Registration is now open || How to View General Discussion
    By Crabwalking Lord Mommy in forum TAO Tournaments & Game Challenge Links
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-05-2020, 10:12 PM
  2. Standalone game versus an in-browser game
    By Gabe in forum New Game Development and Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-13-2016, 05:21 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •