A side note: given the vastly improved presentation in Beta 5, I think it would be prudent to have the same new artistic hotness be applied to the supporting art assets outside of the game. For example the website presentation and the title art - they're both nice, but not nearly as good as some of the new art in Beta 5.
Frogboy... coming from a software development background myself, I imagine that you jumped for joy when the people actually tell you that you get *more* time to refine the product. That practically never happens (for me at least). I'm all in favor of taking extra time and release in July. My request for development focus: increase options for each sovereign (meaning that all world related choices being equal, the same sovereign can be played very differently from game to game).</p
Niiiiiice. Moar!
SorcererKing Forums
I was wondering if the strategic depth of the game (and perhaps strategy games in general) could be increased with creature perks tied to locations. What I mean by that is that, for example, a swordsman might get a particular ability (that others don't get) while in or within 1-tile of a friendly city. Archers may get a stealth ability in forested regions. Certain locations could be made to have strategic presence by the unit-perks they convey. The Altar of Dread Zatar grants the controll
I beg to differ. Unlocks are a near-essential part that you (everybody) enjoy in games already. You start with tier 1 research and unlock higher level research with time and effort. Your heroes start lowly and level-up and unlock new abilities. Completing (and sometimes failing) quests unlock new possibilities. Conversely, if you play a game, be it Sorcerer King or SimCity XXXX you generally do not want all the options from the start. There is little sense of accompl
SorcererKing Forums
Man! The time-to-post-questions is too short; I rarely happen to be on the site when the opportunity strikes.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="12" id="3509031"] Exactly the kind of system I personally don't want, for the reasons I posted above. I hated playing through FTL with crappy ships just hoping to unlock the cool ones. It would suck even more in a 4X. [/quote] I think you may have had the wrong impression on the game entirely then. I don't think any of the unlocked FTL ships are "cool". I mean, all the ships are cool, they're all different and require you to play th
Actually no, the unlocking isn't about cooler/bigger/better. It's about different. It's about replayability. If you've played FTL then would you understand that the unlocked ships drastically alter the game - but they don't make it easier .
@Alstein and Heavenfall: Please substantiate your opinions, it helps the discussion.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1" id="3508879"] Heh. Believe it or not, that's exactly how the sovereign concept started. Originally you would ONLY get the Wizard and you had to win though the Wizard. Doing so unlocked 2 more Sovereigns. And winning with those sovereigns unlocked additional sovereigns. On the team, I was the only one who wanted that however. [/quote] Get the team on board then! I think starting o
This suggestion may be in the category of wishful thinking, but I think Sorcerer King can take a page out of the other recent very successful asymmetric strategy game: FTL (Faster Than Light). A very nice feature in FTL that I think goes a long way to enhancing the replayability of the game is that whenever you finish the game with a particular spaceship, an alternate design for that spaceship is unlocked. This goes completely beyond the cosmetic, the new ship design allows you to pla
I thought it was worthwhile adding a comment to this discussion, as it covers a lot of interesting ground. First-off: a cave-at that I didn't read every single post; but a quick scan suggests that this hasn't been proposed: Instead of focusing too much on positional tactical elements (flanking, backstabbing, etc), I think there is a lot more excitement if the focus where on buff/debuff combinations where the sum is greater than the component parts. This is similar to the comba
Perhaps, even better, would be to have quest rewards that grant army-wide perks. You have defeated the Mighty Spider Queen? Congratulations, your units have 50% poison immunity henceforth. You have explored every corner of the Dreaded Marshes? Congratulations, your units are not impeded by difficult terrain.
Regarding the issue of "losing" items on units that die in combat: I think that should be addressed as an optional skill on either heroes or the sovereign himself: "Salvage" levels 1 and 2: have a 50%/100% item recovery of slain units in combat. On the sovereign it would always apply, on a hero it would only apply if that hero was involved in the battle.
I've posted something similar (regarding varying SK) before, so I wholeheartedly agree with Frank. It doesn't have to be a big deal with art assets, it'll already be enough if the SK has a pool of 10 passives of which 2 are randomly assigned (or 1 per difficulty level) that have simple global effects. SK Warlord - passive - all SK units have +20% damage SK Sentinel - passive - all SK units have +20% defense SK Master Mancer - passive - all SK damage spells
[quote who="Borg999" reply="8" id="3500953"] Quoting HenriHakl, reply 7 I strongly advocate spells that are more than just variants of damage (Wall of Fire, Meteor Strike, Tsunami, etc are fun spells and have pretty visual effects, but they don't really change strategic decisions that I make on a fundamental level).</d
Restless Master (area enchantment) - non-undead that die in the area of effect are returned to play under the enchantment owner's control, they gain type undead and have maximum hitpoints reduced to 5 Requiem of the Mighty (area enchantment) - creatures with a power rating below 10 cannot attack or use abilities within the enchanted area Buoyed by Magic (area enchantment)
I strongly advocate spells that are more than just variants of damage (Wall of Fire, Meteor Strike, Tsunami, etc are fun spells and have pretty visual effects, but they don't really change strategic decisions that I make on a fundamental level).
SorcererKing Forums
[quote who="OliverFA_306" reply="7" id="3500790"] One question: If Galor is sitting in the last patch of farmable land, how is it that there are other (barely surviving) factions out there? I suppose that was a bit of exageration for dramatic purposes [e digicons];)[/e] [/quote] Actually I'd read that as: "King Galor sits on the last piece of farmable land (of the ones mighty Galor empire). "
SorcererKing Forums
A separate suggestion: The game-winning Victory screen: it would add ALOT to the game satisfaction to have the text be different based on your intangible resources. If I'm a cruel warlord that defeats the SK, I don't want to lead men into an age of peace and prosperity - I'm cementing my position as the new big cheese!
SorcererKing Forums
[quote quoting="post"] Need to make sure we provide skills to lower unrest. I do NOT think it should be accomplished with city improvements. Need more crafting recipes. A LOT MORE. I never felt really satisfied with the quality of them [/quote] Regarding city improvements and <str
Restless Master (area enchantment) - non-undead that die in the area of effect are returned to play under the enchantment owner's control, they gain type undead and have maximum hitpoints reduced to 5 Requiem of the Mighty (area enchantment) - creatures with a power rating below 10 cannot attack or use abilities within the enchanted area Buoyed by Magic (area enchantment)
SorcererKing Forums
My biggest gripe, honestly, are the graphics. I imagine Endless Legend is made by a studio with similar constraints as Stardock; but wow Endless Legend pushes the graphic design boundaries so far. I can live with the game design in Legendary Heroes. If I could make changes to the game design: more exclusive choices cities can't build everything; use a location resource to limit "special" buildings heroes get a bigger skill tree, and at level 1
[quote who="Borg999" reply="27" id="3499140"]Quoting Kantok, reply 24 The SK is the good guy because the SK won and history is written by the victors. Sure, everything is relative, but genocide on a planetary scale would be considered evil by most people...especially if they are included on the hit list. [/quote] Propagan
SorcererKing Forums
I disagree. Primarily on point 1. Point 2 is negotiable, but I also don't like the idea of luck determining the result. There's not much point in hiding the numbers, the gist of the choices will become known quickly anyway and having them visible makes it much more obvious to the player that she/he is making relevant choices that have immediate (and long term) consequences. I'm a big fan of tangible (read visible) results for actions, even if it happens to