OT, Stardock's MOM influenced game news

[Agrajag]

WraithLord said:
From what I've read about the races they seem to be balanced using the common, yet much hated by me, method of equalizing.

Gah! Damn balance.
I like my (strategy) games unbalanced thank you very much!
For example, part of the charm of HoMM2 for me is that there are weak, normal and strong factions, so you can choose what type of game you are going to play.

[WraithLord]

I can't stress enough how much I agree with you.

I'm not sure how many ppl are are familiar with AOW and AOW-SM. I found AOW not to be particularly balanced yet the races felt unique. On AOW-SM I felt as if the devs. have chosen a shortcut for balancing many more races than the original had by equalizing them, the result was extremely boring and repetitive.

[Torin]

I don�t see the point in unbalanced races.
Just move the slider of difficulty setting if you want a challenge.
In AOWSM you can start with a Pioneer only while AIs start with that and a town. Choose few heroes and nodes.
Anyways, Halfling are pretty weak in both installations. While draconians are dull and powerful, orcs are powerful too.
AOW:SM is like AOW2 but improved, overall better.
I find so annoying the sounds of the shadow world that I play my random maps without shadow.
Almost as annoying as the elephants and female sounds of Dom3.

[Agrajag]

To simplify things with an example, Torin, not aiming for balance can improve the thematic feel for game regardless of difficulty because:
(completely fictional example)
It is much more thematic that 1 elf can kill 10 halflings, rather than elves and halflings having identical stats but the AIs having 10x as many elves.

[Edi]

For the female and elephant sounds, see the soundpack thread in the maps and mods forum. For me, AoW2 and AoW:SM were rather bleh. Never did play AoW:SM a lot. Compared to AoW1 they sucked. Some graphics were prettier and some mechanics changed, but the spirit just wasn't there the same way it was in the original.

[Twan]

Beorne said:
btw, someone heard something about this turn based fantasy game: "Fantasy Wars"?
http://www.fantasywars-thegame.com/index_uk.html

It's a poor 3d remake of Fantagy General (90% of the rules are a copy, the only differences are : you control far smaller armies in FW but each troop can gain chosen particular skills when they level and mages have access to more spells).

(be aware : FW in publicities is announced with "epic battles of more than 500 units on screen" and "a map editor", and these two things are totally absent)

Fantasy General you can get on any abandonware site has a campaign 3 or 4 times longer than the total FW content, with a research system you don't have in FW, more diversity of troops and terrains and a far better system for customized battles.

Even Wesnoth, freeware inspired by fantasy general, is far richer than FW (with lots of user made campaigns and a more interesting tactic system with a choice between several attacks for each unit).

ps : I discovered dominions 2 on the masterofmagic2.com site too.

[WraithLord]

My gripe with equalized balance has nothing to do with difficulty. It has to do with boredom. Lets take the example of AOW-SM,
1. All races has same structures, temple, barracks etc.
2. All races has the same units tier structure, lvl1 with a melee unit, ranged unit < lvl2 < lvl3 < lvl4.
3. All races share the same economy model (gold). Most ridiculously even the undead do.

These are but a few that come to mind after three years I've stopped playing AOW-SM. I recall at the time discussing those issues at length and in much more detail at the AOW heaven forums.

Warcraft II and most RTS are also a good example. 2-4 races, if one race gets a flyer then all the rest must have a flyer, doesn't matter if its thematic or not. Same for stealth units, extra powerful thugs and so on.

I actually kind of like balance, but of a different kind - balance in which races that have different mechanics and concepts match a bit differently according to settings of the conflict. One in which race overall strength is non transitive, meaning race A is considered more powerful than race B, race B is considered more powerful the race C, however race C may be considered to be more powerful the race A because, say, it inherently contains many counters to race A.

I think balance is dominions is more akin to the concepts of balance that I like.

[sector24]

Edi said:
For me, AoW2 and AoW:SM were rather bleh. Never did play AoW:SM a lot. Compared to AoW1 they sucked. Some graphics were prettier and some mechanics changed, but the spirit just wasn't there the same way it was in the original.

I'm glad to hear you guys were disappointed with the later games in the franchise. I see references to AoW all the time on the forum and just assumed you guys liked the game, an opinion I could never support. But now that the truth is out we can all be best friends.

[Beorne]

Twan said:


Fantasy General you can get on any abandonware site has a campaign 3 or 4 times longer than the total FW content, with a research system you don't have in FW, more diversity of troops and terrains and a far better system for customized battles.

I had it, I played it up to a couple of scenarios to the end. It was mind burning, like chess, and It had a very nice atmosphere, mostly due to the wonderful soundtrak (that I have found lately ). Very good game.

[Beorne]

I agree that AoW and its sequel were boring in the middle-long run, but saying I like unblanced games because the color is better is wrong.
Dom3 is very difficult to fine balance, but it is easy to adjust the big unbalances. And much is beng done.
But I'm playing a five player late map and we are four allied against Ermor ... and he is bashing us all ...