Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Shadowmorn posted:

And just so your worries are unfounded, behold! Hexes!
I don't care how shallow it makes me, but the lack of hexes was what killed HoMM for me. My first fantasy RTS (outside of a LoM demo) was AoW, so I just couldn't get into HoMM's squares and chessboard combat after that.
e: I tell a lie, I played the original king's bounty, but that's different.
Oh hey this wasn't here a second ago:

Gerblyn posted:

Anyways, I can confirm that the game is indeed completely turn based and that both the tactical and world maps are hex based.
You are good people. First question: What's with the giant piles of weenies? I assume they're all "a unit" (as in, buying a weenie now actually buys you a squad of weenies)? Or is that just a promo shot and one archer still equals one archer? I would be happy with either, just curious.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
Also want to ad my name to the AoW music fans.

Gerblyn posted:

Yeah, most units now are represented by little squads rather than individual figures. Big things like Giants and Dragons are still single figures.
Follow up question: How does health work for squads? I will accept "Would have to explain far too much about the battle system to give a meaningful answer" as a response.

Semi-related question: How close will combat be to the originals? Do we still have the 7 hex multi-stack system?

e: Could I sound more entitled here? I'm just so excited and have been burned so much by nostalgia-ruining sequels the past few of years :ohdear:

Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Feb 8, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

We haven't quite figured that out yet to be honest. At the moment the number of figures simply reflects the HP that a unit has left (i.e. a unit with half health only has half its figures), but that leads to an issue where you instinctively feel that a unit with fewer soldiers should do less damage, which isn't the case.
If you're looking for feedback, I'd be OK with this. Would make healing a bit weird looking though, unless squads are special units such that they can't heal back dead dudes but you can merge incomplete squads or something.

Gerblyn posted:

The same guy who made the original music is making the music for this game too.

The adjacent hex rule is still in, so up to 7 stacks can be involved in combat at once. There are also other changes to the combat system, for example flanking a unit will do more damage and let you get a free strike without retaliation.
:woop:

Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Feb 8, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

That Gobbo posted:

You had me at Goblin Theocracies. I'll have to keep my eye on this one, I enjoyed the Overlord games though I've never played the older Age of Wonders games. Have they aged well (i.e. can I play goblins in AoW1)?
Graphically AoW1 might be a bit hard on the eyes (it'll be either blocky or tiny), but AoW2 and SM shouldn't cause you any problems, unless "not 3D" is a big nono.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
More questions! One big thing I missed going from AoW1 to AoW2 was the treasure locations. I really loved exploring the dungeons and crypts, collecting treasure along the way. I can understand why they were cut (taking time-out to play a 5 minute solo minigame is not conducive to competitive multiplayer) but I missed it from singleplayer.

I also preferred AoW1's approach to treasure. Whenever you got treasure from a location you tended to get either a few not-great treasures or one good treasure. In AoW2 you always only ever got one treasure, which meant getting a +1 sword was always a bit of a letdown, unlike AoW1 where getting a basic +1 sword was fine because you'd also get a +1 shield and +1 armour or something. So:

A) Are fancy crypts coming back? (I expect the answer to be no).
B) Will you be going back to AoW1 "point buy" treasure rewards, AoW2 style "One only, might be good might be bad", or something new?

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Splicer posted:

Graphically AoW1 might be a bit hard on the eyes (it'll be either blocky or tiny), but AoW2 and SM shouldn't cause you any problems, unless "not 3D" is a big nono.
I just picked up the trilogy on steam, and apart from the animations being a bit fast AoW1 looks a hell of a lot better than I expected.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

PiCroft posted:

Will there be flavour text for the units? I loved unit backstories and info about the various creatures you encountered.

Also, please include at least 1 lizardy race, either the Lizardmen or Draconians, I like lizards and dragons :3:
Dragor omnia regit

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
If his filthy minecraft monies bring me a new Age of Wonders then all most some will be forgiven.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Mr.48 posted:

I'm a big fan of Heroes of Might and Magic 3, could you briefly describe what's better in AoW?
Hex > Squares :colbert:

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

Just HP loss at the moment, we're worried that reducing unit effectiveness with HP levels will draw out battles and encourage annoying micro. It also creates odd imbalances, since formations with fewer figures become more powerful. This could change, it feels intuitively odd at the moment that a unit with a single archer is as much a threat as a group of 8.
You could minimise the problem of drawing out fights (and the stack imbalance issue) if unit loss didn't match directly with reduced damage. If an 8 model grouping lost 1/14th of their damage instead of 1/8th then even when you got down to one guy you'd still on 50% effectiveness. Because that last guy just saw all his buddies murdered and He. Is. Pissed.

(I'd love it if that kind of thing had a chance to spawn heroes. A Last Man Standing occasionally graduating to hero status would be boss).

Meanwhile, a 6-stack of archers would lose 1/10th damage per lost guy, meaning the last guy is also on 50%. You still have the the mild benefit of having less damage-drop thresholds, but that's balanced out by the fact that you will actually hit the 50% minimum slightly sooner (only needing to lose 5/6ths of your HP rather than 7/8ths). This scales all the way down to two-man squads, who would flat-out lose half their effectiveness at half HP.

...and speaking of HP, you don't necessarily need to directly match Unit loss with HP loss either. Again, if we go with the assumption that the last guy is A Hardass, you could conceivably allow him to have more than his fair share of HP. That is, it takes less than 1/8th of an 8-man squads HP to lose a dude,leaving the last man standing with more than 1/8th of a squad's HP. This would make squads a bit weaker (since you lose damage dealing capacity faster) requiring a bit of a raw numbers buff though.

Obviously it all wouldn't be quite this clear-cut since damage in AoW uses rather discrete numbers (1/10th of 5 to 7 damage gets messy) but there's probably some way to deal with it sensibly.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 03:24 on Mar 27, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Taerkar posted:

All units benefit from the Inverse Ninja Law.
It's a good law :colbert:

e: It would be neat if you could merge like-squads, so if you have two badly depleted squads of archers you can smoosh them into one squad of slightly depleted archers.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

I'm pretty sure that's how it worked in AoW:SM as well though...
Yup

Gerblyn posted:

Another thing that wasn't mentioned is that heroes have classes too. The one in the battle was a Warlord, so he had access to Warlord specific spells that the player as a Theocrat wouldn't otherwise be able to use.
This sounds baller. I always wished the hero classes in SM were a bit more differentiated.

How will leveling work? Same as SM, where you choose from one of 3 randomly offered?

Gerblyn posted:

I have literally no idea how our beta is gonna work, but I think a good start would be to make yourself known as a poster on the official forums, since there's a good chance that beta testers will be chosen from among people there:
I want to be in the beta more than life itself, but not enough to post on a game's official forums for anything other than technical support and modding queries.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Mar 27, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

I think the current plan is more AoW 1, where you get points to buy upgrades. That's not final though.
I always liked the points version better, for similar reasons to the treasure earlier; If there's no wiggle room for different levels of usefulness then you end up with one person getting to choose between Attack, Life Stealing, and Cold Breath, while the next person has rolled Defence, HP, and Poison Spit.

On that note: Have you considered having the "Boring" skill-ups (attack, defence etc) run off a different track to the "interesting" things like Life Stealing, Round Attack etc? Raw number-go-up level ups are vital, but boring. If you either got to buy them from different point pools (so instead of 10 points per level you got 5 boring points and 5 interesting points) or just had the number-go-ups be a function of your race and class (Everyone gets 5 interesting points per level, but in addition to that Orcish Warrior chooses between +1 attack or +1 damage at level 2 while Elven Mage chooses between Movement and Defence at level 2) then you'd never feel like you were wasting a level on boring-but-mandatory things.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

Just asked a designer about this, and he said that in a game like Diablo 2, stat boosts become mandatory since enemies are constantly becoming more powerful, so you have two sets of skill points, 1 for stats and another for abilities. In Age of Wonders this isn't the case, the only things that get more powerful over time are heroes. So we want to make it so the player has to choose between stat upgrades which boost the heroes survivability and basic combat strength, or utility abilities that give the player more options like fireballs or wall climbing.

Also, with regards to the optional spectator mode, it turns out the idea is so good that we implemented it weeks ago and I didn't realise. So, hurrah for us!
I would argue that the units being produced become more powerful; early game you're fighting your opponent's newly produced archers and footmen, by the end of the game you're fighting mass-produced veteran dragons and reapers. I wouldn't argue very vehemently though because I don't know the scale (if soldiers are def 10 and veteran reapers are def 14, for example, that's not hugely relevant, if soldiers are def 4 and veteran reapers are def 18 then that's going to be a factor).

I do know that in SM that unless you went full caster there was a definite point where if you hadn't invested in +attack you were kind of boned vs anything interesting late game.

e: Sorry, mightn't have been clear: There's a number of ways you can design around making sure that the flat numbers increases are useful, interesting, and not mandatory other than just giving them out "free", and from what you've said it sounds like a number of these are being taken into account. I'm just being pedantic about the specific reason given because uh... actually I don't really have a good reason.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 10:55 on Mar 28, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

There's actually a very big difference that you might not realize. In AoW:SM, it was possible for units to miss, so low attack units were essentially worthless against high defense ones. In AoW3, this isn't the case, Attack and Damage have been merged into one value, a low attack unit striking a high defense one will always hit it, it will just do less damage.
:swoon: Tell whichever designers proposed this I love him and/or her. This is seriously the best thing.

e: How will this work for effects?

Splicer fucked around with this message at 12:19 on Mar 28, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Gerblyn posted:

It was me, I used to get so annoyed when my Dread Reaper would miss some stupid halfling swordsman :argh:

We tried having effects work in a similar way (the effect had a strength, and would always affect units that had a lower resistance), but they all ended up being too overpowered. Effects now work on probability, so every point of difference between the strength of the attack and the target resistance indicates an X% shift in success probability. You can see the probability being displayed in a preview popup in the video when the evangelists use mind control. Most resistible spells now have an "On Failure" effect though, so even if they effect fails the target will still lose some HP or some move points or something.
I need more :swoon:s. So psyched for this game.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

bamhand posted:

Also, leprechauns.
But what you're failing to take into account is gently caress leprechauns. Seriously, gently caress leprechauns.

They'd be my perfect example of why this is a great change. Leprechauns were literally unkillable by low-attack units. Not "very difficult", but unkillable. But it didn't scale, meaning that vs high attack units (or medium ones who got a lucky shot) leprechauns were nothing but speedbumps. The Tigran Mystic was the far superior dodgey assbag of a unit.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Kanfy posted:

RIP Doom Bats, I will/won't miss you.
It wasn't their high def that made Doombats awesome/horrible, it was their double-strike and lifestealing. They were the best/worst units and I hate/love them so.

Kanfy posted:



But just lookit him dance :3:
It needs the happy little giggle for the full visceral hatred to flow forth.

Seriously, I hear it every time I read the word "leprechaun" in this thread. Every. Single. Time.

bamhand posted:

Actually in AoW 1 the defense bonus capped at 10% chance to hit so if you didn't have high attack guys your best bet was to swarm the leprechaun with as many cheap, low attacking units as possible and you'll get lucky eventually. Plus who doesn't enjoy the image of 12 dudes trying to jump a prancing green midget in a suit?
Was this true in AoW2? I've seen AoW2 leprechauns cleave through ranks of multiattack units without taking a scratch, giggling all the while. I didn't hate them half as much on AoW1, it was AoW2 that elevated them to dickbag extreme.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Genderman posted:

What was everyones favorite spells? Mine was mass confusion in SM and that death one on AoW1 that let you control random units. Also incarnate was my fav in both. Have him possess some lowly warrior and then suprise your friend with a random ghost


We should get some goon multiplayer dwiggmod going. I played a ton of games with Dwigg to help him test his poo poo out and made some maps you guys should download :)
AoW1, chain lightning, hands down. Why? Because you could lightning the ground at the very edge of your range and it would arc to people who thought they were safe! Taste unexpected stunny death, assholes!

AoW2? Not sure. Nothing really gave me the sheer manic glee of chain lightning, but Haste Domain and Suffocate were always good solid workhorses, re-animating That rear end in a top hat Elf as a new hero was always funny, Infection was also funny but a bit pricey for what you got. And of course it's not a proper game if it doesn't end in a four-way terraforming battle between Ice, Death, Water, and Boring Grass People.

That said, I have a soft spot for blazing comet. Probably because of the animation.

That's not to say the spells in SM weren't good, it's just that nothing will ever live up to the fun I had with Original Flavour Chain Lightning.

Seconding the fun of incarnates.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Mar 28, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Bloodly posted:

Is it lame to say the controlling effects, like Seduce/Enslave/Control Animal, etc? Always lovely to get X powerful/Semi-powerful creatures permanently. I guess that counts under 'Broken Spells' mentioned above. I wonder how possible it will be to pull that kind of thing off early and often? I remember the Elves and the Azracs earned those control effects real early.
I loved stealing Heroes. Especially Heroes with Stuff. Nothing like jumping a pile of guys outside a dungeon and running away with the newly decked-out hero. Eyeball in a jar was the best item :allears:

bamhand posted:

Oh man, I just remembered nymphs. What a hilarious a unit. Everything from the slap attack to the big heart that pops up from seduce. It was also neat that certain races like orcs and goblins had lower magic resists so they were easier to seduce than an elf. The slight differences between the units for each race really helped differentiate them.
:byodame:MmmmMMmmmmWAH!
Lady of Pain (aka Nymph with jaundice and a whip) always cracked me up.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

shelper posted:

Which one of you was rooting for the draconians?

Splicer posted:

Dragor omnia regit
So Undead: I see an undead Dragon in the preview there. Since they're not a race, is there going to be a Necromancer themed build or are Undead purely NPC at the moment? I needs me my Zombies.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Shadowmorn posted:

Placing units ON the income structure takes that income but its not "Yours" until its inside your influence or outside of everyone else's?
Something like this sounds good to me. It wasn't that you could send a single high-move unit to capture a shipyards or something, it was that they could send one single high-move unit to capture half the map. It wasn't hunting down the rogue unit that was annoying, it was the cleaning up afterwards.

Maybe keep capturing as-is, but have any unoccupied locations within your influence automatically start converting to your control over the space of a couple of turns. Say, at the end of your turn any unoccupied facilities owned by someone else get turned to neutral status, and any already neutral unoccupied facilities get converted to your side. So capturing a location and moving on denies the resources to the original owner for the two turns it takes to re-establish control (unless they go take it back personally) but at no gain to you, while leaving your unit camping on it funnels you resources until it gets killed/you move on (at which point the above happens). Or you can choose to raze/loot it over a couple of turns.

e: Obviously cities would not convert like this, if it's even possible to have a city under someone else's influence.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 11:29 on Apr 9, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
I don't think there is alignment? Unless I missed something you choose a race and a class and that's it. There is no more "Evil" section.

The two factions are the commonwealth and fancy prancy dancy nancies. Or whatever the elf faction calls themselves.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Triskelli posted:

Found something to that effect trawling the official forums.
(link)
If your alignment gradually changes over the course of the game (as tis implies) then that would be ridiculously hard to represent units-wise. You'd need three variations of each (good, neutral, evil) at minimum, and without some interstitials you'd have points where your army starts flickering back and fourth between drastically different models whenever you were near a threshold.

Triskelli posted:

What I thought was interesting is that alignment is also effected by stuff like the personal profile and colors you choose for your faction.

quote:

If you want to play an evil Goblin Theo, pick some nice dark player colors, like blood Red on sinister Black (which will be applied on your units, replacing the White/Yellow on the robes of the concept art), choose “Graveyard Gloom” as your leader portrait ambience, raze some heathen cities and you’ll be all the rage at your annual evil fantasy despots gathering.
Pretty sure that bit is just saying that if you want to play an Evil Theocrat you should take red-and-black so your dudes look more evilly, not because it actually makes you more evil. Colour-based alignment adjustments would be pretty :psyduck:

As an aside, it's very possible to play an Evil Empire with "Good" imagery. The crusades come to mind, as does the inquisition. You can't quite go Blood For The Blood God but you can quite easily play We're Genociding You Because You Deserve It.

e: Actually I would be quite upset if my crusade against the evil orcs and goblins of the world caused my angels to turn all demon-looking just because I was burning their filthy heathen villages to the ground :colbert:

e2: In case that was overly subtle I meant that obviously burning down orc villages should make my alignment go Evil, but I'd find it much more enjoyable if I'm able to insist that I must be doing the right thing, I have all these angels on my side.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Apr 11, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Bloodly posted:

I've always found it odd that tech and magic are often at odds. Are there many things where they work together, not one taking the place of the other?
The issue with magic and technology working hand in hand is that usually what's holding back scientific process is the limitations of our current knowledge and sometimes the limit of science itself, while magic is all about "gently caress science, I did it because Magic". If the two can work in tandem you get a massively accelerated rate of development. Just think how quickly diagnostic medicine would have advanced if we'd had even a tiny fraction of the population able to cast "look at what's going on under your skin in subatomic detail". Finding out what actually causes illnesses is an incredibly recent development in human history, but "create the bacteria that cause plague out of thin air and teleport them into people" is one of the basic "things magic can do" in folklore, as is removing the illness and all the symptoms.

The reason this is a problem is that it's hard to write a gripping "Griknar the Bold goes off to kill some Olde Worlde goblins" novel when Griknar and all his friends have a projected lifespan of 500 years and live in a magic space station orbiting Jupiter. So its easier just to say that Magic and Science don't get along, magical plague boils are completely different to regular plague boils, and Griknar's box of infinite food can't be extrapolated to cure world hunger because~

Same reason why genetic engineering is banned in most scifi universes. It's easier to write stories that way.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 14:07 on May 3, 2013

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
Oh my god I hate you I thought there was news :argh:

Map is made of squares. Scrub game :smaug:

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

madmac posted:

You know they've been posting Dev journals, right? http://www.ageofwonders.com/dev-journal-ii-all-sorts-of-mounts/
I did not. Shadowmorn is grudgingly forgiven.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Kanfy posted:

I'm in the minority that likes 2 and SM more than the first game, but if nothing else the soundtrack is definitely worth listening to.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FfmNQJ_Xko
I like 2 and SM more than the first one overall, the only things I disliked about the newer ones were the removal of the minidungeons (understandable), the random level ups (debatable), and the changing of the loot reward system (inexplicable).

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
Hooray for point-buy loot rewards! Announcing a DLC to make Frostlings and Undead playable is all that's needed to go from Best Game to, uh, Bester Game.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
There is nothing in this I did not like.

Though, did it look like the tanks didn't have friendly fire? He hit a bunch of cannonballs right by his fire tank and it didn't care.

Also the Archon skeleton dude model was amazing. He was just so awesomely goofy looking :allears: I hope that's an intentional art style choice.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Taerkar posted:

The cannons do a direct-line attack and he positioned them so that the flame tank wasn't in the line of fire.
But didn't the one that hit the wall do an aoe damage? Or did I mishear and it went through the wall and into the archers?

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
In that case I reiterate my statement that there is nothing in that video I did not like.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Veyrall posted:

What were all the confirmed playable races again? I can't seem to find the list in the OP, and searching the whole thread is :effort:
No Undead, no Frostlings :argh:

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Demiurge4 posted:

The Archons look kind of undead now. At least the gameplay video said that the Archon giant thing was an undead construct.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. No Frostlings, no Undead as playable sides :argh:

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Triskelli posted:

Just trying to imagine Dreadnought Frostlings. Would there be giant penguin musketeers?

On a more serious note I guess with the class/race choices any Frostling combination would play too similarly with freezing the map being your main concern every time.
Yes these are both very good reasons to include Frostlings thank you.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Tuxedo Catfish posted:

I thought "Draconians" was just a stupid overly-baroque name for Lizards.
Nah, they're horrible perversions of magic, deformed mockeries of their Draconic progenitors :getin:

LordSloth posted:

Now that I think about it, there may be sufficiently interesting user-created scenarios for AoW2, but I never dived into scenarios much.

Since I own all three, are there any fan scenarios that goons remember fondly as either quite good or hilariously awful?
Similarly, any good multiplayer maps? I don't care about story and stuff for these, I just want some nice maps full of treasure to punch people on.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Shadowmorn posted:

I've not tried any from here but to my understanding this is the better website for maps: http://aow2.heavengames.com/

It does have an unofficial patch that adds a slew of new units such as unique priests for each race if if remember correctly.
I popped this onto my install recently. The unique priests are the only additional standard units, all the other new units are basically for map builders. A lot of numbers were tweaked for balance and the lower-level and mid-level units were given buffs to make them more useful late game.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸
While most of the female models they had seemed OK, I'm hoping "sensible clothing that covers as much as if not more than the male's version does" will be an option for all the female character sets.

The weird, vacant-eyed look on the scantily-clad woman in the first small picture is weirding me out.

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

bamhand posted:

Keep in mind this is the game that had Julia plastered all over the box.
A man can dream, can't he? :negative:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Splicer
Oct 16, 2006

from hell's heart I cast at thee
🧙🐀🧹🌙🪄🐸

Shadowmorn posted:

Im hoping they let you do whatever you please with outfits and appearances, because options are always better then silly limits. Want to be a nearly nude guy with a stick? Go ahead! Want to be an armoured lady to the point that physics weep when you walk? Knock yourself out. :3:
I said "an option" not "the only option" :colbert:
I, too, would like to play Conan the Bulgarian, and players should also be able to make a prettyboy Dwarf to ogle should they so please.

Splicer fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Sep 20, 2013

  • Locked thread