Probably unintended feature...

Fantasy General II - Invasion is the reimagination of the strategy game classic from the 90s!

Armies once again draw battle-lines on the war-torn land of Keldonia, and a new generation of commanders will test their bravery and tactics against each other. Fantasy wargaming is back!
Post Reply
Edmon
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:50 pm

Probably unintended feature...

Post by Edmon » Sat Aug 15, 2020 10:03 am

If a harpy charms a unit in the middle of your army, it may instantly or within a couple of moves (say, attacking the harpy) morale break.

It will then "surrender" and be instantly lost.

Probably not intended... and themically makes no sense. I would assume the charm effect would simply break in this case, reverting the unit to owners control.

OBG_primetide
Owned by Gravity
Owned by Gravity
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:46 am

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by OBG_primetide » Mon Aug 17, 2020 3:07 pm

Well, that is an effect that is the result of a chain of systems applying, but we think it works out as intended - a "charmed" unit is fully under the harpy's spell and if it cannot flee when it wants, it will disband, which thematically makes less sense, admittedly, but mechanically is consistent.
Making Fantasy General 2

Edmon
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:50 pm

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by Edmon » Tue Aug 18, 2020 8:27 pm

OBG_primetide wrote:
Mon Aug 17, 2020 3:07 pm
Well, that is an effect that is the result of a chain of systems applying, but we think it works out as intended - a "charmed" unit is fully under the harpy's spell and if it cannot flee when it wants, it will disband, which thematically makes less sense, admittedly, but mechanically is consistent.
Yeah, I don't think this makes sense from a gameplay perspective either. It means a harpy could kill units by charming them and then deliberately having any allied unit kill themselves (or sometimes the A.I. accidentally makes them kill themselves). Since charmed unit will already have very low morale, basically any attack can instantly kill a unit, in a way that really makes no sense to the player and no sense mechanically as in other games a unit that is controlled by a 3rd party is still your unit, you just don't control it anymore. You shouldn't be rewarded for killing yourself ether. I dunno, when I encountered this situation it felt like a bug or oversight to me.

On a side note, I just played a pretty epic multiplayer game... but there is one pretty serious balance issue. In multiplayer, capturing things should be rewarded, but for the barbarian side it might not be. Barb's can't deploy units from razed settlements and you can often get rewards you can't use. For example, in my game I got 6 armour from my various captures. It was impossible to use it as I had gotten no gold. Prehaps in multiplayer a selection of rewards should be offered to players can pick something that will benefit them. If you are extending yourself and risking your units to make captures and raze settlements, getting unusable weapons, armour or liquid mana (as you have gotten zero gold) can really hurt your game.

The imperials don't have this issue so much, as they slowly generate gold, they could in theory slowly build up the funds to buy something and use up any armour/mana/weapons they find.

OBG_primetide
Owned by Gravity
Owned by Gravity
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:46 am

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by OBG_primetide » Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:46 am

One of the lessons for multiplayer Barbarian armies is to always keep gold in reserve from creating your armies - because you will be able to get powerful units "cheaper" with your raided armor
Making Fantasy General 2

Edmon
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:50 pm

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by Edmon » Fri Aug 21, 2020 10:11 am

OBG_primetide wrote:
Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:46 am
One of the lessons for multiplayer Barbarian armies is to always keep gold in reserve from creating your armies - because you will be able to get powerful units "cheaper" with your raided armor
But conversely to what I said before, you might never find any armour or weapons, only artefacts and additional money in that case. In which case conserving money for the actual fight has become a mistake. When you burn settlements as a barb, you can no longer deploy there, so you can very easily have no place to deploy if you are risking trying to get something you can use. If you don't find any armour or weapons and you have money already, you might not be able to do anything with that either.

I guess my point is, the rewards are too random. If you could select a reward from 3 random ones or similar then you might be able to plan a strategy around getting rewards... But as things are, it means that RNG becomes a bigger factor than skill in some cases because if you get good rewards then you will be in a vastly better position than if you overextend for say, 4 rewards none of which you can use. It is very easy to obtain many useless rewards and then be in a worse position than someone who just sat near their start position and fortifed it, not risking any units or taking any damage from the neutrals. You can basically really harm yourself trying to obtain rewards and advantages, I am not sure it is good multiplayer gameplay to punish aggression and exploring and potentially reward looking for a good position to camp and then camping there the whole match.

I hope you find this feedback helpful btw. Wouldn't give it if I didn't think the game was really good.

OBG_primetide
Owned by Gravity
Owned by Gravity
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:46 am

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by OBG_primetide » Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:43 am

Thanks- we always value constructive criticism and it helps us get better :)
So yes, much appreciated.
Making Fantasy General 2

trashplayer218
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2020 12:16 pm

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by trashplayer218 » Mon Aug 24, 2020 3:33 pm

No further comments on the random nature of looting.

The faction economy is alright, even if map dependent. Empire does not receive tax if loot timer expires and need to defend every settlement tile for that, and Barbarian does not necessarily need to raze immediately upon capture. Falirson has the ability to set up war camp if one goes too pillage-happy, even if that is an awkward skill tree for skirmish otherwise.

Map control is vital for shrines and mana pools. Shrines are miniscule except the +speed ones, which are game deciding. Getting the mana advantage is very critical, especially with Barbarian. Gold is finite while mana is bottomless, so staying on defensive will sooner or later wear one down. In BvE matchup for example, ceding map control as Empire would give the long reach options free reign because Empire has worse reconnaissance capabilities.

Counter deploying is more advantageous than the tempo lost by hoarding gold, the starting army should consist of necessities like scout and heroes only, i.e. AoE artilleries only upon scouted mass infantries, charge breakers against chargers, high morale units against magic units, etc. See it like a backward RTS. Also mercenaries.

brettwjohnson
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 4:20 pm

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by brettwjohnson » Wed Oct 07, 2020 6:01 pm

OBG_primetide wrote:
Mon Aug 17, 2020 3:07 pm
Well, that is an effect that is the result of a chain of systems applying, but we think it works out as intended - a "charmed" unit is fully under the harpy's spell and if it cannot flee when it wants, it will disband, which thematically makes less sense, admittedly, but mechanically is consistent.
Given that a big part of player enjoyment comes from building better units over a series of multiple scenarios, *permanently* losing an experienced/expensive unit (that you have invested a lot of time/energy into) due to mechanic like this is a *horrible* design decision because the player could not prevent it...

If a player decides to risk a high value unit and loses it, then that was their decision. We may still not like it, but realize it was the outcome of OUR play...

This kind of things simply prompts players to reload and game dissatisfaction... Could easily be replaced with something like "A charmed unit which would surrender, instead loses 50% remaining health to wounds and the charm breaks."

jimwinsor
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 900
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 8:54 am

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by jimwinsor » Mon Oct 12, 2020 2:41 pm

brettwjohnson wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 6:01 pm
Given that a big part of player enjoyment comes from building better units over a series of multiple scenarios, *permanently* losing an experienced/expensive unit (that you have invested a lot of time/energy into) due to mechanic like this is a *horrible* design decision because the player could not prevent it...
But it could be easily prevented, no? You just make sure a retreat path is open for the charmed unit, which you should be able to do unless it somehow immediately broke before you could move units (ie, extremely unlikely). So this is more of a trap for the unwary. Once you're a good player and aware of the possibility, it is easily avoided.
Streaming as "Grognerd" on Twitch! https://www.twitch.tv/grognerd

Edmon
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:50 pm

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by Edmon » Thu Oct 22, 2020 12:14 pm

jimwinsor wrote:
Mon Oct 12, 2020 2:41 pm
brettwjohnson wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 6:01 pm
Given that a big part of player enjoyment comes from building better units over a series of multiple scenarios, *permanently* losing an experienced/expensive unit (that you have invested a lot of time/energy into) due to mechanic like this is a *horrible* design decision because the player could not prevent it...
But it could be easily prevented, no? You just make sure a retreat path is open for the charmed unit, which you should be able to do unless it somehow immediately broke before you could move units (ie, extremely unlikely). So this is more of a trap for the unwary. Once you're a good player and aware of the possibility, it is easily avoided.
Once your army is quite large, having units (especially archers) that are surrounded by other units is something that happens all the time. It only takes a few harpies (one to charm, another to come along and do the fear move) to instantly delete a unit. If it was the kind of unit that generally has low morale, such as trolls or most early game units.

OBG_primetide
Owned by Gravity
Owned by Gravity
Posts: 349
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:46 am

Re: Probably unintended feature...

Post by OBG_primetide » Fri Oct 23, 2020 12:03 pm

Yes, but that is not an accident - you need to have several things happening and you need to see the harpies coming and STILL decide to wall in your own troops. It's like seeing troll hurler or catapult and putting low armour high unit-member troops in reach of them. It is preventable and forces you to adapt your tactics, which is what we want to happen :)
Making Fantasy General 2

Post Reply

Return to “Fantasy General II - Invasion”