Jump to content

Ivory Knight

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Ivory Knight last won the day on September 19 2022

Ivory Knight had the most liked content!


168 Excellent


Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Will unit availability map mode be introduced as well?
  2. I think the army location indicators that are on the side of the screen clutter the visual view/interfacing. The minimap already helps one orient towards the enemy, adding the side screen indicators seems like overkill. Although without play testing I cannot say forsure 😉 . But I think there is a reason games like Starcraft and Total War, do not have those.
  3. Great to hear from you guys again. Happy summer. How does your map generating algorithm actually work? Is every map unique? Could you explain some of the details, such as how it considers river crossings, mountains, swamps, castles, hills ect... What are the conditions for reinforcement? In particular is reinforcement instantaneous and only occurs at the start of the battle if a friendly army is close by? Or can reinforcement occur during the battle, based on the elapsed time and distance and friendly armies are from the battle location? You mentioned armies have "army camps" in field battles. What exactly are these? Are they supply depos that if you captured drops the opponents morale? Or simply the tents that the units deploy when resting and need to dismantle before being able to fight, as was the case in KOH 1? In break siege attacks, does the defending/sieging army get to set up their own defense, such as a trench line or wood stakes to funnel the armies? As you know during sieges the sieging army almost always set up trench works and other defensive structures opposing the castle defense? Understandably, I would expect these to be less assailable than the castle its self.
  4. It is not really suppose to have historical justification, it is suppose to act as an end goal for a player who is playing solo, even in the first KOH you could continue playing even after achieving it, I imagine the same will be in KPH 2.
  5. I get the general feeling that what you are trying to push for in the game is for it to have a deeper play around army positioning and army actions. You are expressing that attitude strongly now with regards to how they handled the supply issue. I actually had talked about a similar desire earlier but focused the changes onto positioning rather then army abilities. I think what we both envision is something akin to "ARCADE WORKSHOP: FACTORY SHIPS" from starcraft but implemented into KOH. With regards to positioning; examples could be , Ambushing bonuses are given to an army which recently leaves a tree line, swamps gives speed decreases to enemy armies which walk around in them too long, Hills provide a degree of bonus to arrow flights, night time fights ( for marshalls who have nighttime traits), fights on snow ect.... all these if given enough buffing and balance could really give the game a deeper sense of army management and gameplay. Now you are trying to achieve similar depth by giving armies cool down abilities, and I think this is a much easier road to walk down, what you have suggested above I enjoy allot, though I do see many issues arising as well, ill just mention a few concerns, which I am sure you will be able to rebut, but these are really intended more for the DEVS I suppose if they do intend to implement your changes to some degree. 1. Do not add too many marshal/army abilities. Both in number and in type. (Number issue is obvious average players will lose them self in trying to remember what all do and end up utilizing just a few. Type isnt as obvious as an issue but still just as important, every type of ability should fill a very unique role and have the most reduced overlap with the others in terms of why and when that ability is best to be used. When abilities overlap in use, it reduces the who objective of having them in the first place which was to give depth of play. The more unique an ability feels the more chance a player uses it when it should be used. 2. Ability adjustments based on army size. ( An adjustment you might think of making is that the size of the army influences the abilities it can use. Though this runs the above risk mentioned where we have too many abilities. But it may be interesting that a fully sized army gets a different set of abilities, then a small sized army, helping balance the armies against each other for all various balancing which needs to be done for armies of different sizing. It could also be done using an ability Tree, every new slot of unit unlocks or exchanges an ability. ) 3. Do not give nations different abilities. (You could get really creative here of course and start to give nations different abilities, but I would argue against this for the Number issue mentioned above, and more importantly that an experienced player might just select nations which are overpowered and pummel inexperienced players. I always enjoy games where the new players are put onto a rather equal field as the experienced players. Abilities which are generic throughout the nations keeps the depth of play much more simpler to get into and learn. ) 4. Abilities should be intuitive. ( this is self explanatory, you shouldnt have to read a forum online 😉 to fully understand all the effects bonuses and negatives an ability gives your army. This also makes the ability more relatable to the player and real life, as a side bonus. 5. Cooldowns and consequences of these abilities should match the expected outcomes. ( What I mean by this is, the abilities should have a nicely balanced cooldown/consequence such that when used, you get the bonus/effect for the expected needed duration of time. In other words abilities should not need to be spammed, nor should they need to be hoarded.) (Side not : This is not starcraft this is KOH, and the RTS of the map should feel more slow but strategically based rather then fast and micro based. I am concerned that the main advantage a person has from the above ability system you laid out is the persons speed to reply and not the thought that goes into the actual action. Conversely, I do not want the abilities to be such 1 time uses that people sit on them until the moment to use them is clearer than water. ) All in all, I like what you laid out William and as usual the devil is in the details. Well see what they say in the stream.
  6. Can you attain more supplies by completely wiping out an opposing enemy army? The assumption here is that you overran the opponents and captured their army supply. Do you still lose supply during an ongoing siege? And if so, do sieges cancel off once you are out of supply? Can you double>triple>quadruple the usage of the equipment slots? i.e Have 4 siege equipment's, 4 wagons ect.. Follow up question: Has this been tried how does the balance feel on that? Keep up the hard work.
  7. "Now, I also do agree that pure trading victory through kingdom advantages is a bit odd for a "medieval kingdoms setting", this is not a "Merchants of Honor: global trade EU" game. But the map is huge, the game can last forever and you need an option to dominate through economy before taking every single province on a map and an escape option to still win even if AI is military way too strong and aims for political (vote) victory. Needs to be an alternative option for a player." I agree, but having the kingdom advanatages being a game victory in the form it is I do not think is the answer.
  8. I agree with you William that, making a tech tree of Kingdom Advantages with further advantages requiring more resources seems like a great way to solve and maintain the current system. It even might make 64 goods feel like a lot less, since you are never worried about all of them at once, but only a few at a time. Although I am still not sold on the idea that accruing all the advantages should be a victory condition, as Vednor points out, the Ai never trully competes with you in KOH 1. Whats the solution? Have the AI compete in KOH 2? The idea of racing to find trade goods (effectively through war, since thats the only way to get more) just doesnt seem fun. I am ok with there being some big bonus once getting all of the advantages or no bonus at all, but being a victory condition just doesnt sit right to me. Unless you bring something deeper to the trade mechanic which unifies economic diplomacy and war together so that through the acquisition of the advantages you impose you rule onto other kingdoms in some form or another. Beating those kingdoms and taking some of their territory to produce a trade good so you have all the kingdom advantages doesnt mean you rule europe, it just means you won some wars and got some territory.
  9. William Blake brings up some good points of issue, and I agree basically with all of them, especially the too many goods point. I think William has tried to stick with the kingdom advantages being a mechanic part of the game and offer adjustments to maintain it. However, I will take a controversial point here, and say, that I think we should remove this Kingdom Advantages. Firstly as a victory condition, since it does not make much sense that acquiring goods some how makes u economically the dominator over Europe. Though in replace another economic victory condition should be implemented. Possibly Vassalage domination, or some sort of Trade domination. Next, this falls under Williams comment that boosting the player for accruing trade goods unless balanced well, can lead to exploding snow balls. This obviously needs to be handled well. Instead I propose something else. Trade goods are existent on the map just as they are now, but they flow between adjacent kingdoms naturally. You can upgrade your trade good province to generate more goods and this will generate more money (or bonuses) as more goods flow out of your provinces and are consumed by Kingdoms which demand it. That is the easy part. Here is the tricky but fun part. You can cancel the demand and/or the supply for a trade good not only within your own Kingdom but also upon another in the form of enforcement. If another nation refuses your enforcement this gives you justifications for war. This is just a general outline and to make it work smoother, enforcement could involve not only threats of war, but promises of lump sum money or monthly money, to make up for the trade lost, or diplomatic pacts of defense ect... Carrot and stick should both be incorporated. This seems much more real and tangible, and say you enforced trade conditions on all the nations in europe, then I would say you economically control europe, and that could be a real win condition that would make sense. Regardless of what is decided in the end I conclude by saying the way the kingdom advantages are laid out currently ( the same they were in KOH 1) seem like a boring game mechanic that brings little to the experience of the game. Just because it was in KOH 1 doesnt mean it needs to be in KOH 2.... at least not in the exact form.
  10. Thanks guys for the new diary!! You mentioned that all the brothers of a prince/king are "important relatives", and can succeed the thrown. What about princesses? Do they also act as potential inheritors of the throne? And could you clarify that this indeed means inheritance never goes up parental lineage ( AKA through cousins.) , but only ever sideways via brothers.
  11. How is communication handled in the multiplayer? Will there be a built in voice chat system or just text base? I would greatly like to be able to chat with all the human players, and also to have a separate chat for my own allied human players.
  12. Do pagans treat each other as different religions? Or just have those negative relations with islam and Christianity. ??
  13. Also I didnt get the impression that poland was broken, by the dev diary, it was just 1 question that someone asked because they thought poland was broken in another game. I think you really misinterpreted that. ;P, Happens to the best of us.
  14. " competitive multiplayer there will be strong exploitable metagame." Sure, but just like sc2, once the appropriate tweaks and balances are made (updates), the meta tends to spread out, opening up other possible strategies. "I'm looking at you soulless "twitch streamer"" Uhmm ouch. But again thats what updates are for, to help balance out broken shit, and strong metas. SC2 wasnt built in a day. You cant expect a new strategy genre to be balanced on release. LOSE THAT EXPECTATION. However, if they do release the game and then loose interest in updating it, then I would be worried, and that is the formula for a game to retain broken metas. I disagree with some specifics of your suggested "Competitive" mode. But I think with some good polishing, something of the sort could work. The question in the end is..... do we want a model closer to something like sc2, where we have completely balanced starting positions, like an "Arena", where metas and mechanics are mostly tested? Or do you want a more chaotic world more like how multiplayer is done in HOI 4 or Europa, where players pick w.e nations and starting positions, and try to form alliances or grand strategies to attain victory? ( Its a very different type of skill, but a skill none the less) I suspect the current game could run into the direction of either of these, choices. It could even, be made in such a way that both are viable. Though when we consider multiplayer, it is always important to not split the multiplayer community too much. We cannot have 10000 game modes floating around in the multiplayer world, this helps kills the multiplayer community especially for games with smaller player bases. That would be my second biggest concern, after the biggest concern of update ghosting by the devs. So in conclusion, I think you are right, 1 mode where anything could be done "free play", and another where competitive play is forced into a set "arena" type mode.
  15. You mentioned that the Islamic religions of Sunni and Shia have different holy cities which they consider holy, and defend aggressively. Could you explain more specifically how the AI Sunni and Shia treats these cities, with regards to diplomacy and war?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.