PDA

View Full Version : Great Game!



Vexbane
03-02-2013, 04:28 AM
Hello. I rarely comment on games like this, but I like this one and see lots of potential.
I think the game is solid. I like tactical battles and the viking concept is great. The fact that a single player version is coming out as well is awesome. Looking forward to checking it out.

The F2P model (so far) is decent. It does not scream P2W ay all, which is a good thing. You can buy renown, but as long as the match making system is decent (so far it is) I do not see it as a negative. The skins are a nice touch. Perhaps though they can be a little different rather than all just different colors? Maybe the outfit/hair styles could change a bit? This would make them more worthwhile imo and get me to purchase them. Right now it does not really interest me as they are now. If I had a lot of extra renown I would try the one you can buy with that though.

I have played about 20-30 games so far. Have a decent win record too. Tutorials are good and informative. Picked it up very quick. I do have many many years of tactical game experience though. So far everyone I have played has been nice and the games have been fun. Most were pretty close, which is good to me. No one likes a one sided fight. I tried to help as many new players as people helped me too.

Trying new combos is fun and the kills for leveling is an interesting mechanic. It can be tough sometimes to get what kills you need on a certain unit. Especially the shieldbangers. It was hard to know which unit needed the kill too since I could not find that info anywhere on my unit (if it is somewhere I could not see it). So that should be added if it is not so I know which of any double units need the kills. The expanded barracks is a good deal. Price is just right on that. The match making works well so far. No units have screamed OP yet, but all of my fights have only been with 1-3 rank 1 units. I like the different upgrade paths for the base units. One feature that would be nice to have is the ability to change the upgrade path instead of having to get a new unit and upgrade down a different path. This will help people who do not buy the expanded barracks as well.

One thing I have noticed that I do not like so far is renown gain. In the beginning it seemed ok to me. Then I put on expert mode and got more. Now though after a more careful look you do not get much at all. If these values are wrong then I apologize, but this is what I have seen.

You get 1 for each kill, 1 for a win, 2 for expert. That is without any other bonuses I assume. Yes I know you can buy renown gain, but that should be an extra bonus. One renown for winning seems very cheap to me and not even worth the effort. Some games can take awhile and after that hard fought victory I get 1 point? Come on. Should be at least 5 imo. Instead of a flat 1 point per unit I think the points should be based on the rank of the unit killed. One for a base unit, 2 for the promoted unit, then maybe an additional point for each rank above 1? ( I realize that right now there is only rank 1). One point for killing that tough unit seems low imo. Only 2 extra points for losing half my turn timer also seems a bit low. I would bump this to 5 imo.
Besides a crash and the game freezing for me during a match this is my only gripe. To me the renown gain is too low. Low level games should be maybe like 15 for a solid win on expert imo. The higher you get the more points you should earn, not the same.

The game is very good though and I look forward to playing more. I hope you will consider the renown gain increase. Thanks.
Regards,
Vexbane.

netnazgul
03-02-2013, 04:52 AM
Great review, Vexbane!

For the kills - you can see the kill count on the unit profile screen (click any unit in the proving grounds) and on the unit's lore popup (it's opened by the scroll button on the unit profile).

For the renown growth - it's still an open question about changing it, as for now there are a lot of different achievements that give renown boost at early stages of your TBS:F gaming. Generally it's 5-10 games needed to promote a unit (you should also get a proper kill count on this unit before it) not including any achievements you will get while playing, so it's even less than that.
The issue is that if the renown growth curve is too steep, higher skilled players will farm a big pile of unused renown (for now rank1 team is pretty much the maximum you can get), and average player will achieve maximum team power gaming too soon to it being interesting.
Still it's a subject to think about as I've said, and much could and will be changed with rank2 and rank3 units introduction which is coming now.

Vexbane
03-02-2013, 07:27 PM
Thank you for the reply Netnazgul. I know you can see their kills in the proving grounds. I mean in battle. There is no way to tell which raider let's say of the 2 vanilla ones I have is the new one I just bought or the one I have had for awhile. It is annoying. I also get that you cannot give away too much renown or it will not be worth buying. At the moment though it is too little for me. The rewards are just not worth the time I invest in the game.

Here are a few other suggestions/tidbits for the devs:

- To me the banner button on the in game screen should display the building banners and the ? should be for help/tutorial. Makes more sense imo.


- There needs to be an option to turn off in game sound effects. More specifically the shieldbangers. Seriously. He is making me feel like Jack from the shining. Please have an option to turn it off.

- Since you can name your units why doesn't this show up on their banner? I know it shows it in the matchmaking screen, but that is not enough. When I see a units banner their name should show up. I want them to know the name of my mighty warriors that just killed them!!!

- I think the shieldbanger and raider passives should be switched. Doesn't it make more sense that a giant man holding a shield would provide shielding for others nearby? He is always in the midst of your army. Where are the raiders often charge ahead or flank the enemy negating its passive most of the time. I realize this would mean a small rework for the shieldbangers and raider, but it makes more sense to me from a fluff standpoint and a tactical one imo.

- The maps have some great artwork and all, but are all boring and uninspired tactically. Only the one with the fire in the middle has any kind of effect in battle. The rest are devoid of any obstacles or things that could effect strategy. The downside of the fire pit though is that people use it to steal kills from you if are winning. Happened to me. Guy was down to his last guy so he just went into the fire and killed himself so I would not get the kill. So the fire, while awesome, needs to not be able to kill you. At least if they are down to 1 person. Because that was just lame. Otherwise it is my favorite map. So add some more maps with stuff that effects you tactically. Like a bar with tables and obstacles etc.. I realize this may hamper 2x2's sometime, but that should be part of battle and the downside of taking a large powerful unit.

So to conclude. I do like this game. I think there needs to be some kinks worked out of course. I will continue to follow it for now. I will play from time to time as well, but until some issues worked out I will be staying away for the most part.
My reasons to not play that much anymore:

- Not enough renown earned per match.
- Maps are uninspiring tactically.

Regards,
Vexbane.

franknarf
03-02-2013, 08:51 PM
Maybe they are planning to add more varied maps, but I suspect that the tactical focus is the units themselves and how you use the space. You might notice that some maps are longer and narrower (the wall), while others (proving grounds) are square. This does actually make a (small) difference. Of course, the other two have posts and are non-rectangular (the beach and mead house). I don't think this is a game about terrain in the way you might be expecting based on your experience with other tactics games. That does not mean that it is lacking in depth.

EDIT: regarding this quote from another thread


The map should play a vital part of your strategy and be positive and negative to some group set-ups.

To put it mildly, that sounds very unpleasant. So, we're supposed to think before the match even starts "uh oh, this is the map my team has a disadvantage on"?

raven2134
03-02-2013, 10:14 PM
In beta, Stoic has explained that the focus for the tactical play is positioning. Units themselves and the positions they occupy create tactical situations, rather than forcing/influencing people to play a certain way due to the map. In addition, map obstacles, while adding more variety to the game, also introduce possible imbalance. Because units move differently (humans and varls, 3 or 4 spaces), different obstacles or obstacles themselves can favor one type of unit over the other.

The current obstacle maps had a good deal of thought go into them to keep both unit positional play and balance as well as terrain variety viable.

Regarding the shieldbanger vs raider passive. This was done for a number of reasons.
1 raiders are more maneuverable and hence are able to fit into formations better to grant the bonus.
2 because varls have higher stat totals and the counterattack effect of return the favor would be activiated more often on a varl than on a raider
3.because of the nature defining the units, varls are designed and narrated to tend to be individuals, similar to heroes in the norse eddas, humans are...humans, regular people, and find their strength in working together.

netnazgul
03-03-2013, 02:28 AM
Thank you for the reply Netnazgul. I know you can see their kills in the proving grounds. I mean in battle. There is no way to tell which raider let's say of the 2 vanilla ones I have is the new one I just bought or the one I have had for awhile. It is annoying. I also get that you cannot give away too much renown or it will not be worth buying. At the moment though it is too little for me. The rewards are just not worth the time I invest in the game.
Yes, it'd be better to somehow separate identical units. Or maybe just to show their kill-count in battle


- To me the banner button on the in game screen should display the building banners and the ? should be for help/tutorial. Makes more sense imo.
You know, I've posted that several times during beta and after launch, and also told devs about that in chat, but NOBODI LISNZZ :confused:



- There needs to be an option to turn off in game sound effects. More specifically the shieldbangers. Seriously. He is making me feel like Jack from the shining. Please have an option to turn it off.
As far as I know, this is (or at least should be) being worked on.


- Since you can name your units why doesn't this show up on their banner? I know it shows it in the matchmaking screen, but that is not enough. When I see a units banner their name should show up. I want them to know the name of my mighty warriors that just killed them!!!
Unit's name is showed in the lower-left corner of the UI, right beside his stats (on his turn)


- I think the shieldbanger and raider passives should be switched. Doesn't it make more sense that a giant man holding a shield would provide shielding for others nearby? He is always in the midst of your army. Where are the raiders often charge ahead or flank the enemy negating its passive most of the time. I realize this would mean a small rework for the shieldbangers and raider, but it makes more sense to me from a fluff standpoint and a tactical one imo.
Raiders are like spartans, they are far more competitive when together. Varls are more of lone warriors. But raven has already said that

piotras
03-03-2013, 08:44 AM
Great thread Vexbane!

To add my 5 cents:

Renown - there was a great suggestion about giving Renown per unit which survived, so for a really superb win you could earn even 3-4 rather than 1.

Maps - there's also the beach map which introduces posts which block units (especially 2x2 Varls) and more maps like that are likely to be introduced (we will probably get more maps as more of the single player content will be produced, I hope at least).