Observations on Combat Phase Dynamics and Kingdom Identity

[Brekk]

Hey everyone,

As we've been diving deeper into the mechanics of the various kingdoms, one thing that's really stood out is how damage is distributed across the different combat phases—archery, charge, melee, and the final battle phase. While it's expected that these phases collectively determine when and how damage is dealt, an intriguing observation has emerged.

Specifically, kingdoms that are traditionally reliant on archery, like the Elves, don't seem to have their damage output in the missile phases (long and short range) reflect their thematic strengths. For instance, when comparing the Elves to the Sacred Order, the latter's cavalry delivers a significant impact during the charge phase, aligning well with their identity. In contrast, the Elves' missile damage, though higher in both long and short range, doesn't carry the same weight or influence in battle outcomes.

This discrepancy suggests that the Elves' damage in their key phases should be as impactful as the Sacred Order's cavalry charge. Adjusting this wouldn't necessarily increase the overall damage dealt by Elven troops but would ensure that their damage is delivered during the phases that best represent their strengths.

Additionally, we've noticed that many companion and kingdom brigades, such as ghouls and shambling mounds, are currently dealing damage in the missile phase. Given their nature, it would make more sense for their damage to be distributed in the melee phase. This adjustment would better reflect their combat style and enhance the authenticity of each kingdom's combat dynamics.

Implementing these changes would undoubtedly alter gameplay dynamics, necessitating further tuning and balance adjustments. However, it would also enhance the authenticity of each kingdom's combat style, making battles feel more aligned with the unique characteristics of each faction.

I'm sharing these thoughts to open a dialogue and gather feedback. What are your perspectives on aligning damage outputs more closely with each kingdom's thematic strengths?

Looking forward to the community's insights.

—Brek / John

[Xerro]

Personally I think its great you are working to make things better. Most online games get occasional balancing patchs to help make the game better. It is accepted industry standard and is viewed as mostly positive. As long as people know the changes are coming in advance they tend to apreciate them and understand even if they personally are hit by the nerf bat. So in sumation I think it is a positive direction, even if there are a few stumbles mixed in. Also I agree with the elf changes I initially pictured them as the hit and run tactic kingdom. I think having different viable tactics would be a good thing. High missile damage and maybe some other guerrilla tactic bonus could make a fun alernative playstyle.

[davekuyk]

When I think of Nomads I think of horse archers - quick, nimble, lightly armored - I believe you have captured them as well as you can with the limitations you have. A rebalance across the board to have kingdoms align with their themes and strengths strikes me as more than worthwhile.

[Pine Needle]

Go Brek! Great ideas. Thanks for the hard work.

All the summoned monsters need work- they all have the same description although Mike said the higher level ones are stronger.

[Brekk]

Go Brek! Great ideas. Thanks for the hard work.

All the summoned monsters need work- they all have the same description although Mike said the higher level ones are stronger.

They are not the same not even close, when I'm all done making changes I will update every kingdom and companion brigades so people know their real strengths becuase it will help going forward as damage phases will Matter!

[Lord Garth]

Brek,

Archery was nerfed by 10% a few years ago so this may be part of the reason the Elves don't really pack a punch in the early stages.

That said, I agree different kingdoms should have different strengths and weaknesses to make the battles more interesting.


Lord Garth
Two Time Consecutive Runner up Alamaze Champion

[Brekk]

Brek,

Archery was nerfed by 10% a few years ago so this may be part of the reason the Elves don't really pack a punch in the early stages.

That said, I agree different kingdoms should have different strengths and weaknesses to make the battles more interesting.


Lord Garth
Two Time Consecutive Runner up Alamaze Champion

That would explain some of it, so I appreciate your guys patience while we work on it.

[Tacticus]

I would suggest battle spells should also be discussed and reviewed. Full high level wizard groups wiping out strong armies; making troops strength, leaders and tactics not much use.

[Brekk]

I would suggest battle spells should also be discussed and reviewed. Full high level wizard groups wiping out strong armies; making troops strength, leaders and tactics not much use.

Tacticus,
Could you add more details to what you're asking so we can be on the same page? With the upcoming changes to troops, I don't think mages will just focus on casting battle spells—they’ll likely need to be more defensive as well. I expect dispels will become more common, and mages who go all-out in the wrong battle may not survive.

[Tacticus]

That’s great. Having stronger troops, more resistance to spells. I was asking that, you already considered.
Wizards should support their army, effect the battle. But should not be too powerful to decide the fate of battle just with a few spells. Spells would be balanced as wiping out thousands of troops instead of tens of thousands.