New Server Updates - Need Feedback

[Alzreborn]

I'll comment on the bottom three kingdoms in reverse order according to my ratings:

Atlanteans

IMHO, this kingdom should be retired until it can be properly reimagined or repurposed for a more-water focused map. Barring that, I believe this kingdom could be reworked to be somewhat more viable and also unique.

Water-based devout and political kingdom is the angle that could be explored.

To do this:

• Add the Dynasty trait (prince + influence)
  
• Add Devout trait
  
• Remove Healing trait (minor but out of place)
  
• Add Order trait
  

This puts them among the top political kingdoms.

They would remain at tier 4 magic.

When I look at the AT setup on the webpage and compare it to when I played the AT lat year, I see the spell lists do not match up. I am going to go with the spell list from my game.

AT wizards do not get the Fear spell; this alone potentially impacts them in every combat, PC and group, as Fear is one of the foundational spells. Without that, they don't get a Fear effect until Crack the Sky at p-9. 

I would give them Fear at p-2.

The other magic change is to allow them to Summon Water Elementals, perhaps at p-4, which is early, but fits the kingdom.

The companions are interesting in that the ones they have: Rohirrim, Hill Giant, and Centaurs, don't really make much sense. Unfortunately, the game doesn't offer many good options. There are no "Drowned" companions or "Deep Spawn", for example.

My suggestions:

• Remove all current companions
  
• Add Zealots (as they are now a Devout kingdom)
  
• Add War Machines (fitting for a kingdom based around order and feudalism)
  
• Add Trolls (yep, Trolls)
  

Why Trolls? They are a stand-in for "Sea Giants" or some such, which we don't have. I believe breaking the rule and allowing a non-evil kingdom to have access to Trolls is interesting and somewhat thematic. 

At the end of the day, we end up with a military that is below average in group-to-group battles but above average in PC battles.


Black Dragons

I have commented on them before: https://alamaze.net/forum/thread-16874-page-2.html; with some small changes, I'll paste what I have there here:

First, re-imagine them:

Once the arcane elite and noble ruling caste of dragonkind, the Black Dragons wielded immense magical power and governed through wisdom, mysticism, and ancient law. Their dominion ended millennia ago when the Red Dragons—warriors and enforcers—rose in rebellion, casting down their former masters in a brutal coup.

Forced into exile, the Black Dragons vanished into hidden realms, nursing their wounds and preserving their arcane traditions in secret. Now, cloaked in shadow and fire, they return from the long dark with one purpose: to reclaim their ancestral supremacy and reforge the world in their image.

Given this, look at re-schooling their traits:

• Dynasty (fits the "nobles in exile" theme)
  
• Secretive (exiled away, biding their time)
  
• Forethoughts (being in exile gives one time to think and plan)
  
• Foreknowledge (the dragons have their secrets - give them three artifact names)
  
• Spy Network (operating in the shadows)
  

Keeping:

• Evil (they are still evil)
  
• Magic Resistance Death
  
• Magic Resistance Sleep
  
• Rich
  
  
• Acuity
  

Removing:

• Ruthless (they are evil but lawful)
  
• Trackers (largely redundant with flying) 
  

Magic

• Change the kingdom to be a tier 2 magic kingdom (was 4)
  
• Early spells: Cold Darkness, Infuriate Populace, Summon Death, and Summon Specters (was only Cold Darkness)
  

Military

• Add Rocs to diversify the recruitment pool
  
• Allow them (and the Red) to recruit up to ten Wyvern
  
• Allow them to Summon Specters (flying undead)
  
• Retool the reinforcement schedule to be more in line with other balanced kingdoms: 2,2,1,2,2,1 (same as DA)
  
• Lower kingdom troop defense from "Good" to "Above Average" to reflect that they are not the warriors the Red are
  

Faerie Folk

I have some thoughts here: https://alamaze.net/forum/thread-16883-page-2.html

I'll summarize the changes that fit into what Brek describes as feasible.

Add the Acuity trait. This is thematic, as flying creatures should be less likely to be captured and troops are unlikely to be surprised.

Increase movement rate to a base of four in the plains and forest.

Focus the kingdom on flying creatures.

Remove the following summons:

• Minotaurs
  
• Iron Golems
  
• Ents
  
• Centaurs
  
• All other non-flying summoned creatures
  

Keep:

• Manticores
  
• Gargoyles
  

Add:

• Cockatrices
  

The Chimera troop in my game seemed underpowered, to the point that I didn't feel it was worth ordering its replacement once it was killed. This shouldn't be the case. I have some thoughts in the thread I linked, but for starters, I'd like the troop's offense and defense to be improved.

As a Flying kingdom, Faerie Folk characters should have a range of nine, just as the dragons.

I didn't mention this in the thread, but it fits the theme to allow the kingdom to get the Invisible spells earlier.


I may do the next three kingdoms (AM, PI, and EL), if I can find the time.

Well thought out and organized.  Sorry if it was someone but i just burned through the Black pretty easily and when I played the red it was fun but limited out early they need more troops numbers.  Playing FF now so I reserve my thoughts on that.  AT on paper seems very underpowered, I am trying to play all the positions but that one has not made the cut yet.

[brekk]

First of all, thanks everyone for your input and for compiling all the information into one post. I'll keep things updated as we move forward.

[Clueless]

Some of the players comments are good, but others should be taken with care.

For example, changing the order entry's map dropdown list to be based on the group's starting position is going to generate problems. If you 699 an inactive group (who's location is always at the capital), the group's starting location needs to change to be within the transferring group's location. So, due to the 699 order (and similar situations), you have to allow the map dropdown list to be anywhere as the starting map location or you'll get in trouble.

Another suggestion that I don't like very much is to change the Fairie Folk summon monster spells to be only flying creatures. I've read the original comment about designing this new kingdom and the reason for the summon monster I-IX spells is that the farie folk are a magical race. In fact, the only other kingdom than the pure wizard kingdoms to have full access to all of the 9 summon monster spells (which are a specialty). By limiting them to only have flying creatures would ruin that design decision. Same for vice-versa situations where ground-based kingdoms have access to flying creatures (like Red Bats/Pegasi artifacts). Wouldn't it be better if the software were to check if there's all flying brigades in the group to then use the flying movement chart instead of the ground-based movement chart (like it does now for the flying artifacts)? Just simply check if there are any ground troops, if so, the group uses the ground movement rate. If all flyers, the group uses the flying movement chart. Doing that (which is already done for other kingdoms with flying artifacts or some flying companion troops) wouldn't ruin the kingdom design of the fairie folk being the only kingdom other than the wizards to have full access to all of the summon monster I-IX spells.

Another suggestion that I don't really like is for the sea-based kingdoms have access to the summon water elemental spell. That one and all of the elementals should only be available for the Elementalist wizard kingdom since that is that kingdom's specialty. If other kingdoms have that ability, it'll ruin the spirit and design of being the Elementalist.

So, I like some of the suggestions but others should be taken with care. You really shouldn't ruin the design and conceptual flavor of an individual kingdom for the sake of balancing things out. Instead, do something else that doesn't break another kingdom's specialty...

[davekuyk]

Continuing my analysis from the ratings sheet:

Elves

The Elves are pretty close to the generic kingdom: Good magic, good troops, some solid traits, decent agents. Everything is good, but few things are great.

First thing is to adjust the archery values much like was done with the NO. I believe Olorin and Brek already plan this, in which case this will give something the EL excels at.

Secondly, the companions are pretty lackluster. My suggestion is to allow them to recruit up to 10 Wood Elves (as opposed to only 5) and also allow them to recruit Unicorns. Elves and Unicorns go together like peanut butter and chocolate!


Pirates

I personally like the PI kingdom a lot. I just wish we had a better map for them. Much like the AT, they are hamstrung by the lack of real open seas.

Unlike the AT, the PI feels like a much better developed kingdom. The extra gold from encounters and sea patrols is cool. Pirate's Cove is nice. Good theming.

Let's look at pushing that theming a bit more:

• Move Summon Skeletons to P-4 (from p-6). Undead, drowned skeletons? Sounds good to me!
  
• Push Storm at Seas and Dispel Storm at Seas to p-3 (from p-5 and p-4)
  
• Command Tornado to p-4 (from 5). More storms!
  
• Crack the Sky to p-7 (from 9). Even more storms!
  

My final suggestion is to add a third random artifact to the Foreknowledge list (they start with Eklar and a palantir).


Amazons

These occupy the very bottom of the next-to-last tier on my list.

I don't suggest any changes to them other than the archery and perhaps cavalry changes Olorin and Brek already have planned.

[Strongwill]

I might not be tracking the archery thing right..

If I have a kingdom that does great damage in the archery phase against a kingdom w a powerful army who stands and defends tac 3 attack or defense really, won’t my group that uses a tac1 or 2 archery phase damage guys going to retreat before the other army and thus take even more damage and moral loss?

Not even sure what I write makes sense, so if I have elves attacking on a 1 or 2 level and my archery phase kicks ass, but the guy I’m fighting uses a tac3 defense or attack and holds his ground albeit with losses from archery phase, doesn’t the mechanics make the elf retreat taking a loss with more causalities and moral?

[davekuyk]

Brek and Olorin have mentioned they are looking at improving the archery damage from kingdoms such as the Elves. Presently, these kingdoms with "great archers" don't really do as much damage as one might expect.

[mwigdahl]

Some of the players comments are good, but others should be taken with care.

For example, changing the order entry's map dropdown list to be based on the group's starting position is going to generate problems. If you 699 an inactive group (who's location is always at the capital), the group's starting location needs to change to be within the transferring group's location. So, due to the 699 order (and similar situations), you have to allow the map dropdown list to be anywhere as the starting map location or you'll get in trouble.

Another suggestion that I don't like very much is to change the Fairie Folk summon monster spells to be only flying creatures. I've read the original comment about designing this new kingdom and the reason for the summon monster I-IX spells is that the farie folk are a magical race. In fact, the only other kingdom than the pure wizard kingdoms to have full access to all of the 9 summon monster spells (which are a specialty). By limiting them to only have flying creatures would ruin that design decision. Same for vice-versa situations where ground-based kingdoms have access to flying creatures (like Red Bats/Pegasi artifacts). Wouldn't it be better if the software were to check if there's all flying brigades in the group to then use the flying movement chart instead of the ground-based movement chart (like it does now for the flying artifacts)? Just simply check if there are any ground troops, if so, the group uses the ground movement rate. If all flyers, the group uses the flying movement chart. Doing that (which is already done for other kingdoms with flying artifacts or some flying companion troops) wouldn't ruin the kingdom design of the fairie folk being the only kingdom other than the wizards to have full access to all of the summon monster I-IX spells.

Another suggestion that I don't really like is for the sea-based kingdoms have access to the summon water elemental spell. That one and all of the elementals should only be available for the Elementalist wizard kingdom since that is that kingdom's specialty. If other kingdoms have that ability, it'll ruin the spirit and design of being the Elementalist.

So, I like some of the suggestions but others should be taken with care. You really shouldn't ruin the design and conceptual flavor of an individual kingdom for the sake of balancing things out. Instead, do something else that doesn't break another kingdom's specialty...

Good point on the inactive group monkeywrench!  Maybe an answer here could be similar to what is done for commands that require a pop center target -- prepopulate the top of the dropdown with the expected legal destinations (the 8 surrounding squares plus STOP) so they're easy to find and select, and have a divider and all the rest of the locations below that to handle the exception cases.

On the water elemental issue, the Nomads already get Fire Elemental in their list.  Having a few kingdoms get individual elementals doesn't seem to encroach too much on the Elementalist's theme, as long as it's not everyone and it's just one variety for those that get them.

[Tacticus]

On iPad and iPhone each movement or location related order map area entry requires scrolling down. If by mistake touching wrong letters, all the way erase the order and start over.

---

Magic immunities are good though very few among low magic kingdoms. The game in current version is unbalanced in favor of wizard kingdoms.

[Strongwill]

Brek and Olorin have mentioned they are looking at improving the archery damage from kingdoms such as the Elves. Presently, these kingdoms with "great archers" don't really do as much damage as one might expect.

Yes saw that was something they are working on, my question though even if you beef it up for damage, isn’t the combat engine designed to inflict more damage to a group who retreats first with applicable moral loss, irregardless of damage sustained? So anyone hitting with a lvl 1 or 2 attack/ defense will automatically hit the threshold to retreat, causing a loss in the engagement? Why I always use the most determined allowed by the kingdom I have.

Expl. I played DK in a game, I did fight to last man against SA, he did his normal attack, the threshold of retreat for my tac selection wasn’t meet for me to retreat, but his was even though he was doing well in battle. He retreated and suffered substantially more losses and moral loss, which pretty much killed his game.

So do the game mechanics need to be tweeked to adjust for the archery phase or calvery phase of attacks to not retreat even if the threshold of damage to the opponent hadn’t been met? It’s like a pop, everything you do is to reduce the archery phase to conquer it, just hold on until you surpass that phase then it’s yours? If that makes sense..

[davekuyk]

Brek and Olorin have mentioned they are looking at improving the archery damage from kingdoms such as the Elves. Presently, these kingdoms with "great archers" don't really do as much damage as one might expect.

Yes saw that was something they are working on, my question though even if you beef it up for damage, isn’t the combat engine designed to inflict more damage to a group who retreats first with applicable moral loss, irregardless of damage sustained? So anyone hitting with a lvl 1 or 2 attack/ defense will automatically hit the threshold to retreat, causing a loss in the engagement? Why I always use the most determined allowed by the kingdom I have.

Expl. I played DK in a game, I did fight to last man against SA, he did his normal attack, the threshold of retreat for my tac selection wasn’t meet for me to retreat, but his was even though he was doing well in battle. He retreated and suffered substantially more losses and moral loss, which pretty much killed his game.

So do the game mechanics need to be tweeked to adjust for the archery phase or calvery phase of attacks to not retreat even if the threshold of damage to the opponent hadn’t been met? It’s like a pop, everything you do is to reduce the archery phase to conquer it, just hold on until you surpass that phase then it’s yours? If that makes sense..

I see what you are saying. I seem to recall that in the "old days," this is close to how things were thought to have worked. Things seem to have changed, where it is not often possible to get the desired result with a probing attack or organized withdrawal.

But I would like to see what changes in archery and other phases are in the works before suggesting any changes.