The OpenDev/Preview Thread

[CivLuvah]

As said by others before, thank you @Catoninetales_Amplitude for the effort in answering our questions and feedback!

2. Quarters "level up" visually once the output of their tile reaches an era-dependent threshold. Here's a screenshot by our resident meme-master Salterius:

I just want to comment on how beautifully laid out that city is. The city centre is at the head and the rest of the city is spread out within the limits of the cliffs.

 

[conorbebe]

So had a chance to properly play the scenarios today on my PC, which was a far better experience than on a laptop!

I found the first 3 battle scenarios offered a good challenge and although it seemed to me that the AI had the upper hand overall, I felt quite accomplished when I eventually managed to defeat them. It's clear to me that the AI is much more strategically intelligent than in Civilization, which is of course fantastic. They were aware of the terrain and the advantages and disadvantages of each feature and position, and weren't too easily baited (although they weren't so smart as to never fall into a trap, which is a good thing otherwise battles might be too frustrating and tedious).

The fourth battle scenario however, I didn't really know what I was supposed to do. It's probably just inexperience and incompetence on my part, as I've never really played a 4X outside of Civilization before, but I just felt trapped the entire time and the battle seemed to drag on with little hope of me making any meaningful advance. The mortars were just whittling down the health of my units whilst their melee troops refused to attack me, or in some circumstances, just stood still in one place until my ranged units took them down. So I definitely have mixed feelings about the fourth battle scenario, although it's difficult for me to say whether this was an issue I had with the game/AI, or simply how the scenario was designed.

I will also say I'm still a bit confused about the difference between reserves and reinforcements, if there even is one? I think some clarification and UI improvements in this area would be greatly appreciated.

Finally, unrelated to the game itself, but did anyone else have trouble opening the feedback forms at the end of the scenarios? For me, half the time I would click submit feedback and the game would just take me back to the main menu, forcing me to open the scenario again. It's not a huge issue but a little annoying considering the whole point of OpenDev is to be vocal about our thoughts on the game.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Finally, unrelated to the game itself, but did anyone else have trouble opening the feedback forms at the end of the scenarios? For me, half the time I would click submit feedback and the game would just take me back to the main menu, forcing me to open the scenario again. It's not a huge issue but a little annoying considering the whole point of OpenDev is to be vocal about our thoughts on the game.

Yes, there appear to be some unresolved issues with the survey integration that we are still looking into.

Regarding the fourth battle, I would say that after you played the attacker in the first three scenarios, it serves as a nice demonstration that as the defender, you can hold your ground against a superior foe if you play your cards right. And of course, in a full game of Humankind those four "strategic turns" the battle lasted could have given you opportunity to move a reinforcement (cavalry) army around the battle and join it at the northern end, striking the enemy mortars in the back while their halberdiers were occupied at the river.

 

[Mathias Rex]

Thank you very much for your response, Catoninetales!

 

[conorbebe]

Regarding the fourth battle, I would say that after you played the attacker in the first three scenarios, it serves as a nice demonstration that as the defender, you can hold your ground against a superior foe if you play your cards right. And of course, in a full game of Humankind those four "strategic turns" the battle lasted could have given you opportunity to move a reinforcement (cavalry) army around the battle and join it at the northern end, striking the enemy mortars in the back while their halberdiers were occupied at the river.

Thanks for your fast response! I agree it was a good idea to switch up the roles, but within the constraints of the scenario I found it a bit limiting for sure. But again, I don’t claim to be an expert of any kind, so there may well have been something I missed.

I’ve managed to submit feedback on all scenarios now. Looking forward to scenario 3!

 

[Shadowhal]

Finally a chance to add some thoughts I have been having.

First off, the battles look amazing and I love that tactics, terrain and abilities play a strong role here. As the scenarios show, there is room to turn the tide, if you play your cards wisely.

That said, I would tentatively share the concern voiced by others that these battles could slow down the overall game flow a lot (too much?). The beauty of EL's battles was that they were generally quite quick, because you only had 6 times to think about and issue commands. Here this can happen more often as you see the result of each unit's action. Longer battles can work, but I don't think I'd want a larger one more often then every few turns, if even. Judging by EL's game flow, it might be a bit too frequent for my taste.

You may want to think about smart automation for battles. I liked AoW's combat retry function, as it safely eliminates the need to fight trivial battles. Is it in-built save scumming? Yes, partly. But do I really want to spend my time as emperor leading small scale 2:1, 3:1 superiority battles when there isn't an obvious terrain risk? Nah, for me at least. Others probably want to fight out everything and love the additional detail.

On more technical aspects, I must admit it took me a while to understand the information about minimum and maximum damage dealt in the attack preview field, both the symbols and the health bar. Maybe add the damage symbol before the minimum damage or after both the minimum and the maximum damage. For the health bar, maybe use a stripped red/green bar instead to display the drop in damage? Or something lightly flashing? (a different colour scheme might help with colour impairments, though the red/green symbology is pretty heavily embedded in games these days). Also, maybe a little number above or beside the health bar to indicate current/max health?

Should there be an option to have any commands be confirmed? Even in the dev live stream, the dev accidentally executed the wrong command, because of a small mouse movement. Seems especially relevant if you want to explore the potential results of more complex commands (first move here, then attack this unit from that spot).

Will there be a live combat log? Might be nice to track what your opponent has done if you missed which unit exactly was moved and how so much damage was dealt. More a QoL feature that can come later.

Not sure it was covered or shown in a stream, but what's the consequence of retreat/winning by capturing the flag? In EL, retreat mean all retreating units lost x% of maximum hit points (around 50% I think). If this happened when the flag is captured, then the mechanism seems self-defeating. It's designed to keep an enemy from avoiding engagement. And yet by capturing it you allow that defending partly exactly what it would have wanted by kiting - escape that immediate battle, albeit at reduced health. But I guess it doesn't work quite like that ...

That being said, what options do you have when facing impossible odds? It would strike that in many historical engagements, an army would only fight a losing battle if it has to i.e. no safe route to escape and/or no reinforcements nearby. And the premise of a "fight to the last man" battle in many strategy games seems quite at odds with many actual battles. Are there are options to retreat, to stall for reinforcements? Certainly battles being bound by rounds helps. Of course, it needs to be balanced for playability. Chasing up fleeing armies forever is no fun for anyone ...

 

[FinalDoomsday]

I think there will be fewer battles than Endless Legend and since world conquest is not a victory condition theres no reason to throw yourself into tons of battles and take on the world. If you claim your fame stars from warfare for the era you might not have any reason to continue fighting so you can settle peace terms.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

That said, I would tentatively share the concern voiced by others that these battles could slow down the overall game flow a lot (too much?). The beauty of EL's battles was that they were generally quite quick, because you only had 6 times to think about and issue commands. Here this can happen more often as you see the result of each unit's action. Longer battles can work, but I don't think I'd want a larger one more often then every few turns, if even. Judging by EL's game flow, it might be a bit too frequent for my taste.

As much as I like the EL system myself, I am afraid it is one of the biggest points of criticism in EL for our existing playerbase. Many players were frustrated by the lack of control. While I still think the EL system gives you more control than many give it credit for if you plan carefully, this planning can also be a problem. Unless the majority of my army wins the initiative, pitched battles often have me thinking about the exact order of orders for a long time, so in the end the Humankind system does not take me longer to use in truly pitched battles.
My impressions from my time with the dev build agree with FinalDoomsday's suspicions: There were generally not as many battles as in Endless Legend for me, because I was usually not fighting to completely annihilate an enemy. There is only so much fame you can gain from military victories and conquest. Of course, I have not played against a human opponent yet, and that might tip the scales.

You may want to think about smart automation for battles. I liked AoW's combat retry function, as it safely eliminates the need to fight trivial battles. Is it in-built save scumming? Yes, partly. But do I really want to spend my time as emperor leading small scale 2:1, 3:1 superiority battles when there isn't an obvious terrain risk? Nah, for me at least. Others probably want to fight out everything and love the additional detail.

Our current automation will play the battle out on the map, so you can turn it off if things start going badly. We're still working on the "instant resolution" though.

Not sure it was covered or shown in a stream, but what's the consequence of retreat/winning by capturing the flag? In EL, retreat mean all retreating units lost x% of maximum hit points (around 50% I think). If this happened when the flag is captured, then the mechanism seems self-defeating. It's designed to keep an enemy from avoiding engagement. And yet by capturing it you allow that defending partly exactly what it would have wanted by kiting - escape that immediate battle, albeit at reduced health. But I guess it doesn't work quite like that ...

That being said, what options do you have when facing impossible odds? It would strike that in many historical engagements, an army would only fight a losing battle if it has to i.e. no safe route to escape and/or no reinforcements nearby. And the premise of a "fight to the last man" battle in many strategy games seems quite at odds with many actual battles. Are there are options to retreat, to stall for reinforcements? Certainly battles being bound by rounds helps. Of course, it needs to be balanced for playability. Chasing up fleeing armies forever is no fun for anyone ...

One side running away and surviving is not the problem we are trying to avoid, but rather one side running around and being considered "victorious" because of that. This is why you get the option to retreat before the battle if you find you are facing truly impossible odds, and a similar retreat happens to the loser of a battle. In both cases, the army doesn't lose health, but they receive a status that will stop them from retreating again for some time, so that you don't end up chasing them for turn after turn.
And by the way, the defending party are the only ones with a flag, so if they do try to win by running around, then the attacker can just walk onto the flag and thus force them to retreat, either repelling their invasion or opening the path deeper into enemy territory. A nimble defender can't win by capturing the attacker's flag, because the attacker doesn't have a flag, but the attacker is also the "loser until proven victorious" (by elimination or flag)


P.S. "The dev" on stream was me.

 

[Uberfrog]

I got OpenDev access this weekend and so played through all the scenarios over the last couple of days.

The combat is a real change from Civ, but in a good way. It’s a little confusing being thrown into the battles but I enjoy that the combat scenarios are quite challenging. It might take a few attempts to win, but it does make me appreciate the range of tactics on offer. The siege in particular felt like a satisfying undertaking.

Of course it is early days, but I came away from the scenarios looking forward to seeing how the battles work in a wider game setting. There is a steep learning curve though.

 

[Shadowhal]

Thanks for getting back to me again.

As much as I like the EL system myself, I am afraid it is one of the biggest points of criticism in EL for our existing playerbase. Many players were frustrated by the lack of control. While I still think the EL system gives you more control than many give it credit for if you plan carefully, this planning can also be a problem. Unless the majority of my army wins the initiative, pitched battles often have me thinking about the exact order of orders for a long time, so in the end the Humankind system does not take me longer to use in truly pitched battles.
My impressions from my time with the dev build agree with FinalDoomsday's suspicions: There were generally not as many battles as in Endless Legend for me, because I was usually not fighting to completely annihilate an enemy. There is only so much fame you can gain from military victories and conquest. Of course, I have not played against a human opponent yet, and that might tip the scales.

I take your point. Even a good system isn't fit for purpose, if its mechanics and details aren't clear for the majority of users.

Absolutely, let's see where the balance falls once the difference puzzle pieces are put together. It was an initial impression, but much is still unknown and may change.

Our current automation will play the battle out on the map, so you can turn it off if things start going badly. We're still working on the "instant resolution" though.

Thanks. My comment related to the instant resolution. Although if a player wanted to disengage from battles, I imagine she could turn on the automation, switch it to fast and just do other stuff in their empire. In principle. On the other hand, small battles will probably be pretty fast anyway. You are right on the money that the feature needs to be good enough to be useful, but not so good that it will beat manual combat. A tricky balance.

One side running away and surviving is not the problem we are trying to avoid, but rather one side running around and being considered "victorious" because of that. This is why you get the option to retreat before the battle if you find you are facing truly impossible odds, and a similar retreat happens to the loser of a battle. In both cases, the army doesn't lose health, but they receive a status that will stop them from retreating again for some time, so that you don't end up chasing them for turn after turn.
And by the way, the defending party are the only ones with a flag, so if they do try to win by running around, then the attacker can just walk onto the flag and thus force them to retreat, either repelling their invasion or opening the path deeper into enemy territory. A nimble defender can't win by capturing the attacker's flag, because the attacker doesn't have a flag, but the attacker is also the "loser until proven victorious" (by elimination or flag)

Ok, I misunderstood the point of flags.

So what are the consequences of "winning" or "losing"? You mention the other side is forced to retreat and gets a status that prevents them from retreating again. Is there anything else? Fame implications? Morale? What happens if you chase up a retreated army and capture the flag again while they have that "no-retreat" status? Do they get destroyed or damaged then? Sounds interesting.

And back to the point of the flag - how would kiting around ever result in victory? Wouldn't it be more like a draw? You imply that the attacker is the "loser" if she doesn't manage to either capture the flag or kill all enemies in the rounds available, so maybe there are no draws?

P.S. "The dev" on stream was me.

I just wasn't sure which of the two was playing and who was commenting. Good to associate a face with the name.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Fame implications? Morale? What happens if you chase up a retreated army and capture the flag again while they have that "no-retreat" status? Do they get destroyed or damaged then?

Military fame is won by destroying units rather than winning battles. It's difficult to become known as a great general because you waltzed up with an army so big nobody wanted to fight you.
There are other implications for the loser that I can't talk about yet because they relate to systems we haven't really revealed yet.
But yes, armies that cannot retreat (for lack of space or because a status forbids them) will be destroyed. (The Honor Code ability of the Naginata Samurai may be an exception here. I have not checked that.)

 

[danza4x]

@Catoninetales_Amplitude since you're being so generous with the questions you're answering at the moment....

Any possibility you could shed some light on what the devs are planning for multiplayer settings, particularly with regards to preventing battles from slowing down the game too much? For example - will there be settings to determine the number of rounds of combat per turn (eg 5 might be a lot for multiplayer, but 3 as I believe was originally planned could be a lot better) or turn timers within battles? How will auto-resolves be handled? I'd really like to see a setting that allows the two opponents in a battle to "agree" to auto-resolve; ie an autoresolve button that only autoresolves the battle if both participants select it, but plays out normally if only one does, alongside the existing auto-resolve option.

Any other plans in the works in this area?

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Unfortunately I can't speak at all about the multiplayer plans right now, since I don't know them.

 

[Krajzen]

Sigh, I got an email about getting into the open dev on Friday, and then I was either out of home or horribly ill for a few days until Monday evening, so if I understand correctly I have missed something. I do hope I didn't miss entire second scenario, just the first battle, but I was so sick I was unable to even play video games (it was really bad).

 

[Elhoim]

Sigh, I got an email about getting into the open dev on Friday, and then I was either out of home or horribly ill for a few days until Monday evening, so if I understand correctly I have missed something. I do hope I didn't miss entire second scenario, just the first battle, but I was so sick I was unable to even play video games (it was really bad).

All of the scenarios will open up again this Thursday. I hope you feel well this next weekend!

I wonder what will happen after that, I guess OpenDev will be gone forever until release? Or new scenarios will appear?

 

[CivLuvah]

I had a dream last night that I got into OpenDev, but I only had 25 minutes to play the game, so I was like...

 

[Narcisse]

a nightmare

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

I had a dream last night that I got into OpenDev, but I only had 25 minutes to play the game, so I was like...

And then the download took 24 minutes?

Could you even sleep after a dream so horrible?

 

[Elhoim]

I had a dream last night that I got into OpenDev, but I only had 25 minutes to play the game, so I was like...

Choose once scenario, and choose wisely

 

[CivLuvah]

And then the download took 24 minutes?

Could you even sleep after a dream so horrible?

I had an interview this morning, so I wasn't even able to sleep in the first place