My general reflection on a game’s general direction.
1) Tactical/strategic game.
There is an ongoing discussion in the forum whether a tactical aspect of SK should be expanded. Frogboy frequently pointed out that he wants the battles to be quick, thus, they cannot be too complicated. It worked well for FE. However, SK is inspiring to be a different game, and thus, in opinion of some the balance has moved significantly from strategy to tactic. If that the case, tactical battles as they are now can be discovered lacking. Frogboy, however, pointed out that you have research (sovveregin), then you have town etc. which give you enough of strategy lawyer so the battles can be of the secondary importance.
However, it is not the case of how much research you have, but rather how much time and energy you spent on strategical versus tactical decisions. In FE I had to build a sufficient empire to have an effective army. I have to carefully ponder which research to do, so I have money for the army, and that the army is modern enough to be competitive. I have to choose how many towns I will have, and I will have to place them strategically. I have to worry about neighbours, to keep them away from me while I build my power etc. So lots of thought was given to that aspect.
In SK there research, but there is not much thinking required. I build the cities where the game tells me to build. I build as many as I can b/c I need logistics. I have one town to build troops, since you build so few of them, and you want to have them with the best bonuses. In every other town I just build every building that gives you bonus to logistics, and that’s it. Then I just build pioneers. The circle where you decide the balance between mana/spell research/sov’s levelling I basically don’t touch, since they are so interconnected that you need all three of them at any given time. In case of a sov I just choose one branch and follow it to the end (the best bonuses are at the end), so apart from the initial choice not much of thinking is required … Crafting – I just craft the best equipment I can and give it to hero. Again, not much to think. Hero by the time doom counter reaches third of scale are already at the level cup – not much thinking required either.
Thus, in SK suddenly tactical battles become so important, apart from the battle not much thinking nor energy is needed ….
2) The nature of tactical battles
Recently Frog referring to a focus and difference between battles in FE and SK said:
The main difference is that battles are mostly about putting your magic/special abilities against the other side's. The skill comes from knowing when to use what rather than strategic positioning.
Here are two problems:
AI – is so bad in using abilities …. ALWAYS they just use the ability the very first thing in the battle, no matter what goes on the field. When I attack a group of shadow wargs with my single hero, I know he will be moved all over the map, since every warg wants to switch his position with my hero … When I attack ogre I know he will through stones first, so I get close to enemies own units – ogre will kill or hurt them every time. Spiders will web me, cavalery will use their skill the very first thing, regardless whether it is good or effective …. Swarm mechanic is cool, bad that AI totally ignores it. I can swarm AI's unit, and it will never move to a better position …
Second – so far there is not much choice on my part. I usually use the same abilities over and over again. In recent game I played Varga and it was: frenzy (for extra initiative), then fire breath (to kill most of them) and then finish the rest. Spells are even worse. Since the game tries to encourage you to actually use them sparsely I find myself not casting them at all. Damage spells – while should I cast them if I can move my unit and attack to a better effect and save mana? Spells that make units weak are good only against super monsters but those are far and between and usually resist them anyway. Then you have this limit of spells to one/battle, and they cost precious mana ….
Recently I played a game where I ignored spells totally (no research, no casting) and I was doing great (on impossible).
Thus, I do not feel that I win by outsmarting AI by using timing and difficult choices in using abilities/casting spells.
3) On Terrain/flanking and other possible upgrades to tactical battles.
For me the core of the problem is this: there is no possible way I can protect my vulnerable low point units from dying in any way. Recently I got a cleric unit from a quest, very cool and nice unit. The problem is that I knew right from the beginning this unit is already dead. First battle and it will die. Archers always target first the low hp support/range units and there is nothing that can be done. In other games, I would keep cleric away/out of range, or put him in the forest, or behind a rock. Here I can do nothing, except boosting his dodge. I gave him three rings, cast spell giving bonus to dodge, first battle against 4 archers he died. Very frustrating. I do not build mages, nor archers, since they will die anyway. Sometimes i just build a series to archers to soak the damage, so they die every battle. Only high hp, high defense units have a chance to level. Possible solution is to move cleric out and back to the army, depending whom the army faces, but it is such a bother … In FE you could deal with it by making very high ini units, SK does not allow you to do so.
The problem is even worse that this cleric would always start the battle in the front line, close to enemy. And of course, you cannot place units before the battle.
That’s for me is a real frustrating problem …
I do not know what ideas could improve tactical battles – I am just sure that smaller battle fields, faster movement, units being canon glass (who attack first wins, hp is generally low) makes the battles even less tactical. And for now there is not much to do apart from battles.
