DerekPaxton DerekPaxton

Fallen Enchantress: Weapons

Fallen Enchantress: Weapons

There are currently 124 weapons in Fallen Enchantress including 17 base weapons.  The base weapons are the normal weapons you will encounter and equip your armies with.  One of our design goals for FE was to make every weapon valuable and distinct.  So there is a reason you may want to use a broad sword instead of a mace, or a spear instead of a dagger.

To accomplish that we needed to add more depth to weapons, they needed to be differentiated by more than their attack rating.  The following table is the weapon stat spreadsheet in the editor (where it breaks down the base weapons so I can compare and tweak numbers).  There is a lot of new information in this sheet.  But the primary information I wanted to show is the stats on the comparisons on the individual weapons.

Type- This is the damage type of this weapon.  Armor has the ability to have different defense values against different damage types.  Plate mail is better against blunt weapons and chain mail is better against cutting weapons.  The elemental types are also damage types so magical weapons can do fire, lighting, cold or poison damage, and magical armor or items can provide defense against those attacks.

Armor Piercing- This means that they negate 2/3 of the opponent’s defense (spears, pikes and yew longbows).  They are excellent against heavily armored opponents.

Strength Mod- This is a modifier to the amount of unit’s strength bonus.  100 means it doubles their strength bonus (the massive Maul is deadly in the hands of Trog units).  Shortbow’s negate the strength bonus entirely (you don’t get to use your strength bonus when using a bow).

Production- How much production time the weapon adds to the units train time.  Improvements can decrease this time (having a weaponsmith in the city) and are a good idea when you are considering building large groups of units with advanced weapons.

Weight- Weight limits are used in FE.  This is the big reason why you don’t simply want to put the best armor and weapons on all your units.  At some point you will have to decide if you want that huge maul or tower shield or full suit of plate mail.  Especially if you are playing as the Wraiths (base stats are faction specific in FE, so the Trogs can get away with more equipment than other races).  Mounts also increase a units carry capacity so another reason you may want to invest in mounts (besides the increased movement) is to be able to use more armor and bigger weapons.  As mentioned in an earlier designer journal you can give traits to units you design, so if you want to make heavily armorer unis with big weapons, prepare to add some traits for strength (as compared to the other cool things you would add with traits, it’s all hard decisions).

Combat Speed- In FE on each combat tick all units get to add their combat speed to their initiative.  When they get to 100 initiative they get an action (this is all behind the scenes, in game players simply see a queue of units in the order they get actions).  The higher the combat speed the more frequently the unit gets to act, and it allows us to be more granular about creature speed.  The base speed is 12, but weapons can affect speed so that a unit with a dagger will get more (ie: if you are a heavy spell caster, carry a dagger or a staff, not a Maul).

Those are the base weapons, but that’s only the start.  Now that we have more depth in what weapons can do we can really go wild with them for magical weapons.  We are creating a dangerous world and we need reasons for the players to risk their units exploring it.  One reason is to find magical equipment.

We added Staves that make spell casters more powerful, swords that do lightning damage based on the wielders level, bows that do more damage vs beasts, etc.  We have a unique great sword that is stuck in one of our elemental lords (good luck getting that one).  We have weapons that poison victims they strike, Slag Teeth that are like short swords with increased crit chances, the Druss Blade that ignores armor, etc.

There are common, uncommon, rare and unique weapons.  There are a lot to find and we want players to be discovering new ones as they play and replay the game.  We won’t have Diablo style drop rates (you won’t be swimming in magical equipment).  Instead we want every magical weapon you get to be something special and interesting.  You should have a few to spread around to your champions by the mid to late game, and you can share them with units that can use them best or pile them all on one champion so he becomes even more powerful.

And this is open to modding.  There are a lot of bonuses to give, and they can be impacted by things like the wielders level (as in the sword that does +1 lightning damage per level of the wielder), only have their bonus apply against certain creature types (this is part of the conditional gamemodifier work we did for traits), vs damaged units, vs units with a higher or lower specified stat, etc.

But my favorite ability is that weapons can apply a spell when it strikes an opponent.  This came out of the requirement to be able to have weapons that poison opponents.  Instead of simply applying a poison effect the weapon applies a spell, so we have the capabilities of the entire spell system open to us for what weapons can do (more about all the new spell functionality later).  Weapons can blind opponents they hit, they can weaken them, they can curse them, whatever the modder wants to make a spell to do, the weapon can apply.

So if you started reading this article and thought that 124 weapons was a lot of weapons, it’s only a fraction of what the game can do and the interesting things we can create.

 

294,942 views 164 replies
Reply #26 Top

Regarding the new combat speed system: the unit whose turn comes up, I assume it only gets a single attack?

I haven't really liked the WoM system where units get to hit several times in their own turn. It just seems a bit pointless, having to click several times in a row and seeing the slow battle animations over and over again.

Reply #27 Top

Kudos. Having the spell-effect linkage is a good win for a request that's been on the site since very early beta. 

In terms of lots of variation, I have to agree with larienna--I think average players will tend to find those weapons with reasonable values and stick with those.  However, if you make training requirements to be able to use these weapons proficently, aka GURPS/DND, this will add some interest and planning and strategy that's much more RPG-ish.  It stinks when you find a magic broadsword you're not trained to use, but oh well, that's variation per game.

I'm privately questioning the prioritization of this as one of the areas to get high attention. I would have prioritized: massively improved magic book genre diversity; improved magic book interface; many more spells with reasons to choose them; adding meaningful race distinctions; ensuring the start of the game is always unique; improving the occurrence of magical events (see my other posts); improving the use of the shards to make them more relevant;flight and those kinds of unit specials; all of these seem to be higher priorities than this...?

I still think the MoM method of different units having different weapons/effects is a well balanced way to give options without having to overwhelm the player with endlessly slightly-varied options.

 

 

 

 

Reply #28 Top

Fantastic! this sounds so rich! i can't wait then to dive in and explore.  this is what its all about.  the weapons really scream rpg now.  hopefully armor will get a similar treatment?

Reply #29 Top

This is great. Plenty of other folks are pointing out the positives, so I need not bother with that. There are some bits I see that could benefit from a bit more love than they appear to have thus far gotten:

Bows are still just each one better than its predecessor. There's no reason you would ever use a shortbow when you can use a yew longbow. It's just straight-up improvement. The weight increase is not important, because archers don't need heavy armor anyway. Longbows should, at the very least, be made something which cannot be used mounted.
Furthermore, "Yew Longbow" is boring. Surely it could be replaced with a composite or recurve bow? At least those would differ in more than material.

Plate armor having increased defense against blunt doesn't make much sense, since blunt weapons regained popularity due primarily to how effective they were against plate.

 

Also, is a warhammer going to be an actual war hammer as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer, or is it going to be some impractical fantasy shit as is usual in games?

Reply #30 Top

I really like the proposed new damage formula: Damage = random(0.5, 1) * Attack / (1 + Defense / Attack)

1- It has limited randomness (a good thing for strategy games)

2- It has good limit behavior: for Att>>Def, Damage ~ Att-Def, for Att<<Def, doubling Def halves damage, and at Att=Def, damage is halved.

3- It avoid the annoying 0-damage attacks, even against highly armored enemies.

 

What I disagree on is the way combat speed work. The way it is phrased, you'll come back to having dagger-wielding mages moving faster and casting faster than empty-handed mages. Why can't combat speed and attack speed be separate? Especially with the new initiative system? Casting a spell could always cost 100 initiative, moving 50 initiative (less for mounted units), attacking with a maul 150 initiative, and attacking with a dagger 50 initiative? Or something like that...

Reply #31 Top

Looks like a much needed improvement over the old system.

 

Not sure why plate-mail protects against blunt damage, IMO should protect vs Cutting. Are you forgoing historical accuracy for the sake of a rock-paper-scissors type of system?

Reply #32 Top

Wow, I think I had a nerdgasm.

Reply #33 Top

To add to Cruxador's point, it also seems that the weight on some of the weapons are a bit exaggerated.  The Zweihänder, for example, usually only weighed 4 1/2 to 7 pounds, and the claymore usually went for 4.9 - 6.2 pounds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweihander

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claymore

 That's a hell of alot lighter than what you got for greatswords, which is what the Claymore and Zweihänder would classify as.  In fairness, you don't specify kg or lbs. so I'm probably looking way too much into what is really just a generic weight score that is meaningless outside of context,  A sore spot for me is when media portrays medieval weaponry and armor being heavier than they actually were, considering that certain weapons such as swords need to be light as possible for various reasons.  Yeah, an 8 lb broadsword might not seem heavy when you first pick it up, but swing it around for a bit and you'll start feeling the weight real quick.

Granted, nowadays weight is the least of the sins committed by modern fantasy games portrayal of swords and the like, but now I'm just ranting.

With all that said, I am looking forward to this game, and I do like the idea behind this new system.  it's been a while since a great fantasy TBS has hit the market, and while I do find HOMM 6 intriguing, I'm not getting my hopes up for that game.

Reply #34 Top

Blunt should be good against armor not piercing. Although piercing should be better than cutting. Cutting should be best against opponents without armoring like creatures. In truth blunt is the type of damage that plate protects least against, although it protects better than mail. To counter blunt you would need thick padded armor that should probably hinder combat speed especially if worn under plate (although this would provide the best protection).

Reply #35 Top

This...this is nerdnip.  I'ma gonna roll around in it for a while, and then go chasing around the house.

Reply #36 Top

Quoting Sarudak, reply 34
Blunt should be good against armor not piercing. Although piercing should be better than cutting. Cutting should be best against opponents without armoring like creatures. In truth blunt is the type of damage that plate protects least against, although it protects better than mail. To counter blunt you would need thick padded armor that should probably hinder combat speed especially if worn under plate (although this would provide the best protection).
Padding is probably assumed with all of these armors. It's not like somebody's going to just wear steel over bare skin or even plain linen. But there's only so much padding can do.

Reply #37 Top

Well, as you can imagine, we recently came into the ability to indulge our development team's fondest desires with Fallen Enchantress.

Ironically, those who purchased War of Magic back last year may have gotten the best strategy game deal ever. :)

Reply #38 Top

Quoting Frogboy, reply 37
Well, as you can imagine, we recently came into the ability to indulge our development team's fondest desires with Fallen Enchantress.

Ironically, those who purchased War of Magic back last year may have gotten the best strategy game deal ever.

 

AI. Give it love. Lots of love. Love it till it can't walk and then love it some more.

Reply #39 Top

Finally! - This is what people want to see in War of Magic. A dynamic, exciting and complex but balanced system for weapons. You really can go to town with magical weapons. These are some pretty generic things that could either exist on magical artifacts or could be spell enchanted weapons.

Flaming weapon: any target struck is burned for X-Y fire damage for next 3 turns

Lifesteal: Steals X health from a successful attack and transfers health to the wielder. Modified by resistance

Frost blade: successul attacks have a chance to slow movement and attack speed by X for 2 turns

Wind strike: Each attack has a chance to summon the elements of air knocking a target off its  feet and disorienting it for the remainder of that turn reducing defense by X

Mana Burn: Each attack has a 50% chance to burn X mana per strike

Mana Steal: Each attack has a 40% chance to burn X mana and transfer it to the attacker

Lightning Lash: Costs X mana and discharges a bolt of lightning into a target at melee range dealing X-Y damage stunning it for 1 turn.

Unleash Curse of Doom: costs X mana and deals Y death damage per turn every turn unless dispelled

Ancient Flaming sword: An extremely rare artifact weapon that fell down to earth during a cosmic battle between the elements of the plane of fire. This weapons allows for the Flaming swords spell to be activated once per battle for 2 turns. The Ancient Flaming Sword summons 3 extra flaming swords that defend the sovereign by parrying attacks directed at the sovereign including ranged attacks and strike nearby enemies for X fire damage.

Hopefully we'll see rare magical artifacts and weapons enchantments with these sort of abilities added on to them.

 

Reply #40 Top

The weapons system seems promising thus far. I can't wait to try it out in the new tactical battle. As someone else asked before, what does backswing do? Keep up the Developer's Journal updates: the last few have been a joy to read!

 

Any chance to see an armor/weapon sets (with bonuses when the set is complete), even just one? Please?

 

Some point's I'd like clarified about the combat system:

  • When it is a unit's turn, he can only attack once, right?
  • Do units retaliate when they are attacked? If so, does the unit retaliate indefinitely or a limited number of times?

 

Suggestions:

  • While cycling through the list of units to see who acts next, if a unit of each army is "tied" for initiative, I think it should be the unit in the defending army that goes first. My primary intent is to give the AI controlled armies the advantage, assuming that the player will more often attack creatures/armies.
  • Show in the battle UI the order in which units will act in battles, like they did in Heroes of Might and Magic 5.

 

So what will be the next great revelation? I vote MAGIC!

Reply #41 Top

gotta say, from my experience playing FFH II, it really looks like some of the best aspects of asymmetrical game balance are making it in here. Kael you seem to be pushing the game really in the right direction. we don't want (or really need) a balanced game for all playstyles. We want (as you seem to know) a game that rewards very DIFFERENT styles, even if some are more efficient than others.

I was a very early purchaser of EWOM, but this stuff is finally making it look like I game I would want to play.

Reply #42 Top

sounds good. But you will face a problem when player will take only the best solution. In order to avoid this you should make every weapon and armor unique.

Reply #43 Top

I'm suddenly reminded of dungeons and dragons now hahaha xD

Reply #44 Top

Nice job, fellas! I like this alot. Especially the Armor Piercing stat.

Thanks to Kael and everyone else behind the scenes for developing the game mechanics a bit further.

Reply #45 Top

Dual-wielding? I can has? O:)

Reply #46 Top

That sounds promising! About 80% of that I had listed in some of my "ideas" threads in 2009.

Just curious however:



 We won’t have Diablo style drop rates (you won’t be swimming in magical equipment).  Instead we want every magical weapon you get to be something special and interesting. 

Wouldn't it be nice if each player, in the Game Setup screen, could choose a type of drop rate from a drag-down list? Like ranging from the default (magic item drop rate = rare) down to exceptionally rare (default x 20%) to common (default x 200%).

EDIT: And I suppose one question I cannot help not asking is this: Considering that what you are describing here has been suggested for ages for EWoM, is there any chance that you can implement this system in 1.3 or 1.4 of EWoM? What would stop you from doing so? Thank you

Reply #47 Top

Quoting Sarudak, reply 34
Blunt should be good against armor not piercing. Although piercing should be better than cutting. Cutting should be best against opponents without armoring like creatures. In truth blunt is the type of damage that plate protects least against, although it protects better than mail. To counter blunt you would need thick padded armor that should probably hinder combat speed especially if worn under plate (although this would provide the best protection).

Technically, many medieval melee weapons that were effective against plate had a point or edge that could actually 'pierce' the armor, although games tend to inaccurately categorize them as "blunt" for some reason. I'm thinking of the pointier flanged maces, war hammers, morning stars, etc. - yes, all weapons with the weight concentrated in the head that rely on sheer force rather than cutting or stabbing, but with flanges or spikes to actually transfer that raw force to a single small contact area, which can at least dent plate and possibly penetrate it. Medieval maces weren't just round lumps of metal on a stick, mind you, they had edges called "flanges" to concentrate the force of the blow, and as pictured some flanges were so pointed that you have to wonder whether the damage is really "blunt" anymore. If I were wearing full plate padded by wool underneath, I'd much rather get hit by a truly blunt mace/club, than a mace/war hammer/morning star with pointed flanges or spikes as pictured above.

That being said, FE seems to be following the trend of classifying war hammers and maces as purely "blunt" weapons, so if that's what we consider blunt, then plate shouldn't be providing extra defense against it logically. It's very strange that the axe does more damage to plate than the war hammer.. the whole point (no pun intended) of the war hammer was punching through heavy armor, it wasn't a great weapon otherwise (see picture, the "war hammer" had a small blunt head on one side and a spike on the other; it resembles an actual hammer, the kind you drive nails with. If you're picturing a great big "sledge hammer" type weapon, you're thinking of a maul). I'd give plate added defense against cutting or, really, nothing at all - with the highest raw defense, does it need added defense against any particular damage?

 

Edit: in an effort to be more on topic, most of the base mechanic changes - weight limits, being able to change unit attributes, etc. - sound good, can't wait to try them out whenever the beta starts. I'm a little disappointed to hear that you're still not going to differentiate attack speed from movement speed - so casters with daggers will run faster than ones without weapons, and mounted units will attack more often than infantry? Will putting my archer on a horse let him shoot arrows more often? Hopefully this gets addressed..

Reply #48 Top

Combat Speed- In FE on each combat tick all units get to add their combat speed to their initiative. When they get to 100 initiative they get an action (this is all behind the scenes, in game players simply see a queue of units in the order they get actions). The higher the combat speed the more frequently the unit gets to act, and it allows us to be more granular about creature speed. The base speed is 12, but weapons can affect speed so that a unit with a dagger will get more (ie: if you are a heavy spell caster, carry a dagger or a staff, not a Maul).

Excellent - much needed - elegant.  just make sure

  • non magic weapons don't add to combat speed. 
  • Armour subtracts from combat speed,
  • the amount of initiative taken by an action is modable.   (e.g. if standard attack or move uses 100 initiative, great smash uses 150 initiative, quick attack uses 50 initiative (but does far less damage) super sumonning spell VII uses 700 initiative)

This system could also handle surpise attacks and ambushes (initial initiative is lower for the ambushed side)

 

Wind strike: Each attack has a chance to summon the elements of air knocking a target off its feet and disorienting it for the remainder of that turn reducing defense by X

would actually be better if this reduced initiative and defense

Reply #49 Top

Quoting RFHolloway, reply 48
would actually be better if this reduced initiative and defense

I'd hesitate to include any way of ever reducing an enemy's initiative. Keep in mind he needs initiative to take any action; if you can take away enough of his initiative often enough, there's the possibility of locking an enemy down such that they never get to act, which just isn't fun for anyone involved.

Really anything that reduces the number of decisions you get to make - including reducing the number of actions your units get to take - is something I'd rather avoid, it's more interesting to reduce the effectiveness of those actions or counter them somehow, without taking away the unit's ability to do something.