Emotions and Critical Strikes

[Darathor]

I said I only want to lose because of my own stupidity because then I can improve. However, if my enemy has all these moral reducing attacks and spells that are very effective against a relatively inexperienced army, I can only use ranged hit-and-run tactics(which hardly ever destroy the enemy) and, while they are good at times, I don't want to be pigeon-holed into doing one thing. There should be many ways to defeat an army, if their morale reducing casters are behind lines and lines of infantry and archers, then I can't get to them before my army crumbles in panic. And they would most likely have their casters surrounded by dozens of battalions every moment if they are smart in any way.
Morale has never been in any rts games that I know of(besides the TW series but those are completely different) and if say, Age of Empires 2 had it, it would have been a horrible game, same thing would happen if Bfme or bfme2 had it, I would have hated it and it would've made them terrible games.
Overall, morale would be a horrible mechanic in this game and most rts games, it is frustrating and can turn off many people from the game.

[Puppeteer]

I'm all for a couple of spells that might cause fear for a short period of time, but the idea of a morale bar is 'too much too far' for my liking.

[wou129]

Originally Posted by Darathor

I said I only want to lose because of my own stupidity because then I can improve. However, if my enemy has all these moral reducing attacks and spells that are very effective against a relatively inexperienced army, I can only use ranged hit-and-run tactics(which hardly ever destroy the enemy) and, while they are good at times, I don't want to be pigeon-holed into doing one thing. There should be many ways to defeat an army, if their morale reducing casters are behind lines and lines of infantry and archers, then I can't get to them before my army crumbles in panic. And they would most likely have their casters surrounded by dozens of battalions every moment if they are smart in any way.
Morale has never been in any rts games that I know of(besides the TW series but those are completely different) and if say, Age of Empires 2 had it, it would have been a horrible game, same thing would happen if Bfme or bfme2 had it, I would have hated it and it would've made them terrible games.
Overall, morale would be a horrible mechanic in this game and most rts games, it is frustrating and can turn off many people from the game.

Bfme has morale in some sort of way in my opinion

[Darathor]

They cower when charged and under certain spells, however, they don't run away when overmatched.

[Josh Warner]

Originally Posted by Jean=A=Luc

tldr but TW-like morale system doesn't really fit non-TW-like games.

I expect this game to be very similar to TW in the tactical sense, obviously not the strategic.

Originally Posted by Darathor

I said I only want to lose because of my own stupidity because then I can improve. However, if my enemy has all these moral reducing attacks and spells that are very effective against a relatively inexperienced army, I can only use ranged hit-and-run tactics(which hardly ever destroy the enemy) and, while they are good at times, I don't want to be pigeon-holed into doing one thing.

How does morale pigeon hole you, each type of unit should have several ways to counter it, this isn't rock paper scissors. Also, what's with the inexperienced army vs experienced army - that won't be fair morale or not. And morale doesn't even need to be effected by how experienced units are, balance > realism.

There should be many ways to defeat an army, if their morale reducing casters are behind lines and lines of infantry and archers, then I can't get to them before my army crumbles in panic. And they would most likely have their casters surrounded by dozens of battalions every moment if they are smart in any way.

That's why there are several counters to everything in a decent game, counter fear reducing abilities with the opposite. Also what makes you think fear has to be a ranged activated? Why couldn't morale units only induce fear when in melee so they can be targeted and killed, make it so when there are no morale factors in play armies regenerate it very quickly as well.

Morale has never been in any rts games that I know of(besides the TW series but those are completely different) and if say, Age of Empires 2 had it, it would have been a horrible game, same thing would happen if Bfme or bfme2 had it, I would have hated it and it would've made them terrible games.
Overall, morale would be a horrible mechanic in this game and most rts games, it is frustrating and can turn off many people from the game.

What're you basing that on? Not many granted, but units running away due to specific mechanics is just a dumbed down simple version. I much prefer an in depth morale system to click x to cause fear for y seconds as well. Morale is under your control in that situation, unlike nazgul screech for example which in my opinion is FAR more annoying as it's NOT under your control.

I wouldn't say on the battlefield level that DoF will be radically different, they've said units will carry over experience and such for MMO mode. Instead of a turn based strategic mode it's ALL done in the real time of battle. The MMO aspects make this quite a bit like TW except all in real time.

Blanket statements like 'it would have been horrible' are silly, you have no idea how it would work. I understand your aversion to yet another factor you have to learn and adapt to, combined with everything else that already overwhelms people in an RTS, but that doesn't mean it's inherently bad because you don't care for it or understand it.

Originally Posted by wou129

Bfme has morale in some sort of way in my opinion

It has a far more annoying and noob friendly 'morale' system.

[Darathor]

Originally Posted by Haeso

I expect this game to be very similar to TW in the tactical sense, obviously not the strategic.

I have to agree with you here but, the TW series is supposed to be realistic this is a fantasy game, in fantasy games people seem to have more courage than in real life in most cases.

Originally Posted by Haeso

How does morale pigeon hole you, each type of unit should have several ways to counter it, this isn't rock paper scissors. Also, what's with the inexperienced army vs experienced army - that won't be fair morale or not. And morale doesn't even need to be effected by how experienced units are, balance > realism.

Sorry, that was a scenario stated earlier when I was arguing with Aametherar about how having morale increase with unit level, sorry that I got that mixed up.

Originally Posted by Haeso

That's why there are several counters to everything in a decent game, counter fear reducing abilities with the opposite. Also what makes you think fear has to be a ranged activated? Why couldn't morale units only induce fear when in melee so they can be targeted and killed, make it so when there are no morale factors in play armies regenerate it very quickly as well.

Then still, you can't engage the enemy in any fight where your enemy gets in melee range, so hit-and-run tactics would still be the only viable tactic unless you just get hordes of archers.

Originally Posted by Haeso

Blanket statements like 'it would have been horrible' are silly, you have no idea how it would work. I understand your aversion to yet another factor you have to learn and adapt to, combined with everything else that already overwhelms people in an RTS, but that doesn't mean it's inherently bad because you don't care for it or understand it.

I was merely saying that those games would have been worse for me if those games had a morale system like that. I don't find those things enjoyable, they seem to detract from gameplay, they might make a game have more depth, but be less fun. Many people I know don't like those mechanics and if DoF had them I would be much less likely to buy the game.(the I is in italics because that's just me)

P.S. Thanks for basically saying that I'm might be not intelligent enough to understand these things and that might be why I am so averse towards those mechanics.

[Josh Warner]

Originally Posted by Darathor

I have to agree with you here but, the TW series is supposed to be realistic this is a fantasy game, in fantasy games people seem to have more courage than in real life in most cases. .

So you're point is that it's more realistic for a fantasy game to have more courageous and brave units? I see what you're getting at, I imagine you see my point as well here, though. And I don't think TW has morale just for realism either, it works very well.

Then still, you can't engage the enemy in any fight where your enemy gets in melee range, so hit-and-run tactics would still be the only viable tactic unless you just get hordes of archers.

You misunderstood what I meant, they don't start lowering morale unless they're in melee, and they don't instantly make them run, think before they're engaged your units stay at full morale, as soon as units start dying you lose a bit, kill some gain a bit (maybe, personally I'd prefer a system that's sustainable by combat unless you're losing horribly, or at least prolonging if you're not getting completely slaughtered) and once these units enter melee they slowly cause morale to lower, my favorite way would be slowly and temporarily lower the maximum morale, or if it lowers the actual morale level then cap how fast morale can drop, with or without these units. I didn't mean as soon as they enter melee your units flee, I apologize for the confusion.

I was merely saying that those games would have been worse for me if those games had a morale system like that. I don't find those things enjoyable, they seem to detract from gameplay, they might make a game have more depth, but be less fun. Many people I know don't like those mechanics and if DoF had them I would be much less likely to buy the game.(the I is in italics because that's just me).

A morale system like what, I hadn't given any specifics other than there actually being one, that's like saying I wouldn't enjoy a game that has mana, I only like games with activated abilities balanced by cooldowns not cooldowns and mana. It's an absurd notion - there are so many ways to create a functioning morale system.

P.S. Thanks for basically saying that I'm might be not intelligent enough to understand these things and that might be why I am so averse towards those mechanics.

Either the mechanic works and you can't figure it out/choose not to and give up on the game, or the mechanic is broken. I've yet to come across a game that doesn't function well because of a morale mechanic, I haven't played every game ever, but quite a few, and I can name several that use them effectively. Kohan and TW are two great examples of functioning and good morale systems, imo. I'm sorry you got defensive and thought I was calling you stupid, I'm just struggling with such a sweeping hatred of a mechanic that can work well, work okay, work poorly, or not work at all. It's success and functionality is decided by the dev team, not a stigma associated with it because of dislike carried over from other games.

I respect that you can have an opinion, but yours is far too generalizing. Whether it be from a, or a few bad experiences - that I can't know, but I DO know, it's not the mechanic itself, it's how it was implemented that you just didn't like, which is understandable. It's not understandable however to just dislike any game that chooses to use the same type of mechanic as I explained in the other part of my post, it's... unreasonable.

[Darathor]

It doesn't matter whether or not if functions, I just don't like the idea that a combat strategy can be made to shoot for the absence of actual combat, slaughter=/=combat. It's like in World of Warcraft, the epitome of pvp combat is characterized greatly by abilities that create an absence of combat, it's just annoying that combat is mostly based off of the absence of combat in pvp.
My initial excitement has worn off now, I really just didn't like the idea because of above reason and because no rts game that I like has morale mechanics like that(by that, I mean where your units run away(this applies to my previous post)).
It still is a turn off for me in a game, but now that I've relaxed, if it is in DoF it won't be as bad as I previously thought. Still, I think that it would be better if it didn't. Sure it adds more strategy in a fight but it would be annoying to have my soldiers run in their stupidity away from a fight that they could've won.

Also, my empire will be like the Soviet Union in World War 2, if you retreat, you die by my hand.

[genroxbro]

Hi,
I have two main menus created, one is public and one is for registered users - they are set up so registered users can access public pages for editing. I did this by selecting specific items from the menu lists rather than setting display to "All" or "None". However, there is no displayed menu on the lost password and lost username pages, and I cant figure out how to add either of those to my hidden menu so I can set the menu display for those. I was able to set the displayed menu for the Login page, but the lost password and lost username pages are separate from that, I guess. How can I add the lost information pages to my menu, or how could I otherwise display a menu on them?
Thanks so much,
Sarah
_____________________________________
Website I designed for payday loans bc company.

[Tbeaz161]

Wow I really love all the little details in a game, cheering is just such a great touch and im looking forward to seeing ym army cheer while standing in the burned husk of my enemies domain. I have to be honest i forgot about the game for a bit but now that the new site is up i just cant wait! I hope Reverie is happy knowing the pain and anxiety we are all going to feel waiting for this one.