• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I really like the idea - but I was also pretty shocked that Elemental War of Magic turned out to be so boring, and Fallen Enchantress wasn't much better.
It's probably pretty difficult to blow the game dimensions up, strategically, and keep a certain tightness, while creating a worthy AI at the same time PLUS having interesting battles. I also was disappointed with the result of the glut of 4X space games. It's always about maximizing some output, and what I really like with AoW3 is the fact that no matter how good your output is, troop quality (in terms of medals/upgrades) is at least as important. Which means, that I like a game in which you cannot just build your empire to eventually lash at everyone with superior tech, but simply have to put everything to a practical use immediately.

Dominions 5 (and previous games) is the best fantasy strategy game out there. It knows what it wants to be and it pulls it off fantastically. I always felt that Fallen Enchantress lacks in scale.. if I have magic to play with, I want to be a damned God, start summoning titans and make the world freeze over.
 
I'll gladly let me show by Triumph, that such a game is possible. If it works, fine.
The snag is, though, the bigger and more complex the game gets, the more difficult it is, to craft a good AI, while at the same time MP play is discouraged by sheer mass.

I tend to think, that rogue-like elements might be necessary to introduce, specifically, to abanon the idea of letting everyone start under the same condition, but basically have empires in different development stages already on the map - something like an existing world or galactic order, in which the human player has to grow, to eventually take the lead or something like that.
 
Hey, Arnout! Nice to see you here as well. Yes, I definitely remember playing AoW for the first time and thinking, nice, that's like playing an improved Warlords II, except the combat is infinitely better. :).
I remember buying a Sega Genesis with a Japan adapter specifically in order to play "Advanced Daisenryaku" or Advanced Military Commander (which in 1994 was ported by SSI to a game called Panzer General), then going nuts on Master of Orion in 93, with Warlords 2 as a welcome diversion, replacing the latter with Panzer General in 94, going back to Warlords 2 Deluxe version in 95, and then in 96 becoming irrevocably hooked on Heroes of Might and Magic 2.

Anyway, I'm really curious what you guys came up with for your new game. You know, I've been in a professional relationship with Ubisoft since 2005, and when Ubisoft decided not to continue the work with Nival for HoMM 6 (or M&M: Heroes 6 as it was called), I tried to get them to contact you, because I thought, if someone would be able to come up with a HoMM game design that would blow all predecessors out of the water it would be Triumph Studios, but alas, they had other plans. As it turned out (imo, at least) Ihad been right then, because you came up with AoW 3 which I felt was exactly what a sequel should be. :)

Brings back good memories these classics. I played a lot of Battle Island and History Line 1914-1918. And I was totally addicted to Heroes 2 as well.:D

Looks like the game announcement will be on Sunday, right?
EDIT: No, tomorrow as part of the announcement show, with a Q&A on Sunday, is what I read. Right?

Yes that's correct!
DdZq1lVWAAcByCt.jpg


And don't forget the Triumph interview at 17:30 :)
 
I really like the idea - but I was also pretty shocked that Elemental War of Magic turned out to be so boring, and Fallen Enchantress wasn't much better.
It's probably pretty difficult to blow the game dimensions up, strategically, and keep a certain tightness, while creating a worthy AI at the same time PLUS having interesting battles. I also was disappointed with the result of the glut of 4X space games. It's always about maximizing some output, and what I really like with AoW3 is the fact that no matter how good your output is, troop quality (in terms of medals/upgrades) is at least as important. Which means, that I like a game in which you cannot just build your empire to eventually lash at everyone with superior tech, but simply have to put everything to a practical use immediately.

Fallen Enchantress quickly got boring, the AI is horrible, game balance a let down (tough at start but then a leveled hero will walk over anything), diplomacy a joke. The only thing it did right was the variety of units and the appeal of exploring with lots of quest or even the exploration win condition but that's not enough to overcome its hudge flaws. Sorcerer king got even worse. It really doesn't hold a candle to AOW3.
 
Dominions 5 (and previous games) is the best fantasy strategy game out there. It knows what it wants to be and it pulls it off fantastically. I always felt that Fallen Enchantress lacks in scale.. if I have magic to play with, I want to be a damned God, start summoning titans and make the world freeze over.
I tried 3 some time ago, but couldn't get warm with it.
Seeing that both 3 and 4 are in Steam sale right now - would you say that 4 is worth the extra money? Is it a significant step forward compared to 3? Or is 5 way better than both?
 
I tried 3 some time ago, but couldn't get warm with it.
Seeing that both 3 and 4 are in Steam sale right now - would you say that 4 is worth the extra money? Is it a significant step forward compared to 3? Or is 5 way better than both?

I didn't play 3 & 4, but 5 is too much hands off style. I feel like I don't have enough control and strategy seems a bit limited since it's all auto-controlled but I guess that was the same in 3 already. The only real part of control is at pretender creation (the big improvement in 5 apparently where you can personalze blessings) but then I've got no clue at what I'll fight so I just create something that looks cool and there's no reason to change it beetween games unless I think of something even cooler (or pick another nation).

The only big plus is the convenient multiplayer system, no need to sit hours in front of PC to play multiplayer :) And rituals are pretty cool.
 
I tried 3 some time ago, but couldn't get warm with it.
Seeing that both 3 and 4 are in Steam sale right now - would you say that 4 is worth the extra money? Is it a significant step forward compared to 3? Or is 5 way better than both?

4 and 5 are both basically "3 but with more stuff". I don't think 4 was a huge step up from 3, but the real time combat system in 5 and changes in blessings makes it a much better game and absolutely worth it imo. Illwinter also keeps adding more nations and spells every few months through patches for free (no DLC's even with new nations!).

I can't truly recommend the game if you don't play multiplayer though, that's where it really shines. The sheer amount of different nations and spells and the 'last God standing takes all' aspect of the game makes it one of the most machiavellan multiplayer games I've played.

Most people use llamaserver.net as a dedicated server with PBEM, with 1 turn every day, a game lasting a couple of months to half a year or so, but you can play smaller 'blitz' games that lasts only an afternoon if you are so inclined... I mostly use singleplayer to test strategies or different nations at this point.

I didn't play 3 & 4, but 5 is too much hands off style. I feel like I don't have enough control and strategy seems a bit limited since it's all auto-controlled but I guess that was the same in 3 already. The only real part of control is at pretender creation (the big improvement in 5 apparently where you can personalze blessings) but then I've got no clue at what I'll fight so I just create something that looks cool and there's no reason to change it beetween games unless I think of something even cooler (or pick another nation).

The only big plus is the convenient multiplayer system, no need to sit hours in front of PC to play multiplayer :) And rituals are pretty cool.

You get to script 5 rounds and then cross your fingers the AI picks choices that won't lead to total defeat. That's part of the charm :D You can pull off some cool stuff through scripting, if you know what you are doing (arrow catchers and the like comes to mind).
 
Brings back good memories these classics. I played a lot of Battle Island and History Line 1914-1918. And I was totally addicted to Heroes 2 as well.:D
And don't forget the Triumph interview at 17:30 :)
I played Battle Isle as well. Was tempted to go for the Platinum collection on GoG, but decided to buy Battleworld Kronos instead. I also have Spirit of War on my wishlist, which is a Matrix Games remake of History Line. Looks pretty cool, actually.

And, no, I won't forget the interview nor the Q&A on Sunday. :D
 
Dominions 5 (and previous games) is the best fantasy strategy game out there. It knows what it wants to be and it pulls it off fantastically. I always felt that Fallen Enchantress lacks in scale.. if I have magic to play with, I want to be a damned God, start summoning titans and make the world freeze over.

I wish Dominion 6 would be made by Triumph Studios. The Dominion Series really needs proper interface & quality of life features. You spent so much time moveing gems,items &reinforcements around.
 
I think AoW3 had high quality (nice interface, nice graphic, no bugs ). But the design decision with the classes in exchange for less magic was terrible.
See I'm on the other end of the spectrum. I think the classes were mostly fine (Though I liked undead as a race better...) but the graphics were just not what i'd call good. I don't think AoW made a graceful transition to 3D as a lot of the unit models are just really really bad especially compared to the art from the last game.
 
Hi everyone,

This is my first post on the forum here - brand new account! - looking forward to hearing what you think about the game when its been announced!