• 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.
More choices? How?
As I (and others) already pointed out you didn’t have a choice in AoW3 if you wanted to be competitive in a multiplayer game, especially PBEM. You HAD to do manual combat and harvest as much XP as you could, cheesing your way through the fight. Even for the easiest fight. This was extremely tedious.

With the Planetfall system you have the choice to do the occasional AC without getting punished.
 
I do not miss having to cheese the game every battle, making sure heroes are getting most of the kills, power leveling, avoiding getting kills with operations so as not to lose xp, baby sitting support units with low killing power and artificially prolonging a battle to spam their abilities for more xp since they're bad at getting kills, avoiding getting kills with elites so xp doesn't get wasted on them. No thanks to any of that


This. 100 times this.
 
Yesterday, having played Planetfall for maybe 25 hours, all in all, I realized that, playing the campaign, I did most of my battles as autobattles (expert difficulty) - which was somewhat bewildering; in AoW 3 I haven't fought many battles via autocombat, and when I say "not many", I mean virtually a handful, not more, in 5 years of playing the came nearly constantly every day.

Analysing the reasons, it was pretty easy to see why. In AoW 3, there are 3 (actually 4) resources, that you have to (or at least CAN) manage in battles. These are: 1) unit health (to keep units battle-ready - if a unit loses too much health you are likely to lose it when you send it into the next battle); 2) Mana and hero casting points; 3) XP gain and distribution
Now, suppose you have a "safe" battle waiting, that is, a battle in which you will very probably not lose a unit in autocombat and won't see the health of one or more of them seriously depleted, there is still one reason left to fight manually, and that is the management of the XP resource, because that's what XP is, a resource. And in AoW 3 you made sure that no matter how much XP you already had gained, you could always use more and had never enough of it (unlimited upgrading).

Admittedly, you set it up in a way, that made it too abundant, but that was nothing that couldn't be changed and righted with simple modding and try and error. However, the general idea was more than sound and offered a massive incentive to fight battles manually. In fact, it was a pretty ground-breaking thing. Think about it this way: if your after-battle reward in gold/energy would be dependent on the hits you delivered and took, people would try to maximize the gain here as well - and of course fight battles manually.

And this is the trick that AoW 3 pulled. Battles are an important part of the game and a lot of work has been put into the system to make it really great (and the game is universally lauded for it). However, when people, who LIKE the battle part of the game, use autocombat in single player (too much) so early after starting to play it, then something isn't right, when so much care and work went into battles, battlefields and every in connection with it.

However, players are not in any way FORCED to battle manually in AoW 3, and they are also not forced to maximize experience gain or directing XP where it does best use, they don't have to fight battles "in an unnatural way". Instead they can fight the way they want, get XP and rewards and enjoy themselves.
Competetive spoken, however, maximizing and making maximum use of resources is what you do in these games, and what AoW 3 gave us, is ANOTHER resource to maximize and make maximum use of, and that's experience.

I have no idea why EXACTLY this was changed so drastically in Planetfall, but no matter the reasons, it's a huge step back. The system we have now is, in comparison, bland. XP is shared equally, units get only 4 upgrade levels and there is abundant healing (playing the first real Jack Gelder map, Field Medicine, Nanite Injectors on everyone plus PUGs make sure that the AI can competently manage the health of your troops), so:

Suddenly there is no reason anymore to fight a battle manually, when you are halfway sure you won't lose anything.

That can't be good in a game like this - for me, it isn't. Because:

It is a good thing when the player knows, no matter how well the AI fights for you, you will be able to do it better, manually. And that is something you can't do in Planetfall, when the AI comes out of a battle not only without losses, but also with your troops in good shape.

Now. Obviously the system in Planetfall has its uses in live MP games, because a solid, dependable autocombat is accelerating things and the equal sharing of XP supports this, so I wouldn't want it to be changed, now that it is in place.

But for all SINGLE play and PBEM play, you took something away.

That's why I''ll make a suggestion (in the suggestion thread) to re-introduce the AoW 3 system as an OPTION (same way as simultaneous and classic turns) to pick when setting the game up.
Believe me guys, that AoW 3 system IS brilliant, it just needed some balancing and fine-tuning to work with minimal potential for "exploits" and it HAS added another dimension to battles.

I would implore you to give this serious thought and take this into consideration - part of the community, myself included, has put a lot of time in refining the numbers in AoW 3 that deliver "the right amount" of XP - which is, in reality, not that much different from balancing the availability of the other resources, gold, mana, energy, cosmite or "Strikes" - you name them. I'm sure, everyone involved would share their insights into this, so the balancing at least, wouldn't be much a problem.

I clicked disagree, not because I disahree 100%,but because of several issues this 'capped' xp system fixes from AOW3, in my opinion anyway.

First, while I agree with the analysis of xp as a resource, and practice xp farming myself in AoW3, I do not consider it a good thing. High level units benefit far more from this system. A champion 5 level manticore rider is, even on a comparative,equalised scale, far more dangerous then a Champion 5 Swordsman. They are also easier to get there due to being a tier 4 endgame unit. This means that, in an uncapped system, lower level units will be disregarded. This could lead to the dreaded t4 spam, but also defeats the purpose of scaling lower tier units entirely.

Second, it creates an immersion break in my opinion. How can a unit of human dudes in armor have more HP then a giant, or hit harder then a charging knight? Granted, this is subjective, and could be fixed by fighting an equally leveled knight or giant, but see the first point above.

I agree with the 'being able to do better' should be what motivates manual combat. Infinitely scalable units might not be the best reward though. Instead, increased strategic capacity(as you point out as well, saving troops from low hp endstates) or advantages weighing risk and reward (i'll take the overwatch fire, for a chance to infect this last unit, instead of nuking it) are, imo, more organic ways to leverage combat for rewards.

Lastly, I believe this change may also have something to do with balancing. Without champion levels, there is a hard cap on unmodded stats and abilities per unit. I suspect this makes balancing the insane amount of mod/doctrine/hero skill/operations/etc more managable for lack of inifintly scalable HP.
 
You could have the system without ANY XP farming, by simply allocating a maximum XP to each unit. Then a "contact" would give the unit a certain XP value as in AoW 3, but the "kill contact, would deliver only the rest amount. This way everyone would get the same XP, but could allocate (if battling with a plan). The big(gest) problem with the AoW 3 system is, as I already mentioned, in general terms the fact that heroes are treated LIKE regular units, but AREN'T regular units, so if you wanted it to make foolproof, you'd have different options for heroes.

However, you are all seriously mistaken when you think that Planetfall doesn't currently offer abuse and/or micromanaging - you just haven't wasted any thoughts on it. Relevant facts are:

Heroes can equip 5 "artifacts/mods", but their main power still comes from leveling up, that is, via MP gathering (abilities you can buy are basically comparable with mods, so a level 10 hero will be as powerful as their counterpart in AoW 3).
Heroes can upgrade a lot, units only 4 times. When a unit is fully upgraded, the XP it would gain via battle is forfeited.
Knowing the formula for XP gain, you can micromanage your stack size to maximize XP gain (via rounding errors). Considering the amount of XP and the number of battles, this makes a difference. For example, I tried a fight with 6, 7 and 8 units and got the same XP for each unit with 7 and with 8 (4), so doing the battle with 8 not only was easier (for the AI) it also got me more XP.

Knowing this, you can immediately say that you are best off when you do all battles with heroes and as few as possible with fully upgraded units, because they can't get any better by fighting.

I have to say that I don't like that at all (I also made a suggestion to re-introduce the champion levels, btw).
 
nowing this, you can immediately say that you are best off when you do all battles with heroes and as few as possible with fully upgraded units, because they can't get any better by fighting

But we already have an option to limit heroes per Faction, if you lower this to a lower amount this issue is mitigated. You could even have none apart from your commander which would vastly increase the relevance of your units.

That said, Heroes were stronger as units in AoW3 as well, so saying the XP system is causal to that is problematic, even if it correlates.
 
This xp system is better for two reasons :
- it doesn't favour high tier units, which increase the relevance of low tier units through the game.
- it doesn't encourage the player to abuse the game.

A mechanic that entices you into chores, cheese, abuses and exploits is a bad mechanic.

Xp as a manageable resource in battle is a very good concept, and I had a ton of fun with it in AoW3, but let's face it : when you streamline it for competitive play, it becomes very tedious and frustrating. Good riddance. And one less thing impossible to balance.
 
What has all that to do with my post? Did I say anywhere I want to play with the system as it was?

A mechanic you can abuse is bad, but the mechanic in AoW3 was not as such one to abuse, only the way it was balanced. I've put serious time into making it better, others as well, and it doesn't have to be abusive.

Which is incidentally the thing everyone writes, as if that was what it amounted to. It's no point at all, though, because NOONE wants an abusive system.

As I already wrote, I've already found a way to abuse the system (which is actually quite easy and much less of a chore than it was), and as long as the champions upgrades are not implemented, the system discourages you to use fully upgraded units in battle.

But even then, you are STILL encouraged to somehow find ways to heap most XP on your hero(es) (which actually means that you will try to fight only with hero(es), simply because the XP is best placed there. It won't take long and you will see level 10 heroes on day 8 or so, people fighting with a lone modded hero and raking in XP for them, snowballing themselves to fast victory.
 
...good luck with that I guess... but I REALLY don't think a lone modded hero is generally going to be able to take on entire stacks, certainly not early and definitely not without massive use of operations.
 
The mechanic *was* to be abused at its heart. Just think about it and what it does : in a battle, there was an amount of xp you could earn to make your units better. And as you can pick which unit earn the xp, you are enticed to choose the unit that will benefit it the most.

So either the benefit is dim, or you need the power boost to stay competitive.

And for you to get the correct unit to get the xp, you must go through each and every battle, even the most insignificant ones, to correctly allocate your xp reward. That's where it becomes a chore.

As for the abuse you are already talking about how to abuse the planetfall system. Competitive and power play will always encourage players to abuse any mechanic that can give them an edge. But here can't, because you can't artificially increase the xp reward of a battle, and I doubt that the risk of feeding xp to only one unit will be worth the result compared to a normally trained army.
 
This is so wrong in everything. Picking which unit gets XP is no abuse, but has something to do with tactical decisions - if you HAVE the option to choose, that is, in battles you control. There is nothing wrong with that. After all you also pick who gets what artifact, who will be part of which army stack and a myriad of other things, so that is not the problem, although you actually don't really "pick". Instead, you may want to feed the XP to one or more units, but then you have to play accordingly first. If you see that different, you have a different opinion on what "gaming" means, than I have.

That is not abuse. Abuse is, when the system offers a lot more XP to gain than, within the range of normal combat, would be gained, which was the case here. At first there was an immense amount of contacts that would give XP, so lengthening the battle, hitting with minimum damage and all that stuff gave more XP, THAT was the problem. You COULD make it so, that each action of each unit could give XP only ONCE per battle, for example.

With a view on Planetfall, it's strange that you don't believe me that you can QUITE easily abuse it - I'm going to wriote exactly how in later post, but I have to check something first.
 
I vastly, vastly, vastly prefer not being required to do manual combat for every battle because I need to personally micromanage every single XP gain to the units that I specifically want to give it to most. I never knew that was a major mechanic of online play in AoW3, having never played competitively, and the knowledge that it was a major component of play makes me pretty much want to swear off of that completely.

If the new XP system means that XP is handled automatically behind the scenes and I don't have to micromanage it in that way, that's fantastic news to me. I can instead focus on the things that are fun to me - synergizing unit attacks and abilities, maneuvering units in ways that take into account their abilities and the abilities enemies have, building my heroes the way I want rather than in the ways that are strictly optimized, and so on.

If you want to add in more micromanagement of units not for their combat effectiveness but purely to maximize the XP gains of the mechanically best units etc. etc. then cool, have fun with that, I hope you're able to mod it in. But I agree with the others earlier who said that they don't want Triumph adding that in themselves. That takes away attention and resources from adding new features, fixing bugs, UI improvements, and so on. Mod in a custom XP system when you get the tools if that's the way you want XP to work, but let's let the game exist as it is.

Besides, they literally added in combat cards specifically because they didn't want people doing manual combat every single time in multiplayer. Micromanaging XP to specific units in manual combat heavily discourages auto combat and conflicts completely with this design goal.
 
This is so wrong in everything. Picking which unit gets XP is no abuse, but has something to do with tactical decisions - if you HAVE the option to choose, that is, in battles you control. There is nothing wrong with that. After all you also pick who gets what artifact, who will be part of which army stack and a myriad of other things, so that is not the problem, although you actually don't really "pick". Instead, you may want to feed the XP to one or more units, but then you have to play accordingly first. If you see that different, you have a different opinion on what "gaming" means, than I have.

That is not abuse. Abuse is, when the system offers a lot more XP to gain than, within the range of normal combat, would be gained, which was the case here. At first there was an immense amount of contacts that would give XP, so lengthening the battle, hitting with minimum damage and all that stuff gave more XP, THAT was the problem. You COULD make it so, that each action of each unit could give XP only ONCE per battle, for example.

With a view on Planetfall, it's strange that you don't believe me that you can QUITE easily abuse it - I'm going to wriote exactly how in later post, but I have to check something first.

I do agree to some extent with you, i do agree that its about tactical decision making.

However and thats the most important part here, just because something can be used tactically doesn't mean that it is fun. And personally, like many others it seems the hassle of manually fighting everything to optimize the ressources felt like a chore.

And while you could argue that the games tactical component have been lessened with this and because of this it is less complex in itself i would argue against that as well.

The System of AoW 3 was the system of AoW 3 and this is planetfall, instead of looking back to the older game, a game that you can still enjoy the tactical component on this has shifted in Planetfall.

I am pretty sure that you guys will find new ways to to optimize your gameplay, however I think this change has made the game a lot more enjoyable and allows to focus on other tactical aspects of the game.
 
This is so wrong in everything. Picking which unit gets XP is no abuse, but has something to do with tactical decisions - if you HAVE the option to choose, that is, in battles you control. There is nothing wrong with that. After all you also pick who gets what artifact, who will be part of which army stack and a myriad of other things, so that is not the problem, although you actually don't really "pick". Instead, you may want to feed the XP to one or more units, but then you have to play accordingly first. If you see that different, you have a different opinion on what "gaming" means, than I have.

That is not abuse. Abuse is, when the system offers a lot more XP to gain than, within the range of normal combat, would be gained, which was the case here. At first there was an immense amount of contacts that would give XP, so lengthening the battle, hitting with minimum damage and all that stuff gave more XP, THAT was the problem. You COULD make it so, that each action of each unit could give XP only ONCE per battle, for example.

With a view on Planetfall, it's strange that you don't believe me that you can QUITE easily abuse it - I'm going to wriote exactly how in later post, but I have to check something first.
You are missing my point. Picking what unit get xp is good. It gets abused when you use inneffective attacks to multiply the xp you get, or when you drag the fight as much as you can to artificialy inflate the xp you get in the fight. This is cheesy abuse or berderline exploitive in some situations.

The fundamental difference for the abuse is when the amount of xp for a given fight is fixed (AoWPF) or inflatable (AoW3). PF wins here.

Then there is the chore, the tedious gameplay : it becomes tedious when you have to feed some specific units, then you *have to* do *each and every* fight manualy to feed this unit specificaly (or the couple ones). And if you can, you have to cheese the fight to earn as much xp as you can.
 
And you are missing my point, because I specifically said a hundred times that you CAN limit the XP gain - have you read what I wrote you would have seen that I even gave an example how this would work.
What you are missing as well is, that PF loses out on each front versus a refined AoW 3 system, because the central problem is, while XP for units has become a lot less important (you basically get the same bonusses for which you need always more XP, especially when the Champion version is implemented, but of course without it now it's even worse, since XP above the last level is forfeited), it is still as important for heroes, so leveling up heroes is, relatively spoken even more important than in AoW3.

What you are also missing is, that you can (and should) still abuse the system, and fairly easily. Every unit has an XP value (4,6,8,12 for the tiers), and the sum is divided on all units that STARTED the battle. The result of the division is rounded arthmetically to the NEXT integer, .5 rounding UP. On my mettings, the easiest guards I have consists of 3 T1s and 1 T2 and 2 T1s and 2 T2s for 18 and 20 XP, respectively. If you attack everything with a 6-unit stack, you are par for 6x3 XP on the first and lose 2 on the second for 6x3 as well. If you attack with 5 units, you are par on the second for 20, but GAIN 2 for 5x4 on the first (3.6 for everyone). Attack the first stack with 7 units, and you get 7x3, getting 3 XP as a gift. If you know what you are doing, this will sum up to significant numbers fast.

Now, think a bit farther. The way this works, you are encouraged to fight stacks involving heroes supported by as few as possible HIGHTIER creatures. If you attack something with 1 hero and 5 highly modded fully upgraded T1 units, you will gain 1/6 of the XP for your hero - for example, a stack of 3 T2s and 3 T1s for 30 XP will give your hero 5 XP. If you attack instead with a Hero and 2 not fully upgraded T3s your hero gets 10 XP - and your T3s will get 10 as well.

Which will force you, when you play competetively, to play accordingly and in a way you probably don't want. At this stage I see no gain whatsoever, only a step back that, considering the amount of data available from everyone playing AoW3 competetively, makes no sense, because the AoW3 system could have easily be adjusted to be unabusive.
 
You are missing my point


I think he understood you.

If I understand him, he's saying that the implementation in vanilla AoW3 was open to abuse, but the system as a whole was not. Basically, we all agree on the problem, just differ on the solution:

Problem = abuse of xp mechanics

Solution = shared xp pool (Planetfall) or other ways to limit the abuses specifically (what JJ wants)
 
Okay, I do agree with the premise.
I, too, want to have a reason to fight my battles manually in contrast to auto resolve. In AoW3, it was XP gain (which I, as apparently a more casual player) never farmed excessively. And it was the better chance of a favorable outcome due to HI>AI. Both seems to be resolved in PF. (I haven't had enough time to play so far, but this is, what I get from this thread.)

I do disagree, however, to the "just make it optional" suggestion. This proposal is made again and again by players, when it comes to disputed features. It is not the solution!
Where to stop? I dare to say that every single player has preferences that she/he would love to see implemented. Just as an option, right?
The amount of options would soon be unmanageable (as UI Element let alone in the code)!
Each and every option would have to be programmed, tested and maintained in future updates. And each new option will increase the likelihood of undesired interactions and therefore bugs.
And last but not least, game designers have to plan and balance their game with certain mechanics (but also visual factors) in mind. They simply can not cater every optional variation and still keep the integrity of their product.

But if an option isn't the solution and farming XP feels cheesy for some players (apparently) or too easy to be abused, maybe there could be other incentives?
It might feel a little bit artificial, but couldn't manually fought battles simply yield more (evenly distributed) XP than automatic battles?
Or could there be random loot be distributed on the battlefield (energy or cosmite) that can be gathered during a battle, but only manually? (One might think of XCom, where timed boxes filled with alien stuff explode, if not gathered in a timely manner. This could even be a fun and interesting additional battle objective!)
Or, as a final suggestion, maybe killed enemies might be looted for their mods. This could only be possible in manual battles as well. Or, alternatively, only 3 loots per battle are granted; manually, the player could choose which one to pick. Auto-resolved battles would only grant a random choice.

You guys will probably have way better ideas.
I still hope, I could make my basic point clear: Give us an incentive to play our battles out manually (other than the sheer fun of it). If it is not controlled XP distribution like in the previous AoW3, introduce another benefit.
 
Last edited:
I think he understood you.

If I understand him, he's saying that the implementation in vanilla AoW3 was open to abuse, but the system as a whole was not. Basically, we all agree on the problem, just differ on the solution:

Problem = abuse of xp mechanics

Solution = shared xp pool (Planetfall) or other ways to limit the abuses specifically (what JJ wants)

It is a different System, a system that is a lot less time intensive like the last one.

If the problem still exist, a (new) solution needs to be found for the new framework since even if abuse exists in this new system it has benefits of its own.
 
I think he understood you.

If I understand him, he's saying that the implementation in vanilla AoW3 was open to abuse, but the system as a whole was not. Basically, we all agree on the problem, just differ on the solution:

Problem = abuse of xp mechanics

Solution = shared xp pool (Planetfall) or other ways to limit the abuses specifically (what JJ wants)
I thought I just had made it clear that the abuse is still there, the difference being you need no skill, just being able to do elementary school math.
 
the abuse is literally "I get a few more units xp than someone doing it with one stack" it's not nearly as tediously game ruining as spending 30 minutes a fight as you purposely drag it out and out and out and out and out. Also those two units off to the side are highly vulnerable to getting focused out, I've done EXACTLY that to AI even with minimal army splitting.
 
Last edited: