Features for 0.7?

[kittel]

We have had multiplayer games that lasted 7+ hours and we did have many 2nd level units in game.

- Miyo

So for games like that, choose a multiplier of x1.00.

This is one point where i dont think it makes sense to KISS. Also, I think it will increase the longevity of the game to provide this (non-obscure) option. Want a quick fun powerful game? Choose x3.00. Should be quite different from a x0.75 game.

[Mooses]

KISS?

Don't know that

Mooses

(only know kiss, which doesn't make too much sense here, does it? )

[miyo]

Mooses,

KISS stands for Keep It Simple Stupid.

- Miyo

[kittel]

KISS?

Don't know that

Mooses

(only know kiss, which doesn't make too much sense here, does it? )

KISS="Keep It Simple Stupid". Useful principle for reminding people that more features are not always a good thing, and might actually make things too complicated (or something like that).

[Mooses]

Thanks guys, you never stop learning!

Mooses

[Seb]

Hi love BfW, the engine is nice, graphics are cute, rules are simple and effective, learning is quick (very rare in today games !), a quite pleasant experience.

But I think it would be possible to strengthen the gameplay variations.
First, it would be nice to

be able to enroll units in lot of different places.

For instance, the hero could go in a village and ask to recruit the available people in the village. Similarly, in other places (caves, forest) it would be possible to find new units to recruit. Each place could propose a different set of units to different prices.
Additionnaly, this would free the hero and let him walk around the map without sacrifying the possibility to enroll new units.
I think it is not too hard to program in a basic way (put keeps in other places than in the castle and assign a unit availability list per keep)

Secondly,

a wider type of maps

this came to my mind by looking at the loyalist campaign where one of the map would be a city map. But it could also be nice to have dungeon&dragon maps with a gameplay similar to rogue-like games or to spacehulk games. Those maps could have different exits to other maps.

Thirdly,

non linearity in the storyline

This has already been proposed in other posts. It would be nice to introduce little quests like "bring this object to the hermit in the mountains without being captured by the orcs. If you were captured by the orcs, you will find yourself in another map, otherwise the hermit will give you another quest.

This would lead to a game with different kind of gameplay during the same campaigns

[kmj]

non linearity in the storyline

To a large extent, I think this is already possible. I should you look into scenario development. I'm willing to bet you can even have a "mercenary" or D&D style campaign, where the player could choose between jobs (or quests) and as easier ones are completed, more difficult ones open up.

It's just that somebody's got to write that style of campaign.

[Accipitradea]

Along the lines of non linearity, I'd like to see you leader be able to die without the map ending instantly. When a great leader falls, it's possible for another to step up and take his place. Obviously for the Heir to the Throne Campaign, Konrad can't die, but he could be incapacitated and the map won without him, and then the healers (white mages, whatever) can heal him after the battle. If you want to get really complicated, you could have all your units fight with the opposite of leadership for the rest of the map if you leader falls, representing a loss of morale. It should be possible to win without a leader, but losing your leader should have negative consequences.

[Eponymous-Archon]

Along the lines of non linearity, I'd like to see you leader be able to die without the map ending instantly. When a great leader falls, it's possible for another to step up and take his place.

This is interesting. Perhaps any 3rd-lvl unit could transform into a leader, maybe if he had the leadership.

Worth considering, I think.

[Turin.]

Secondly,

a wider type of maps

this came to my mind by looking at the loyalist campaign where one of the map would be a city map. But it could also be nice to have dungeon&dragon maps with a gameplay similar to rogue-like games or to spacehulk games. Those maps could have different exits to other maps.

Hey, someone actually looked at my campaign!

However, i would be against have any other type of gameplay such as D+D, because it would ruin the point of the game, which is to fight. In a game like HoMM[1], i always thought the battles were the best part. It would ruin part of the gameplay for me to have to go and do other types of stuff to get to more battles.

[1]- Heroes of Might and Magic

[kmj]

However, i would be against have any other type of gameplay such as D+D, because it would ruin the point of the game, which is to fight. In a game like HoMM[1], i always thought the battles were the best part. It would ruin part of the gameplay for me to have to go and do other types of stuff to get to more battles.

Well, you certainly don't have to play a D&D style campaign.

[Accipitradea]

This is interesting. Perhaps any 3rd-lvl unit could transform into a leader, maybe if he had the leadership.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. That would encourage you to have more units do the leadership branch.

I'd personally like there to be two levels of leadership, one for the captain level units, and one for your leader. It's one thing to fight next to Faramir, a Captain of Gondor, but it's a completely different thing to fight next to Aragorn, Isildur's Heir and King of Gondor.

Having your leader die would be like when Theoden fell during the breaking of the Seige of Minas Tirith. It's not like when Theoden died, the Rohirrim just packed up their horses and left. They still finished and won the battle, and a new leader, Eowen, emerged.