DISCIPLES II++
Contents
- Intro
- Terramorphing
- Motherland
- Rod Monsters
- Army
- Lords
- First Leader
- Monsters For Leaders
- Diplomacy
- Thief
- More Options
- Battle
- Running Around
- Thousand And One Unit
- Side-Bar
- Waiting
- Blocking
- Trainee
- Pop-Corn
- Skills
- Foredefence
- Experience
- Inventory
- Magic
- Fog of War
- Book Revision
- Interface
- Outro
INTRO
Disciples III has proven the new unpleasant habit of a game industry: the sequel to the good old game is released, but this sequel is so arguable, that might be better if it didn't happen at all. Or it should have used a new IP name to be considered a good game. And it's hard to understand who's responsible for abandoning the original game core and value defining exactly Disciples in a favor of mainstream features.
In this article I will tell about my vision of what really could have been improved in Disciples's original gameplay, expanding and upgrading it.
TERRAMORPHING
Or terraforming. One of the first things that you notice in Disciples is a total landscape change of the territory under your control. But besides the visuals it does nothing. What if we think a little bit more about improving this gamedesign element?
Motherland
Territory itself can give bonuses.
In practice, I propose to give additional armor both for damage and magic to armies located on their territory and make a little weaker hostiles. Or otherwise, for dark races (Bethrezen and Mortis children) it won't give anything but remove armor, thus making more damage. And Elves as Duality God children would have 50/50 - remove and add at one time.
This coefficient must not be equal for every piece of your land, but must be dependent of distance to your land source (rod/garnison). For example, rod gives 5% bonus to defence at close. Rod range is, for example, 5 steps, so at fifth step armor bonus is not 5% but only 1%. If there's enemy rod close to the first one, they would weaken each other. Something like lowering bonuses modifiers at borders depending on how far is enemy land source.
This would make more need in rod planters as strategical supporters, and would make need in planting rods not only near resources.
And, as main factions receive bonuses from their native lands, probably, it would be fair if NPC races would have their one. Like, merfolks will have bonus at sea, barbarians - at snow mountains etc. And it would be great to have possibility to hire these creatures not only from special buildings but from garnisons located at their ex-territories and have possibility to improve them there. Something like capturing barbarian capitol. But, mb, this would be too much for Disciples.
Also it would be great if lands would enlarge smoothly mixing with neutral or allie lands, but showing smth like conflict with growing into enemy lands - like being in no change with allie land, but changing every day with enemy land.
Rod Monsters
Despite the fact the rods and rod planter were simply thrown away, leaving only "listening posts" like in WH40k:DoW, Disciples III idea of rod defender is not bad at all, especially if we implement it in D2 gameplay.
Essence is that more time rod has existed on map, more powerful its monster is. Something alike summonned creatures, only living in rod and appearing when somebody is trying to take it off.
There will be four levels of existing: zero level, when rod is brand new, with no demon inside; and first-third level, with each of them demon equiering new abilities. He still would be able to level-up after that, but it won't improve him much - we saw it in Disciples/Wesnoth.
Type of magic attack of rod monster is dependent of it's race: undead would hit with death; legions - with fire and so on. But there rods that are put into resources - this make special rod monster which will strike with mixed magic - first source is "native" race magic, and second is resource magic (death, fire and so on). Gold mine, of course, is not magic one, but anyway, this rod monster, for example, can have more hitpoints, or hit with some material strike.
Being attacked, rod monster is fighting alone, except for case when there are rod planter near by: it's the only leader, which can defend rod monster (or otherwise), fighting in one squad with him. For this rod planter will have "natural" restriction to have more then 4 units with him, one less then other ones.
Experienced rod will spread his "land" influence more then the fresh one. The same goes also for other land sources up to the Capitol, as the maximal power of land source. So, if enemy puts the new rod near you old one, then the border will be much more closer to the new one, as old one has more influence. But, of course, if put 4 and more new rods, then the old won't be able to resist them and, probably, will become weaker (if evil race).
The same thing would happen to the garnisones and the Capitol: when enemy lands will be under the wall of the city, it will influence the defenders and rod/capitol monster, thus making easier to capture it. But, of course, you'll have to plant a LOT of rods to overpower the capitol demigod.
Talking about garnison monsters: if Capitol and rods, as land sources, have their own defenders, then why garnisons doesn't have one? Even more, there are free space for such (only 5 places maximum). Yes, of course, 6 places - and it's already a Capitol, but why not.
Garnison defender's level-up can be made different ways: we can make it grow with time or with each upgrade of city, or combine this two by limiting monester level-up with city level, something like usual unit upgrade when you need to buy building to get him upgraded, just this time this is town level, and it's personal for each garnison.
Or other options, like monster appearing from the very beginning; or only from 2nd (to have +1 level unlike rod monster), or 3rd (to have the same upgrade amount as rod monster), or even from 5 (as town build up completely and getting close to Capitol). But to know what's better iIt must be tested.
ARMY
Let's talk about leaders, if have started thinking of rod planters. But let's begin with higher rank guys - Lords.
Lords
Original game had 3 lords: a warrior, an archmage and a guild master.
As a land now means something more than just a your territory counter, it's quite natural to make one more lord: a Landlord. He would have two abilities: first, raised land bonus (for example, not 5%, but 10%), second, his rodplanters will have 3rd level from the very beginning (with default or selectable perks) or they will have leadership of 2, which means that they will be able to get not one but two units. Will they cost more - 350/400 gold - that's the question, but no other abilities present.
As an experiment, there might the second lord candidate: the guy who has replaced Guild Master in DisciplesIII. The one who had +15% gold more per turn. Let call him smth like "burgomaster" and leave everything as is. Let check if money would win the evil?..
In any case, additional lords would increase game strategical possibilities.
First Leader
And there's a question - what about leaders? Because it depends of a lord, which first leader you will receive! Who will be the first leader for these two new lords?
This question is solved quite easily: we just need to give a choise of first leader. First, when playing campaign, many use to have "unnative" leader, as the main one (for example, combination of ranger leader and archmage lord with correct spells makes a marathone runner capable of passing through the half of the map in one turn); and second, when importing hero you choose your favorite one, of course, not the game given. As a result, everything would be much easier: starting the game you will choose leader the you like and play in your favourite style.
Monsters for Leaders
I was always confused by the possibility of hiring only those leaders which are in garnison/capitol. There are a lot of monster-leaders on the map, why don't we follow this?
If we take a look at any leader then we understand that this is second level unit which has stopped in developing and getting additional perks. What if we might make leader of a unit? We have "stop upgrading" button, why don't we develop further this idea?
When unit get to 2nd level and more, he can be turned into the leader in Capitol for 500 gold - and will continue to get experience according to his upgrade tree but without upgrades, of course.
Units will receive perks due to their basic "class": warrior, mage, ranger and rod planter (maybe this artificial rodder will have leadership of two, maybe it's price won't be 500, but 350/400 - must test it). There might be upkeep in 250-500 gold for each level of unit turning into leader, but I don't think it's needed penalty: from now you will have one high-level battle unit less, and you'll have to think harder of how you're going to make it great leader.
There may be a problem with "big" (two square) units due to their size. We can just not allow to create "big" leaders, which will solve logical fail with wearing artifacts. Or we can limit them to have maximum leadership of 4, not to wear some artifacts, and have cost of 750 gold. Even more, every unit-leader can have "dress code" restrictions - but, of course, we can also say that this is simple game conventionality.
For this operation we can make new building at the Capitol in the same section with temple, guild and mage tower. And "burgomaster" will have this as default (like other lords having something built at the beginning of the game).
Well, also we could have possibility of combining leaders together in one squad, like it was done in "Heroes 4". It's quite arguable change as it would make too much bonuses for one squad, but on the other hand, it would be like putting all eggs in one basket - and as we know of classical Disciples, squad is quite fragile for global magic…
Might be worth of giving some special perks to units that have stopped their upgrading, but this may be a little too much into personalisation. Or not: give names, make a little randomisation…
Diplomacy
Many TBS have possibility of forcing neutral unit become allie. Why can't we get something similar in Disciples?
It must not be very simple - in the most of the cases, neutral squads are more likely to die of your hands (or otherwise). For them to join you must be several parameters checked, like: is attacked unit race frendly to the player's race; how much attacker is stronger then attacked units; how good is leader's diplomacy... AI must count his chances to make any damage: if it's very low or no at all (it usually can be told by first turn), then it better to give up.
The same is about running away - computer is standing till the end. Even if there are only one supporter's left with no damage doing, it continues to cast spells till all is left of him is ash or jibses. It would be more logical to run away of the battlefield, and then try to give up.
Thief
Thief is one very special character. First, he doesn't level-up, second, he does some very unique thing, which are not available to other leaders. And as he is single it's hard to call him leader… The thing is that now he will level-up.
There was a Guild Master lord which gave to thieves new abilities. Now these abilities would open with new levels - but, as it was, they will be available to this lord from very beginning. How this will be done?
There may be two options: whether it's available from the very beginning, whether Guild Master will be served by the best thieves of third level. As I think it would best about additional levels, as it will create unified system with Landlord's high level rod planters. On one hand, it would be good to start with special units of 3rd level, on the other hand, you won't be able to act freely at the beginning of the game because of neutral squad for experience, and to achieve new level this guys would have to work more then usually… That's why this option seems to me quite balanced.
As well, quite standard thieves in the very beginning may become more race-specific in their level-up.
More options
What else can we thing about?
I'd add possibility of destroying buildings in Capitol for having alternate unit upgrade during the same game (like wrong decision in long campaign mission). Do you want to develop another branch? Destroy existing building for it's initial cost. It's good if you have decided it early, but what if you need to revert building that cost you 3000 gold?..
Also would be good if allies would be able to get into your garnisons for unit heal and ressurection (and otherwise) and ally basic unit hire. Why they are needed without upgrade building - unclear, but option is good. Could be usefull. For example, sometimes I did not converted single-target Specter into multi-target Shade, as the latter had lower chance of paralyzing…
BATTLE
There are discussions about tactical mode: many don't understand why there are so less units in squad, why they are not moving - conventionalities all around. And these many think of tactical mode the first pretendent to be changed.
But, before chopping with no painkillers, let's think of why it was made such way.
Running Around
If take "Heroes" series as a golden standard, then we can resolute that in "Disciples" strategical mode (global map) has taken almost everything from tactical (battlefield), leaving only moment of strikes. That's why there is no movement on the battlefield - all the movement had been already done.
But if we still decide to change tactical mode, then we can go in a "chess" way - something alike "Heroes5", but with much smaller battlefield. Units will move maximum for one step.
We can leave old standard of no space between armies, or put few cell to make retreat easier: one cell if units will move and hit in one turn or two cells if units whether move wether attack. This movement thing would also make interesting collision about going for the last row of enemy unit: traditionally, you can't kill supporters before you slay all first row guys; now you can go for them, using empty spaces between guys of first row (which will be convinient for werewolf, for example). So there will be a lot of headache: will we count turn for movement? Will hits from behind and side do more damage? Or let's do the "tetris": while row is not fully dead, you can't access second one? Or some cover fields, you cannot pass?..
In general, I'd say that it's not worth of it - it's better to leave everything as it was. All genius stuff is simple. I'm not wondering that Disciples III has not succeded with unit movement implementation, copypasted HoMM and added a lot of unuseful things turning game from TBS with RPG elements into RPG with TBS elements. They would better played "Etherlords"... I believe, "Legends of Eisenwald" had an implementation that looks a lot more appropriate to the title of "Disciples battle system evolution", than DIII.
Thousand And One Unit
Six units - is it many or not? I think, for Disciples it's quite many. Of course, when ending campaign, with experienced leader leveling-up of his units is a matter of few not very difficult battles; but if you start from the very first level, then you will get 2 more leadership, thus filling up all 6 slots, is not very easy and fast.
And if we remember that Disciples strategy is definitely not about single squad developing - he will be dead soon enough with magic, thieves, summoned creatures and enemy frag-leaders help - then we will understand that 6 units is a very good number. Even more - it would be very sad to loose, for example, 10 high-level units (which are trained with a lot of unreturnable low-level monsters) because of few "Armageddons" cast in the wrong time in the correct place.
That's why I think that there's no need to change this element. But for others…
Side-Bar
I was always wondering about "big" units of why there's no possibility of placing them other way then "vertical"? I'd change this: in any case such monster is taking two slots, but working as one (one and half, let's say). If the big guy is behind, then there will be maximum of two mages, and it will be faster to go through the first lines to kill the mages. Or, if it will be in front, then big guy is opened for kicking of every enemy unit - all three guys in the first row and supporters from behind. Practically, all the positions will have their pro et contra.
Realisation of this can be done in "Heroes 5" way: if small unit is for one cell, then big unit will have four, but two of them must always lay on the battlefield. And to place it you will have to circle around your army placing.
Waiting
There is the button "wait", that was implemented in Disciples 2. It can be upgraded a little bit.
Let's pretend "Heroes 5" copypasted unit turn queue from Disciples III (actually, it can be polished a little bit and put back): as we remember, if we press "wait" button, unit's turn will fly away into the round end. I suggest that "wait" effect would not send unit to the queue end but after the next unit. Awaiting unit avatar may have some sand clock animation.
Blocking
Also there must be possibility of setting unit for blocking ally from hits. It won't do anything but cover - at least one time. At least non-magical attacks.
Trainee
Get some units to map with the time to have possibility of training few high level squads. Make this optional as enemy with more territory will have advantage of gaining more experience for his support squads.
Pop-Corn
And the last thing that tactical mode asks for - are special effects. The fight must look similar to "Etherlords", "Tekken", "Dawn of War" etc animations. Few options of animations for lucky strikes, fatalities, defense and death (there might be even nice scene of turning dead unit into ashes or smth else)…
SKILLS
"Disciples" skills have always reminded me perks of "Fallout". And the same they were some serious help for destroying enemy units, unlike these childish "+5 to Death magic defence" of "Disciples III".
Probably, it's quite obvious thing but still I'll tell it: there must be pack of perks, available for all leaders. But, besides them, there must exist special perks for each type of a leader, special perks for each type of lord, special perks for each race. And also converted units should have there own traits.
Foredefence
It would nice to have some perks alike "Tactics" of Heroes: it will be usefull when you are forced to fight, for example, you can regroup for retreat. I don't know if this would be fair and "disciplish" enough.
If we continue the idea, we can also make defence from the global magic: when you're about to be hit, you will be warned of some unknown spells going down from the sky or elsewhere. You will do air magic defence but noooo - it was a rock, earth magic. But the next level you take upgrade of "Foreseeing" perk and now you understand what's going to happen, but you have no recources. And you fail again.
These feature may be for all. But we can give only to certain type of leaders (warrior/mage) or even certain type of leader under command of certain type of lord. Choosing lord's favourites may give certain bonuses.
Experience
I think, modificators of non-upgrading level-ups must be lowered: in "Disciples I", unit, reaching the end of it's upgrade tree, has stopped gaining any experience at all, which is not very good.
"Disciples II" has improved this part of the game, but, at least in campaigns, there was developed only one overpowered leader, and that was dimming true strategical mode from the eyes of player.
Second problem was succesfully solved in "Battle for Wesnoth", where units are leveling-up alike "Disciples" with choice of who to be, but secondary levels (without turning into somebody else) are not giving big advance in front of enemy except for gaining full life instantly. It's quite good feature.
If we talk about the campaigns then between scenarios there must be possibility of taking no only one unit but several: main leader, secondary/rodplanter and thief; for player to be used of developing few characters at once.
Inventory
There is quite much claims for inventory being too much abstract: to wear some boots you need to have perk for this, like your leader have never seen boots in his life before.
Maybe we should have possibility of using items without needed perks - it will only limit magical effect of item to very low. Probably some additional items like armor could be implemented, but there are doubts if it won't get Disciples too much into RPG.
MAGIC
Magic is a mighty thing in "Disciples". And first what I'd certainly changed - it's an option to disable spell animation, and possibility to make spell pack to cast them all selected at once (like improve defence, hits and so on).
Fog of War
When you have all map opened, then you can cast spells everywhere you want, which is quite nasty. In the beginning I thought that it would be better to strike only on your land, but it was considered not very smart.
But we can implement fog of war: it will be clear at your land; there will be misty at lands you'd been at, but these are not yours yet; and completely dark at unknown ones. Your lands will whether open new territories whether won't go to the unknown lands.
This would both save you from enemy spells (and otherwise), and would make a need of recoinassance for succesfull war actions. Not like in previous games: you open map and have half of the victory in your hands.
Book Revision
Balance that was based on 4 old races has broken with Gallean people return: new mana has appeared, and elves wer neither good (Imperium, Clans) neither bad (Undead, Legions), so it was unclear what kind of magic will be using.
But the developers did it smoothly: thanks to dual nature of elves, chaos and order, madness and clear mind of Gallean, elves have become the center in the cross of the good-bad races relations (Clans-Undead & Imperium-Legions). That's where come spells of +/-30% of armor: plus for us, minus for you and there goes the same 50% that take off bad guys and add-on good ones.
It's interesting, that "Disciples III" had a possibility of making this feature, as developers has chosen Imperium, elves and legions as playable races, but for some "innovative" reasons, they have decided to create their own Frankenstein.
Also like old spells, elves need one mana type for first and second levels of magic, and then were added 1-2-3 mana types for further levels. So elvish spells fitted the game quite naturally. Of course, it doesn't cancel the fact that other races doesn't need Gallean mana at all.
The same, DIII was created only thinking about elves, human and demon mana: nothing for upcoming add-on for Undeads, nothing for unfinished add-on for Clans…
I think, that elvish mana needs to be included into other race spells from the very beginning. 5 spells levels for 5 manas: 1st level for native mana; 2nd level for two manas and so on. It would interesting to make magic combinations logical: for example, if you combine air and earth manas, you get meteor shower; fire and water makes deadly steam; death and life makes poison - and so on.
INTERFACE
"Disciples" is a game of no hurry. It is quite slow: your turn, enemy turn, spell effects, epic unit animations… Very meditative. And interface is helping this. How could we increase the speed of the game?
First, we might take "HoMM" idea of fast movement by double click, which disables animation allowing "overjump" leader to needed place. For animated movement we need possibility to stop it by one-click or simply disable it.
Second, we could bring often used things to the main screen, such as most used spells and spell packs or garrisons with forces inside, like it was done in Heroes VI UI.
OUTRO
Here I stop as my ideas end. In any case here are enough ideas too say that this is not Disciples II any more. But, if any of these will come to realization, then it would require many time to test it. But still I hope I have interested you. )
