Maybe make each of the races give a better “feel” for certain classes? Like the Northern Alliance looks better in offensive classes but not crafting or trading classes.
I think the best way to do it is to give little convenience buffs, but not gamebreakingly so. For example, Northmen’s Alliance is militaristic, so say crafting weapons is notably easier, but not to the point it would be inconvenient to use any other race for military. Or like when crafting weapons they get one more use out of each resource block than they normally would. Maybe that’s too drastic, but I think something like that that makes it feel a little better to play to their strengths, without making them substantially stronger than others in that area.
So what will be the difference between choosing ascendency and Northmen or the children
After studying the small parchment thing we where shown during the kick starter it said something that the Northmen prefer to create smaller settlements and trust axes and compasses.
Does this mean the nords will have a unique axe wielding unit perhaps? Maybe some sort of special minimap?
The children or whatever their name was. Say that they have a large empire meaning more immigrants perhaps? One thing I defiantly remember was he comment on there affinity for trading. Does this mean discounts on items?
See, I think that for The children instead of discounts maybe traders show up faster or more frequently.
Remember the faction/race distinction. The three kingdoms will be mostly the same as they are all the same race (humans) where as the dwarfs being a different race they’re trying to make considerably different with from the sounds of things reworking a fair bit of the classes at the very least. So your suggestions might be bang on as they are all relatively simple things.
There’s not much to add to this point as it’s pretty much the reasoning for keeping each faction the same/ similar.
If there are differences, they would hopefully be aesthetic, it’s hard to think of certain gameplay differences that wouldn’t direct players to choosing a specific race each time they play. Things like perhaps different weaponry and armour etc. that are gameplay wise the same as their counterparts but look different would be quite cool?
Personally I feel stereotypical in a way of how things should go like the Norsemen should have big fury work horsey, be big and burly,and have War axes, the Asendancey should have swords, English looking homes and, are bad at cooking, the Raya’s Children should be, Asians with Asian armor tools, and homes. and thats the way I feel
agreed… and it would seem thats Radiant’s reasoning as well… make them visually distinctive for the variety that offers, but dont make one group inherently “better” at something than another, forcing certain players with certain play styles into selecting only one of the factions…
Faction specific items and units though?
Northmen supposed to be axe handy but make small tough settlements.
Does that mean:
- Pop Cap
- Axe units
- wood cutting capabilities
Or are you saying that radiant don’t want to do this please confirm
They say they don’t want you to pick different races just because they fit you’re play style, so passive buffs (wood cutting) aren’t there. but maybe things like axe units that are the same as sword units except for skills.
You can’t have the races play differently and not suit different playstyles more or less, and apparently they’ve said both. Dwar(f|ve)s are meant to be different (stonecutters from start, the whole underground shtick, etc.) and has been stated in at least one livestream of that I know of but that would mean they’d have a different method of play, it would change how they build defense, buildings, and fire if wood is that much harder to get.
I think looking at a game like Civilization V would help show what the perks would be like.
All Civ’s are designed for specific play styles (be in military, science, diplomatic, or cultural victories) and some take advantage of certain game mechanics (city-states, religion), but you could potentially win through any victory condition with any civilization. Almost all the perks add just that - perks for your civ, but they’re usually too small to have a drastic effect on gameplay.
With that being said, I’m think the differences would be in advantages (Northmen have a slightly better attack in a snow region), “culturally-relevant-items” (each produce different kinds of jewelry that are all the same in terms of effects but aesthetically look different), and products/crops (which goes along with the culture items, but this would be exclusive potions or special swords/axes… maybe even special units). However, nothing would be overpowered. If a regular axeman has an attack of 10, than the Northern FireAxe Ninja of Destruction has an attack of 12, with slightly better agility or something (or maybe it has an attack of 6 but incredibly ramped up agility).
The point is that you wouldn’t pick them due to your playstyle, but they would each have small aspects to themselves that would make them unique.
I agree with @CableX17: small buffs are the way to go. I don’t want picking which kingdom defining my game style, but just having a subtle difference would be fine.
The Ascendancy = large number of troops and good farmers, crafters
Raya’s Children = resist to the desert and sun and good wizards etc
The Northmen’s Alliance resist to the cold and are strong fighters as well as good miners and forgers etc
and yes I would LOVE love love! for it to affect the kingdome you start with!
I’m personally hoping for different overworld music, just to add a little aesthetic diversity. It’d also be interesting to see specific unit designs, minor technology/upgrade differences, and aesthetic designs/furniture. I’m not certain how much I’d like the gameplay to change depending on the civilization yet, it’s a little too early for me to say. Lots of general gameplay to be figured out before then.
I can’t stress how strongly I agree that the differences should be purely aesthetic. With extremely careful consideration, I think one area that could be different and perfectly balanced given what exists of the game now is food preference.
I disagree. I think purely aesthetic changes is boring. What is the point of having blue shirts instead of green shirts? And having different names? I think that 3 totally different races gives the game some variety if the races have their own unique challenges to overcome.
I think each faction should have a different class tree. Not totally different, mind you, but with one or two units swapped out. The new units would look different, but behave almost identically to their counterparts. With one exception: their level-up skill set would be different [and so might some of the crafted products] showing the strengths and values of each seperate faction. This is a mostly aesthetic difference, and the gameplay difference doesn’t need to change how you play. Possibly, travelers from other kingdoms could join your city, allowing you equal access to other crafted products and skills. That would remove long-term gameplay difference without removing depth.
some ideas on key differences:
Slight changes in classes- hunter instead of trapper for example (small aesthetic class changes)
different tameable pets
Different workshops (thinking more dwarves but who doesn’t want a dwarves forge)
Different clothing- some races good in warmth and bad in cold… increases the need to trade clothing with seasons
Just a few ideas that sprung to mind
different biome strengths? elves could be 10% faster in forests, dwarves 10% underground and we could make a fish people race with a breathing passive to make cities underwater oo
bunny race gets 20% more food satisfaction from eating carrots