Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Built-in autosave feature (for the TE version).Auto-translated
I believe that SoD is more versatile for the sm-template for many reasons. First, different starting armies, versatility. In TE, the army is the same; the third hero has no army. In SoD, there's a search for money + a possible focus on magic. In TE, gold instead of scrolls + banks + crypts, for example, in Barbarian lands. They tried to make castles more similar—as a result, the first week of development is routine. But the version has interesting points. For example, simultaneous turns up to 116. Judging by the creators' attitude, however, the bugginess will be off the charts. Although the idea itself is good. If only they could open their eyes to gameplay and so on :D
2Wicc: by the way, you have misconceptions of the same kind. You think people play SoD because of conservatism? Nonsense. There is no conservatism! It's a fiction. You simply don't dare admit that SoD is, in many ways, more versatile in the choice of development tactics. Yes, there are bugs; yes, there is imbalance like Shakhti. But the sm-template looks 10 times more interesting in SoD than in TE. And besides, to attract people to something like TE-lite, some time needs to pass—at least six months—for the version to be tested. SoD is a brand, but TE-lite isn't yet, and IMO conservatism has nothing to do with it.
P.S.
True SoD players will not switch to any version... even if it's SoD + simultaneous turns, because that would no longer be real SoD )))
Not true!!!!!!!! It is enough to carefully implement version continuity. Without any of those removals of guard stacks or zero armies for the 3rd hero.
Not an attempt, but a rollback. And a rollback of unsuccessful things. We tested, tried, and found errors. We are fixing them.
Well, that's from your point of view. They may not be unsuccessful from other points of view.
Yes, there are things that should have been rolled back – like the armor, which made it noticeably more useful than offense, and armor specialists became even bigger tanks. Or the strengthening of the swamp, which is constantly being removed from opponents in fixes, and in random games, it is only given in pairs with other overpowered castles.
But I don't understand why experience was disliked. It's an excellent strategic component that forces you to fight more, find a balance between upgrading, losses, and the timer. And it clearly shows the difference in skill – more skilled players usually have a much better-upgraded army, which partially compensates for the unevenness of the situation.
2. Balance is in second place – but since the balance in SoD is quite normal (if you apply a 10-page rulebook to it)
Eeeee... so, what was all this TE for, if the balance in SoD is normal? And doesn't the fact that the castles are in a strict hierarchy of strength matter? And no one will seriously play Stronghold on Dungeon. Or choose a starting hero different from the standard one. All this significantly impoverishes the game compared to TE.
Judging by the developers' attitude, the bugginess will be extreme.
There are bugs, of course, but I'm working on them. Yesterday, I tested it with SAG. There are bugs when clicking the button to pass the turn from red to blue, but I think I've figured out how to get rid of them.
But overall, I'm already happy with the stability of the version....
In TE, the Tower strategy isn't effective against Necropolis either. :D 2 asm-
There are bugs when clicking the button to pass the turn from red to blue, but I think I've figured out how to fix them.
Even though I'm not a programmer, I think this is called bug fixing. And bugs are things that appear once in every 10-50 games. Like battle desynchronization. And until the version (is it called a beta?) is tested by users, it's too early to talk about fixing bugs.
Even though I'm not a programmer, I think this is called bug fixing. And bugs are those that appear once in every 10-50 games. Like battle desynchronization. And until the version (is it called a beta?) is tested by users, it's too early to talk about fixing bugs.
Let's not delve into terminology. Work is in progress, and that's the most important thing.
to asm It was expected that there would be those who agree and those who disagree, but the catch is that those who liked the idea from the beginning will mostly just have to wait to see it in practice... while those who didn't like it will criticize it from the very beginning (even though they haven't tried it in practice yet). There will certainly be a divide, but there's a chance that the "gap" between TE-Full and SoD will eventually disappear. And no offense to Wicc, but TE-Light is just a temporary alternative. In the end, hardcore fans of extremes will be satisfied with a sandbox of like-minded people, and developing players will find the new patch to be just what they need... the main thing is that the idea works out!
Now, more specifically: (the opinion of a SoD player-conservative who is drifting into the astral plane from 2 letters... TE) : What dissatisfies 90% of SoD players and TE players -Turn-based gameplay -Interface (+ buttons) What is expected to be new, but should please both groups -Simultaneous turn gameplay -Built-in autosave -Possibly, in the future, the ability to password-protect maps and saves -Balancing of necessary and unnecessary secondary skills -Embedding the rules into the game itself -Other (not yet known)
What might not appeal to SoD players? It might not appeal to them that this isn't SoD, and that it's too lazy to switch to something else, but this isn't TE either, where the only advantages for a hardcore SoD player are: -Turn-based gameplay -Interface (+ buttons) And is it worth installing 300 MB of TE-Full, disabling all settings for Light, and playing with doubts about the game's proper functionality and connection, and the complete coincidence of all the details with SoD? As for me, I might have switched to TE-Light, but for now, the audience there is small, and here, a decent alternative is also planned.
What might not appeal to a hardcore TE player?it doesn't matter who said it
the level of conservatism is so high that... they drift into the astral plane
it doesn't matter who said it
Your target audience is TE players. And with this approach, you're doing them a disservice.
I took some telling phrases from Wicc's post... I assume that over time (we SoD players) will read the topic with amusement: "why I switched from TE-Full to World Tournament."
OelmIn SoD - searching for money + a possible bet on magic. In TE - gold instead of scrolls + bank + crypts, e.g., in Barbarian lands. They tried to make the castles more similar - as a result, the first week of development is routine.Regarding the excess of money in TE, I have already spoken out both on Bay and on the Saga forum. Yes, it exists, which somewhat simplifies and unifies development. I even made a proposal on how to fix this - exchange scrolls not for gold, but for a random resource. At the same time, resources for the Watchtower will appear, and one can observe a shootout with "teapots" by the 2nd week.
2Wicc: by the way, you have misconceptions of the same kind.
Of course I do. I search for them diligently, and if I find them, I analyze them impartially.
Do you think people play SoD because of conservatism?
I think that is the most common reason. There are a few others.
You simply don't dare admit that SoD, in many ways, offers more variety in the choice of development tactics.
What a powerful statement ...
In some ways it is correct, of course, but this variety stems not so much from an abundance of opportunities as from the diversity of shapes and sizes of the hole you can fall into. Primarily regarding the starting army, and then money, blocks, and other things.
By the way, recently I played several games at 200% (TE), with a start of 2500 cash, 5 wood, and 5 stone. The variety in terms of development increased noticeably; I had to think a lot about building up, as well as scrape together finances penny by penny. And on the 2nd week, not break cons/Dragon Utopia/the opponent so quickly, but first finish development.
But in terms of "hole" options, nothing much was added - you can almost always buy out the starting army (if there is absolutely no cash, then with a loan).
That's actually why I have an idea to make such a start standard in the next version.
No offense to Wicc, but TE-Light is just a temporary alternative.
What's with the offense? TE-Light has far outlived the time I initially allotted for it. It was created with a single purpose – for the tournament in Yekaterinburg. I'm not particularly interested in its further fate; I doubt I'll be playing or further developing it.
Pulled out some key phrases from Wicc's post... I suspect that over time (we, the SoD members), we will read the thread with amusement: "why I switched from TE-full to the "new patch".
It seems like some kind of projection based on personal experience... As far as I can remember, my views have generally been quite consistent and unbiased, and if they have changed, it's not due to mood or other subjective factors, but rather due to new information that restructures logical chains.
I actively cultivate this process, considering it a sign of personal development. Therefore, yes, my views are evolving gradually. However, I still agree with most of the ideas I expressed earlier – within the context of the situation in which they were expressed, they were quite adequate to reality.
What annoys 90% of Sod and TE players: - Hours spent playing - Interface (+ buttons) What is expected to be new, but should please both groups: - Simultaneous turn-based gameplay - Built-in autosave - Possibly, in the future, the ability to randomize the map and save file - Balancing of necessary and unnecessary secondary skills - Embedding the rules into the game itself - Other (not yet known)
Here, the opinions coincided; this is roughly the essence of my arguments. The only tricky point is the balancing of skills. But giving logisticians a 3% bonus and reducing the necromancy percentage by half – that's a reasonable idea, in my opinion.
In some ways, it's true, but this variability comes not so much from the abundance of possibilities, but from the variety of forms and sizes of the "thing" you can encounter.
This problem also exists. :D Although it is exaggerated.
But conservatism is a myth. There is no such problem. Just imagine the mindset of society. For example, would you want to launch a drink on the market that would compete with Coca-Cola? It's not enough for it to be of equal quality; it must be significantly better. And even in that case, you need a very strong promotion to gain any ground.
But conservatism is a myth. There is no such problem. Just imagine the mindset of society. For example, if you wanted to launch a drink to compete with Coca-Cola, it wouldn't be enough for it to be of equal quality. It would have to be significantly better. And even in that case, you would need a very strong promotional campaign to gain any market share.
The first two sentences of the paragraph contradict the rest of the text, which is obviously true. Therefore, the first two sentences are incorrect.
(I wanted to draw a line here between conservatism and rationality, but damn, there's no time. So, without further justification :))
Using the SoD version as an example — it's not just a game, but also a certain image formed in the minds of the audience (quality, availability of a licensed installation, same-proven reliability, fame). The product is recognized as successful. TE-lite — (from the perspective of an average player: quality is unclear, no licensed installation, not time-tested, limited own fame). In other words, it's risky. If choosing between reliability and risk, what would a normal person choose? Reliability! Thus, the choice is primarily influenced by rationality of thinking.
2asm: hit me up on ICQ, as there is a very large substantive part. 373347222
Sorry for interrupting, but it just caught my eye:)
He prefers what is familiar and proven by experience over what is unfamiliar and new.
and
If you have to choose between reliability and risk, what will a normal person choose? Reliability!
In my opinion, you have clearly demonstrated your own conservative leanings :) At least because "new" is inherently risky ;) And if you know what to expect from "new," then it's no longer new, but something you've studied.
Отдай свои прошлые сны, В сомненьях себя обрети, В бешеном танце душа кружится! Не думай, что будет потом, Здесь и сейчас мы живем, Стань хоть на миг сам собой, слышишь!
I think that the arguments about reliability and risk in the given context are not entirely relevant.
If you invest money in a bank, then reliability is indeed a priority. Because the stakes are high, and few people have the skills to accurately assess the risks in the banking sector, so they look at the overall reputation (although the crisis clearly showed the ephemeral nature of this entity).
But when it comes to entertainment (which is what a game is), this approach suddenly loses its meaning. Because the stakes are not high (at least due to the lack of clear criteria), and the players' skill level is high enough to be able to assess something as is, without relying on other people's opinions. That's one thing.
Secondly, it so happens that I learn the areas I venture into quite quickly, so from a certain point on, it simply becomes boring - everything is already known, there is only implementation left, and there is no room for creativity.
In fact, I am not alone in this approach to the game; several of my regular sparring partners also readily try something new, whether it be templates, settings, game rules, etc.
When I wrote the script to change the contents of canned goods and Hives, there was a real brainstorming session on tactics for capturing them for different factions... both alone and in conjunction with other players. It immediately reminded me of the good old days of Heroes, when I used the same methods to study techniques for capturing different banks, which gave me a lot of positive impressions.
Thirdly, as a person with the psychology of an athlete, I strive to create situations with multiple options, the ability to choose from approximately equivalent options at first glance. And so that the outcome of the game depends primarily on my choice, and not on factors beyond my control.
For this reason, I immediately liked the ideology of the Total Enhancement (TE) mod, because it really contains the principles of competitive sports. As I studied TE, I found many things that contradict this concept, which I try to eliminate as much as possible. But compared to the original game, a big step has been taken in this direction.
Now we just need not to deviate from the course (as asm does). However, it is also not worth rushing too much (as I do). I hope that through discussions, we will find a golden mean.
Oelm
