Things we'd like to see in Samurai Wars


#41

The roadmap hasn’t changed, it is still very much relevant. That said, I’ve been taking time to fix bugs, improve stability, and to make sure that code is well written and modular. And I haven’t implemented everything in the exact order listed by the roadmap (like the in-game forum etc). I will soon be done with the user interface rewrite mentioned above, and after that I will update the roadmap accordingly.


#42

Hey guys,
Here are a few things that I find are very important to improve this game.

  1. Unit Customization - the ability to customize your army is a must. This is how I believe it should be set up. A player’s total army would be a total of 12 units plus the General. You would have minimum and maximum amounts per unit type.
    The minimum amount for ranged units is 2, infantry units is 4, and Calvary units is 0.
    The maximum amount for ranged units is 6, infantry units is 8, and Calvary units is 6.
    I would like to add that u may pick any units you wish for ranged, infantry, and Calvary. Why? Because even if someone were to pick 8 spearman (Yari), their units would flee quickly under archer fire or when overwhelmed. Even if a player were to pick 6 Calvary the player would have a very hard time controlling all of them to raid which would be the only serious available advantage over an army of infantry. Even if a someone picked 6 ranged units the archers can easily be raided and picked at, further more the army would be very weak in close quarters. There would be advantages and disadvantages for all army customizations. That’s what would keep the balance in game.

  2. A 3v3 and 4v4 game mode - This game mode would be very fun and challenging. The map size would need to double the current size and each player would need 6-7 units with their own general. And if a player were to leave mid-game his units flee.

  3. A multiplayer challenge mode- This would be the same as 1v1 and 2v2 but it would have fog of war.

  4. A better single player/ practice mode. Make the enemy charge your units instead of walk to them. Also give the enemy an army, like 2 infantry and 2 archers, that gradually grows per wave.

  5. Improved Ranged unit gameplay-
    • Remove the Auto fire function and replace it with a lock-on fire function (Or simply add into game as an alternative to the Auto fire function in settings) This will require the player to aim and lock his unit onto enemy units. To do this there must be an extended range in which the player may lock-on to an enemy unit so when that unit comes into firing range the archers or gunners commence to fire. To aim your ranged unit you need simply to drag the little arrow in a general direction. To lock on to an enemy unit you simply drag the little arrow onto an enemy unit within the lock on range, if that enemy unit leaves the lock-on range then your ranged unit will no longer be locked-on to that unit.
    • Ammunition is a must to making this game more strategically realistic. I think that each archer unit should have about 12 shots since archers typically have about 12 arrows each. Also the gunners should have about 10 shots that cause slightly more damage than archer units.

  6. Here are some things I see need to be improved.
    • Rivers need to slow units by 60%
    • Spearmen ( Yari ) should be able to stop all enemy movement passing through it when facing the direction the enemy unit is coming from. This should be only for Spearmen. No other unit should be able to do this.
    • Ranged units should give more damage. I noticed that a single ranged unit ( both archers and gunners ) gives about 6 damage per volley/shot and takes about 50 secs to single handedly kill a samurai unit. I think that a single archer unit should cause about 15% damage per volley/shot at full strength. A single shot will put the enemy infantry at 85% health/strength, 5 shots will put the enemy infantry at 44% strength and 10 shots at 19% strength. This seems more realistic than how it is now. Ranged fire will be extremely lethal at diminishing enemy numbers, which gives your army the close quarters advantage.
    • Archer units need to have better close quarters strength. I don’t think that archers were utterly helpless against other warriors in hand to hand combat. They should be able to 1v1 a samurai unit with 30% health when at full strength.

  7. Tutorial mode

Thruzan


Making Samurai Wars More Realistic
#43

My opinion on unit customization is that I shouldn’t have an opinion. If you want to host a game with those restrictions you should be able to do that, and if someone else want to host an all-cav battle they should be allowed to do that too. This will require some way to edit scenario parameters (min/max count and cost of each unit type), but IMHO it’s the best and only solution, because unit balancing is a nightmare to get “right” and there are as many “right” ways as there are players.


#44

Sure… I was just stating my opinion to that… However having an all Cav army has no strategy… U just charge…

Thruzan


#45

This Game is amazing! So much potential already realized. Here are my suggestions as a student of strategy and military history. I love the aspect of reality and the random nature of the load out. Generals fight with the armies they have, not the armies they choose. My

  1. Fatigue accumulation, especially when running, eventually affects speed and morale.

  2. Some amount of fog of war, but not too much, maybe not being able to see what type of units your enemy are until they are closer. Or just a big cloud of dust, more for horses. After all the maps aren’t that big and scouts are a ubiquitous thing. Obviously hiding in forest would be much more concealing and add so much to the game.

  3. Drastic slowing of movement when moving through a friendly or enemy formation, spears would slow the most, followed in order by smaller weapons.

  4. For the love of God horse archers can fire when moving and arrows can hit running horses.

  5. Over issuing and delayed issuing or orders. If a commander issues too many orders and counter orders in a short period morale will drop, more so with peasant units. Also there should be a lag in the orders if the unit does not have line of sight to the general, i.e. Rider would have to be sent with dispatch if signal flags, trumpets couldn’t work. This might be the most important suggestion of all. After all commanders have to anticipate and forethought is what strategy is all about.

I havnt played games in a long time, but this one has so much great potential to expand. Please no enhanced graphics that will slow gameplay down, not everyone is in hyper speed big money Internet land and I love I get to play people from all over the globe, rural, etc.

Thank you so much.


#46

Good suggestions. I really like the idea that issuing too many orders causes stress and morale drop.

Personally I think would like command delays, and command signals could be accurately rendered with flags and runners, etc. It’s a little problematic though, depending on how you see it. On one extreme you could be playing the general, and only be able see what the general can see, even hiding your own troops in fog-of-war. The other extreme is that you’re omnipresent and that you “are” all unit commanders simultaneously, and able to see what they see and control them instantly and all at once. The first one conflicts with playability (unless you’re really hard core), and the second with realism and fog-of-war. I think one has to find a good compromise, where players are omniscient about their own troops, but with fog-of-war about the enemy, and a balanced amount of friction.


#47

Ha, not even ancient warriors liked to be micromanaged.

I wasn’t imagining actual runners or a signal Corp, but a delay in responding to orders to simulate an era with non instantaneous communication, maybe a little ticking clock so folks don’t think there is a glitch. The delay would be greater the farther from the main group. It’s kind of tricky, but somehow l.o.s. And movement values could be used to delays troops response. On the flip side if it didn’t work right it would be super frustrating.

Thanks again for the great game and not making it pay to win and upgrade.


#48

VEveryone here has amde a proposal, so I will too:

  • Take out the marvelous feature were units lock onto other enemy units. My army would survive for longer. It is really frustrating when you are trying to run away and your miserable units route because of this lock, when your quick skirmrish parties fail because they attack the infantry rather than just fire at the archers.
  • Make the server much more stable, though I suspect it is just me… But hey, maybe check it out.
  • Create bubbles that mark your units that are off your sight, all of them. I sometimes split my army and miss out some action because of it… Maybe even a mini map somewhere, may in the upper rigth corner.
  • And finally, the way to solve the request for custom armies. Create a balance of what each unit costs. Before each battle with the “deploy” on it, players should be able to choose their units. Now here comes the punch-line: Have you ever seen Totally Accurate Battle Simulator? Kind of like that, players have some amount of money, the same amount each battle. Now they will use this budget to choose what kind of units he wants, within the budget.

#49

Need to get separate chats in the war zone so you and your partner can make audibles without your opponents seeing


#50

I would love to see rivers slow enemies, when I first began playing I thought they did (and suffered the consequences of trying to defend against it…) and I would love to see how a slowed march through water (with perhaps heavy units such as samurai unable to cross?) could turn the tide of battle.

I also very much agree with the prospect of adding the special ability for Yari troops. Too often cavalry units have simply rode through my spear line, suffering a few casualties but ultimately bypassing it. I think either cav should simply “bounce off” from a direct attack (meaning the unit scatters) or only the samurai unit should even be able to mount an attack, as only the most well trained horse would willingly charge into a spear, as the Romans found out and used to their advantage.


#51

I really think a naval component would really make this game more interesting. Have two large islands with forts, and like two smaller islands to capture on each side. I think it would add a really cool side to this game.


#52

How to playing p vs p…?


#53

Check out:


#54

His name was the only thing you would like to see


#55

Put some personalisation to the game


#56

no only if it includes rainbows


#57

That is good and I would love there to be castles so u can defend and attack and the attackers can get more unites than defenders that would be great


#58

only if there are narvelous rainbows


#59

Archers able to lead their shots against screening cavalary so the entire game is not unicorns running around with their rainbow flags waving.

That is all…


#60

I would like some narbellious rainbows tho