Larian Studios Forums Dragon Commander Dragon Commander - Beta Changelist 1.0.152.9727

Surprise! A new beta update!

We read and heard you regarding the end of battle rules and are working on changing the system, but that's probably only going to be in tomorrow. In the meantime however, here are a couple of sweet changes that increase stability, take care of some long standing requests and in general make your dragon life better.

- Added "Show map" button to battle menu
- Fixed shadow artifacts when zoomed out in combat
- Added more information to tooltips in battle menu
- Pathfinding issues fixes for boats
- Iron clads can attack sea build sites now
- Double clicking a unit will only select the units of the same type on-screen
- Added "Skip" and "Continue" button to auto-resolve
- Mouse-button to pan the camera in strategy phase is configurable now
- Fixed mouse-click_through issues on some UIs
- Hunters will shoot the dragon now with rockets
- Fixed stability issues for polyphormed units
- Ocean files do not give affinity anymore
- Cards that are played correctly undo now
- Several smaller stability fixes

Have fun!

I've noticed in the last couple patches that Shaman seem to perform worse. They don't response to my commands very well and often lag very far behind the main forces. Almost to the point of uselessness unless you baby them along. Didn't notice this last week.

- Mouse-button to pan the camera in strategy phase is configurable now

Ah finally.. Thank you!

Is the building creation bug on the campaign map fixed with this update?

Well I'm glad that render engine issues are fixed as well!

Lord Crash - yes... but there's a new bug where all the information from the maps is gone. No country names, population, gold, research points... that's missing from the graphics of the map.

I do like being able to see the map before committing to battle/autoresolve and most importantly before using mercenary cards.




Uh... where exactly is that configurable? I've looked through all the options twice, and the controls three times, and I can't see where to change that.

Just got this bug myself. Got it after loading.
Here is a screen shot.
http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/1119427776392877277/862E9FD1AED9965E7B51D74E9800454D9C654FAD/




Yes this is a good feature. Maybe a new card should be introduced to work with it. A "terrain advantage card" where you can change the map. Make it rare though.

Also, it seems that devastators on siege mode do not attack the targets you tell them to, they say its "out of reach" even if the target is right next to them.

Thanks! Keep up your great work!

Signed!

And I still think that the "percentage to win" should be displayed not only at the very bottom but also on the screen where you decide if you want to autoresolve or engage personally in battle. It's kind of weird to have to mouseover over the respective country when the battle preparation screen for a single country is already visible....

On the new campaign map, I've noticed that I don't seem to be getting any mercenary cards. I have several taverns but they don't seem to be coming up. Also the enemy doesn't seem to be getting them either.

Finally got some time to play with the latest patch.
The gold costs on the strategy map are much more sensible again.
And it's nice to have another multiplayer campaign map to play with.

Unfortunately balancing between campaign map/RTS units is still very much the same, meaning that in comparison to RTS units, initial units still don't matter much, unless you bring a large amount of them, but I guess we won't see a change in that anymore.

Well, I'm still looking forward to finally playing the single player campaign!
Very interested to see if it plays any differently to the beta.

I actually kind of like it where it's at right now. You don't get too much advantage with 2-3 units in the fight but when you actually have decent forces on the strat map it helps. One exception though is troopers and grenadiers. They really aren't worth their gold cost in strat map. If I changed anything it would be making troopers and grenadiers worth more in conversion. 3 gold for 3 troopers? that's a ripoff. If I was modifying the strat-RTS conversion I like how it is for most things now but I would make each trooper or grenadier counter count as 5-7 units in RTS. 1 gold per trooper is just crazy!

I haven't gotten far enough into a campaign to use higher-level units, but yeah, Troopers and Grenadiers could be bumped up more, to 4 or 5. Higher than 5 would probably be too much.

Well, it works and it's not too bad.
IMHO it's probably not the strong part of the game, though (for me that is).
Although I won't exclude the possibility that I'm just not very good at the RTS part.

Anyway (I know I'm repeating myself here), I think that considering the amount of units on the campaign map, the numbers in the RTS part are much too high (or the conversion rates too low).
The combat IS build around spamming units.
While there are a lot of abilities and strategies to discourage blobbing, you will still pump out units at an insane pace, which for me at least usually results in battles that go on until the ressources are depleted (unless I attack with absolutely overwhelming force).

Personally I would still increase build times and/or build costs, but I guess Larian won't do that anymore. Too bad, would have loved to give it a try at least.

That being said, the game has improved a lot over the beta (but I think the RTS part was best somewhere in the middle).

Just out of curiosity how many units do you typically attack with? I found the Campaign AI is a bit too rushy due to recent changes to the conversion (now keeping forces together matters more) but if you defeat it's initial waves and dont immediately push back and rush yourself it tend to create a more stable front that sees larger forces clashing. Once you get that the RTS conversion is much better (although I still think grenadier/trooper conversions are too low) and you get decent starting forces.

The problem is it seems the AI is still seemingly coded around strat map units not really mattering much and it races units out to every corner of the map threatening everything. As such if you are good at the RTS without major starting forces you can push them back with tiny 2 units vs 3 units kind of fights and rush yourself knocking them out due to momentum. However if you give them a few turns to get borders more finalized then they start massing forces in border regions and you see bigger clashes.

The downside is it's easier to just rush with a big stack while they are disorganized (as letting them organize with a stable front makes the battles harder and greatly increases the average amount of units in combat). A change to the strat map AI to keep units grouped in larger numbers when near enemy units and not just throw units piecemeal into border regions would be nice.

An example of that is a recent campaign I played on center mass. The enemy had a large force of mostly hunters and grenadiers (there were a few other units but they are inconsequential). They were 2 moves away from a border region that I was about to assault with a large mixed force (around 10 or so units) They tried to move the whole force to the region where I was about to attack but the hunters made it it one turn while the slower units only moved one space. As a result I was able to attack and overwhelm the hunters and then next turn overwhelm the grenadiers and other units. If the AI had sacrificed the border territory and had the hunters only move 1 space (thus keeping the units grouped together) then they would have had a chance at beating me at the next territory where they could have bunched up.

Edit: Explanation as to my thoughts on why battles tend to be small

Obviously it depends on the numbers the AI has by the time.
But most of the time it's at the maximum of what I can build, which will be roughly the same as the enemy anyway, with the exception of a small force I leave behind to guard against flanking maneuvers.

Yeah but what is the average amount of units? I find that once you get 10+ units in the fight then starting units feel like they really matter while if you do the tiny 2 unit vs 2 units fights the AI loves to pick they won't really ever feel very large.

I used to hate the conversion rates, but they have improved a bit since the start of beta and now 10-15 unit (on the strat map) clashes actually feel like you start with something. It might be that you just don't like it because the AI loves picking tiny fights as opposed to big offensives. That's just my opinion though.

I usually attack with 100% of max at once or a 50/50 split on two fronts. Depends on the map.

Had a very interesting experience today though. The AI on insane was building a LARGE quantity of warlocks. And it was using the special abilities really well. They annihilated like 4/5ths of my army just with mass spamming death from above. Quite nasty.

Were you not getting any at all? Taverns should generate mercenary cards every 3 turns (and did for me Tuesday, at least).

None, zero. Played up to 15 turns. Had 3 taverns on map.

thanks for "Mouse-button to pan the camera in strategy phase is configurable now"

Early on I usually have rather small amounts of units I bring into the fight, but it increases as the campaign goes on.
Of course, when you bring large forces, those will matter more, no question.

Lately I started a new 2vs2 campaign, while before I mostly played with 4 independent factions. This again can change things quite a bit. Suddenly you play with 4 players on 2vs2 maps, which means that you end up with less support and ressources and consequently less units compared to a 1vs1 on the same map.
So it might be that I will have less issues with single player, since I suppose that in SP the maps will be balanced around 1vs1 (or whatever the campaign at the point asks for), rather than being made for 4 player matches.


Btw., what do you mean by "the AI loves picking tiny fights"? That the AI tends to invade with small forces? Because on the RTS maps I've seen some quite large offensives (see my GBOD topic). Although they usually happened late in the (RTS-)match when ressources start to run out.

That's my thoughts as well. if you look at the map size of many of the preview vids they are much smaller thus allowing starting forces to be brought to bear more easily. But no my "tiny fights" comment was mostly concerning the strategy map. I feel that the AI loves launching small invasions against lightly defended territory rather then get in large invasions. As such when they attack the forces involved are small, and then when you counterattack they are spread thin enough that you don't need large forces to defeat the AI. As a result you tend to get a ton of small fights instead of a few big fights. It's not a bad AI by any means (small raids are a valid tactic, probably the best in earlier betas, although IMO not the best now that starting forces are more potent) but it would be funner to face and set up for larger starting forces better if it didn't spread itself a bit too thin and used large forces to attack and defend with.

That said once the borders in strat map finalize the AI does get better about grouping units and using forces en masse but you have to let them get to that point. If you are a skilled skirmish player you can defeat all of their initial incursions and counterattack with overwhelming force thus not allowing them to get stabilized and keeping them on the back foot until they are defeated. Maybe that too will be better in SP as the AI won't be in "mad dash to get all of the neutral territories" mode as from the previews most of the provinces start out controlled.

Again, where is that option? You are talking about the "press mousewheel to move camera", right? I can't find that option in the controls.

Uh.. I just checked it out, there's still not a way to reconfigure the middle mouse button camera pan thing.

Please, Larian, add a confirmation to the "sell building" button on the map, or adjust it a little bit so that it is more distinct from the "buy unit" icon.
I keep selling my factories due to mis-clicking.

Also I wonder if the mechanic that units in a country can't move if that country is attacked in the same round could be exploited at chocke-points to prevent the enemy from starting an invasion there.

there is an undo button ?
same amount of clicks for a confirmation and less annoying

That has to do with the turn order. If an enemy enters/passes your territory before your force has left, they encounter eachother, and the same goes for you when you move. When you are first, or when no enemy moves before you, you know exactly where the pieces will be during your move. Conversely, when I go last I often command my units to act attack (leave their defended countries) because they will not leave if their country is attacked.

The order changes every turn. (I think you go 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 1st and then 4th again. I also think this is mentioned in the manual or some other documentation.)

About the confirmation button: Do you know that there is an "undo" feature? You can press backspace or use the little button (turning arrow near the research buttons, I think). Undo should be a better solution, because it doesn't add extra steps when you do the right thing, and functionally it is simply more powerful than prompting to confirm. (You can cancel one operation, same as with confirm, or you can cancel several.)

Confirm/cancel and undo aren't mutually exclusive features, but confirm isn't strictly necessary where undo can be employed.

Oooooo

Soon....

Larian Studios ‏@larianstudios 5h

"New Dragon Commander beta coming. Couple of big new features in there, including letting you change all the rules!

Pretty much lets you play DC as a dragon dogfight game, as a pure RTS, as a board game, as a tactical puzzle and more, all in multiplayer.

Should be there in a couple of hours - still some tweaks to do and then we'll put it on Steam"

Indeed, I didn't know about the undo feature (or rather I had read about it but quickly forgotten about it again ).