DCI: Last Alliance - Open Beta released, NEW: 10 October 2020 new patch released, contains Ents - Wolves - Spiders crashes fix! (and more)

[King Athelstan]

Less is more, eh?

[IBSXYPNTS]

The thirteen factions avilable are the factions and the amount intended from the start of the project. "More is better because its more" is a way of thinking that has never held sway over us, hehe, we merely make the best of what we intend and deem appropriate ^^

Well said, plus I always felt the world of tolkien is alot less populated than real lands at this time, what with roving bandss of merciless killing machines prone to wander about and attack homes in the night and all that it makes sense. Never really made sense to me to have so much of the map under faction banners at start.

[insolent1]

Everything except the snaga skirmisher hordes(I just hate that unit) looks great, I like slow cooking/simmering mods as they produce the best results.

[Ngugi]

Less is more, eh?

Well said, plus I always felt the world of tolkien is alot less populated than real lands at this time, what with roving bandss of merciless killing machines prone to wander about and attack homes in the night and all that it makes sense. Never really made sense to me to have so much of the map under faction banners at start.

"Less is more" is often a cunning truth, that we do not shy from, though I think the term I'm looking for is more like "considerate moderation", hehe.
Hmm, what I try to get at here is that "new" in the modding scene is generally like candy to a child, if we are honest with each other, hehe. Or as how children will run from shelf to shelf in a toy store to see next line of toys, so players will mass to visible news, the more the better by virtue of quantity. It is very easy to as a creator be taken in by that spirit, to be seduced by the attention and to lose sight of the goal once intended, in the face of requests for more news in their own right. To be aware of this and stick to what we deem we should rather than what we could is our philosophy.
See, there is no inherent value with holding it at our chosen number of factions. But there's no inherent value in adding new factions either. Are they motivated by lore, and are they then motivated by game play concerns? If yes, then it should be added - in this specific matter I'm glad to argue they're in fact already in, ofc. If not, they might decrease the value of a good Tolkien game, in our setting, in my sincere opinion as a Tolkien admirer and as game designer combined.
Oh well, at end it will be up for each and everyone to judge what came out of it, when they play it

Everything except the snaga skirmisher hordes(I just hate that unit) looks great, I like slow cooking/simmering mods as they produce the best results.

Yeah, assume you refer to my stack of skirmishers there, hehe, though it shall be stressed it was a result of me screwing up badly; I (I admit!) had not read the instructions properly (to remind myself at the start of the campaign) of how to unlock each new unit, so I was limited to mass skirmishers for a long time. Smarter players will not suffer that miss, and the AI will have all units except trolls avilable from start.
Yeah, we aimed for a game where turn 200 shall be able to offer a sense of challenge and fun as was it turn 20. I cross fingers we'll get close, hehe.

[King Athelstan]

And for all those who want new stuff, have you seen the MoM tier 2/3 decorations? Now that is the only eye-candy I need

[captainkrunch]

For the Numenorean Kingdoms, I do respect you guys sticking to your guns and not dividing the Kingdom despite what some would want, but out of curiosity, can the AI handle it? Obviously they already start out quite large so I don't expect them to expand too much but they feel very large and I wonder if the AI can handle having two large kingdoms so seperated from each other in one faction, especially considering that even taken on their own Gondor and Arnor already start being quite large without considering the other.

[Ngugi]

Gladly yes, had it not worked out we would divided them.
I quote a guy on our test team from an ongoing campaign at turn 101;

Numenorean Kingdoms has been particularly remarkable, and I wasn't sure how the AI would handle being split in two like that, but they're doing very well. They've more or less held Arnor, except for losing Tharbad (subsequently retaken in a Tol Acharn). The Gondor portion is also performing really well. So far they've lost all of their territories on the further bank of Anduin, which is to be expected. And, despite heavy fighting with Harad around Pelargir they've managed to hold that line. It took until turn 95 for them to lose Osgiliath, and then the Western side was subsequently retaken and that's where we stand right now, although I think they're getting pretty near the breaking point without an intervention from an ally.

The map [NK is in black obviously]:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Some 55 turns later the front had broken for NK (Minas Anor then recaptured from enemy hands by Lothlorien via a Tôl Acharn).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

but over time this is to be expected, yet will vary from campaign to campaign.
Some other campaign examples;

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Turn 151 (as Lothlorien)
followed by turn 238

Turn 153 (as Lindon)


Turn 196 (as the Goblins)

So all in all, its promising

[Fahnat]

I say it because i am accustomed with Divide and Conquer submod, and the factions there are well made and lore accurate, but that doesn't mean the same thing for the Second Age. I think the factions are well placed and have no idea for any new ones. There's just one faction that i wonder if should be in the mod, but that's for whend it's released.

[Frotzy]

Well made sure, but FYI DaC is not very lore accurate in terms of factions. It goes more for enjoyment and gameplay rather then lore in many cases. Dorwinion is for example completely made up. I'm by far no lore expert, but it does stretch the lore quite a bit atleast to my knowledge .
Anyways guys, as said, the mod looks great and I can't wait for it!

[Danger Close]

I say it because i am accustomed with Divide and Conquer submod, and the factions there are well made and lore accurate, but that doesn't mean the same thing for the Second Age. I think the factions are well placed and have no idea for any new ones. There's just one faction that i wonder if should be in the mod, but that's for whend it's released.

All of the factions in DCI are lore accurate and have a place in a Second Age mod. Especially with all the thought that has been put into developing the scripts an unique gameplay characteristics for most if not all of them.

[Ngugi]

By nature of its intent, to get as many factions in as it can, often in lack of lore to work from rather than because of it (as they are upfront with), there will be unavoidable trade offs.
A good game always require additions and tweaks to begin with (JRR did not write a game manual after all). When whole factions are based on a name and handful of lines of lore (Dorwinion btw existed, and have a few more notes to it than The Hobbit offer), or when applying a none-existant faction such as Ar-Adunaim, much artistic license naturally must be taken. Is there a point where its to much? Does it suffice to call it lore accurate that a place existed to validate whats invented for it to make a full faction? Does that matter? How great liberties should be taken, and of what kind? Such question will be up to each player and developers to answer, each on their own - and our own, as the broad grey area is by default of equal concern for any game or mod that claim to take place in Tolkien's world.
As for suggestions, anyone are free to give such indeed, at end it simply remains to see if its something we find of interst for our own claim, hehe.

[Green Partizan]

Thus spoke Ngugi, son of Nrugi, lord of DCI:LA.

Well spoken my friend, but remember that nice and shorter speeches leave more time for drinking !

[Ngugi]

Hear, hear!

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[El Monstero29]

[King Athelstan]

Can't hold his drink, eh?

[DudeGuyMan]

I don't know if this was asked before but I'm interested in how you guys avoid the stack spam and keep the experience a hard one even 100 turns in. Sadly not a lot of mods do that and since Im submodding myself I wouldn't mind knowing some tips if you can share some. Like is there a garrison script for most settlements or do you use a specific AI mod or script etc. I really respect you guys for trying to make a hard and challenging mod and seeing all the things you've been working for so long I have nothing else to say but praise.

[Earl of Memory]

You'd be surprised that you could play 300 turns and still struggle .

[Ngugi]

Hello DGM

A fair question, hope we may give some inspiration. The key concept is increased fun through self-discipline. Shackle the economy, as was it a wild beast, and avoid excess.
There is a reason why early game is considered most interesting and fun strategically in about every TW game that ever existed. Because you're yet not so large, so rich and your armies so many that no opposition is of concern, and the game is not yet merely reduced to industrial scale grinding of enemy stacks. DCI has been designed with the aim to secure that this challenge is long term, as fars as we may, without being crippling.
Economy is the key to this, for the player and for the AI.

If you can afford five stacks for two fronts, or have four stacks when the enemy has three, challenge is in question and unlikely. To offer challenge the enemy then won't have only three stacks if you have four though, will it? The AI will have ten, and more coming! But it do not have to end up with no concern for money and grind.
For the player you must make sure that the costs for building is relevant and bonuses don't become so many or so large that money becomes of no concern. In important symbiosis to this is that the costs for holding an army (costs for recruiting but more importantly upkeep) should be significant and balance out: when you field armies you should not be rich (have some money unless you spent ill, but not rich).
The reason for this is that the game will be thrilling when you have one stack but two fronts to protect, or have two stacks but the enemy has four. And if this is fine-tuned then it can scale well, so that the players have to consider their economy and how much forces they can afford to send here or there still at turn 200.
This require tests and rebalancing, certainly, but I'd argue it's worth it (as Earl refer to above, hehe).
For the AI you must think the same way. If you have scripts that give money bonuses to AI factions, keep them limited. However, since you already limited the players economical capacity, it is resonable to decrease unit replenishment rates for all factions so the AI can not misuse the economical edge that it do has, it will not stack spam but still offer a challenge and you can limit garrison scripts and spawns in general.
On the plus side, it makes battles important throughout a campaign. If you and the enemy have few armies, defeating one or getting defeated can suddenly have great ramafications. And with great ramafications comes great tension

This as noted require self-disciplin from us modders. We as a breed seems conditioned to think that "if we can add something we better should", hehe. More of something is always the solution, less of anything hardly comes to mind.
So we might unintentionally boost the problems of low difficulty + grind, instead of designing against it: it is very common in general as modders know we are free to add what's instantly fun (to make for us or from player feedback), resulting in excess and inflation.
Say that we toss in buildings that offer bonuses and money, for the short term fun of instant rewards, because players love things to build and troops to recruit.
Then we reach the situation when the enemy have to great forces to handle. Compensate that with more income and bonuses so you can get more troops! But now its to easy! Boost the AI's ability to muster even more forces! And the circle begins again. The spam grows, while the design do not try to amend the root issue, but makes the situation worse.
When the fun of "getting new stuff" is the point and guiding light at the expense of challenge; then balance is compensated for with the spam, instead of sufficiently designed for.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is a view point, naturally, I do not claim the have 'the truth', but low spam and long term entertainment is what we aim to offer by this philosophy. Hope folks will enjoy it

[DudeGuyMan]

It's really interesting to see the thought process behind all this. Thank you for the detailed reply I'll keep it in mind Can't wait to see it in action though. Best regards guys!

[Ngugi]

Hope it was food for thought Thanks!