The best way to have your say!

[Overwatch]

Hey all,

We decided to open up a new section to the Mordheim: Warband Skirmish forums. This is where you'll be able to tell us exactly what you'd like to see within the game and it's also a place for you to give us any feedback you may have from all the content we plan on showing you. Whatever the suggestion is, big or small, feel free to leave anything you have either down below or create yourself a separate thread!

This section can also be used to tell us what content you'd like us to showcase next. Whether that be from the UI, some in-game aspects, or maybe even a closer look into the Warbands and what they'll have to offer.

I'll be checking everything you put forward on a regular basis and relaying that to the rest of the team, so be as outrageous as you want (keep it clean) and you never know we may implement your ideas within the game!

 

[Brascus]

I guess I'll start here. Now I haven't seen any of the actual game play in action so I'm sure some of these suggestions may not even be feasible, and others may already be planned, but I'll mention them any way just in case.

1. One of the biggest things that I wish more strategy games could do, especially on mobile platforms, is asynchronous multiplayer. I would love to have one or two simultaneous games going where I could hop in, take my turns with whomever has initiative, and when it gets to my opponent's turn, send them a push notification, and then sign out of the application. This way a game can last all day, may not consume your whole battery for one match, and you don't need to set aside an entire 30-60 minutes to play a game. You can just fit a game in during your normal work day.

2. Another thing to assist players new to Mordheim would be suggested character builds. When a character earns enough XP to gain advancement points having an option to auto level a unit as a ranged or melee build would be a good way to help new players get a grip on how to build a decent army. I get asked the question "How should I build this unit?" or "Is this skill worth it?" all the time by subscribers.

3. Don't forget to make the game accessible to special needs players. While it is nearly impossible to predict all of the needs of players for your game the one that most frequently affects me is color blindness. Simply making sure that the colors you want to use are easily distinguishable for those of us who can't differentiate between certain shades is huge. Entire game modes have been unusable for me because I couldn't distinguish friend from foe. Maybe creating a new forum topic asking what sorts of difficulties other gamers like myself have experienced can give you some idea for alleviating issues like this.

4. Consider making wyrdstone shipments a bonus and not mandatory. This was our number one problem trying to run a competitive Mordheim PVP only league. There was just not enough wyrdstone to go around. Game kNight and I were in the same league, though he didn't have nearly the trouble I did collecting those precious green rocks. All of us wanted to continue with the same war bands, but failing just one shipment could spell the end for an entire war band as that just meant all subsequent shipments were even harder to obtain. To alleviate this, we thought it would be nice to instead provide war bands with an allowance every few days that could increase with war band rank. You could still allow wyrdstone as a way to get extra cash, but this way it doesn't become a mandatory resource that detracts from your enjoying a game against a player.

5. Easy explanation of stats and symbols. A good example of this done right is Dark Souls. Hitting a button will allow you to navigate their GUI, highlighting individual parts of the screen. As each part is highlighted, a little box pops up explaining what it is and what it does. Doing this to explain stats, physical resistance, magic resistance, unit costs, crit chances, etc would help when you see an icon and you wonder, "what is that indicating?" I had this problem early on with Mordheim: City of the Damned.

That is all I've got for now. If I think of others I'll come back. Hope this helps.

-Brascus

 

[Mortz82]

+1 for the asynchronous gameplay idea

 

[Overwatch]

I guess I'll start here. Now I haven't seen any of the actual game play in action so I'm sure some of these suggestions may not even be feasible, and others may already be planned, but I'll mention them any way just in case.

1. One of the biggest things that I wish more strategy games could do, especially on mobile platforms, is asynchronous multiplayer. I would love to have one or two simultaneous games going where I could hop in, take my turns with whomever has initiative, and when it gets to my opponent's turn, send them a push notification, and then sign out of the application. This way a game can last all day, may not consume your whole battery for one match, and you don't need to set aside an entire 30-60 minutes to play a game. You can just fit a game in during your normal work day.

2. Another thing to assist players new to Mordheim would be suggested character builds. When a character earns enough XP to gain advancement points having an option to auto level a unit as a ranged or melee build would be a good way to help new players get a grip on how to build a decent army. I get asked the question "How should I build this unit?" or "Is this skill worth it?" all the time by subscribers.

3. Don't forget to make the game accessible to special needs players. While it is nearly impossible to predict all of the needs of players for your game the one that most frequently affects me is color blindness. Simply making sure that the colors you want to use are easily distinguishable for those of us who can't differentiate between certain shades is huge. Entire game modes have been unusable for me because I couldn't distinguish friend from foe. Maybe creating a new forum topic asking what sorts of difficulties other gamers like myself have experienced can give you some idea for alleviating issues like this.

4. Consider making wyrdstone shipments a bonus and not mandatory. This was our number one problem trying to run a competitive Mordheim PVP only league. There was just not enough wyrdstone to go around. Game kNight and I were in the same league, though he didn't have nearly the trouble I did collecting those precious green rocks. All of us wanted to continue with the same war bands, but failing just one shipment could spell the end for an entire war band as that just meant all subsequent shipments were even harder to obtain. To alleviate this, we thought it would be nice to instead provide war bands with an allowance every few days that could increase with war band rank. You could still allow wyrdstone as a way to get extra cash, but this way it doesn't become a mandatory resource that detracts from your enjoying a game against a player.

5. Easy explanation of stats and symbols. A good example of this done right is Dark Souls. Hitting a button will allow you to navigate their GUI, highlighting individual parts of the screen. As each part is highlighted, a little box pops up explaining what it is and what it does. Doing this to explain stats, physical resistance, magic resistance, unit costs, crit chances, etc would help when you see an icon and you wonder, "what is that indicating?" I had this problem early on with Mordheim: City of the Damned.

That is all I've got for now. If I think of others I'll come back. Hope this helps.

-Brascus

Very interesting ideas! I'm not particularly sure if number 1. would be possible, but that will definitely make a good office discussion.

I think that adding some sort of suggested character build would be an interesting feature. I get that some people probably won't know what to advance in from time to time, especially new players. So I can see why that'd be beneficial!

Making the game accessible is undoubtedly important to us, and we want to make sure that our game is playable by as many people as possible. So if you want to make a thread, or any one else wants to make a thread covering some of the difficulties that players may encounter then that definitely would help us a great deal in identifying a potential problem to some one with disabilities.

The way Wyrdstone works within our game is completely different from City Of The Damned. I personally found trading in Wyrdstone quite tedious, and at some points of the game extremely challenging / impossible to do. In our game Wyrdstone converts to the in-game currency, which can be used to buy more powerful weapons / armour to make your Warband stronger. So at the moment collecting Wyrdstone will give you a bonus amount of money each piece that is picked up after you've finished a match, which works very nicely if you're running low on cash or want to save up for something particularly expensive.

Someone has mentioned having an easy explanation of stats within the game before to us, which I think would help the player out quite a lot. The symbols we've used are quite distinguishable, but some could easily confuse the player. So I think having something to refer to if you aren't sure about something will always be an added bonus...

Thanks for the detailed feedback!!

 

[morjax]

+1 for the asynchronous gameplay idea

+2. not sure how hard it would be, but being able to have a pile of exhibition games running would be excellent! I'm imagination something like penpal chess, or similar. I've wanted this option ever since playing the Mordheim tabletop years ago, to be able to make your move and ship the board back to your opponent for their move. This feature alone would probably increase my own playtime significantly!

If there are not plans for a exhibition and for-keeps PVP modes, both would be an awesome option. The former encourages more frequent play (especially if you could have multiple asynchronous PVP exhibition matches running simultaneously, like what Gladiabots does - essentially, you can put a number of offers for matches out there at once). The latter seems fitting, just given the way Mordheim was - play for keeps, gun for the stone, and roll the dice on those injuries!!

Speaking if injuries, are there plans to implement a robust injury table? It may sound silly, but a massive part of the enjoyment of the tabletop game for me was the advancement mechanic, both the positive aspects of increasing your warrior's stats and skills, and the negative aspects of horrific scarring, lost limbs, stupidity, mental toughness. Waiting for that roll on the injury table was /so exciting/(!), and having a powerhouse with a couple downsides from their interesting adds a LOT of texture and character to the warbands.

I'll keep bringing ideas as they occur to me.

Cheers!

 

[Overwatch]

+2. not sure how hard it would be, but being able to have a pile of exhibition games running would be excellent! I'm imagination something like penpal chess, or similar. I've wanted this option ever since playing the Mordheim tabletop years ago, to be able to make your move and ship the board back to your opponent for their move. This feature alone would probably increase my own playtime significantly!

If there are not plans for a exhibition and for-keeps PVP modes, both would be an awesome option. The former encourages more frequent play (especially if you could have multiple asynchronous PVP exhibition matches running simultaneously, like what Gladiabots does - essentially, you can put a number of offers for matches out there at once). The latter seems fitting, just given the way Mordheim was - play for keeps, gun for the stone, and roll the dice on those injuries!!

Speaking if injuries, are there plans to implement a robust injury table? It may sound silly, but a massive part of the enjoyment of the tabletop game for me was the advancement mechanic, both the positive aspects of increasing your warrior's stats and skills, and the negative aspects of horrific scarring, lost limbs, stupidity, mental toughness. Waiting for that roll on the injury table was /so exciting/(!), and having a powerhouse with a couple downsides from their interesting adds a LOT of texture and character to the warbands.

I'll keep bringing ideas as they occur to me.

Cheers!

We're trying to keep the game as true to the tabletop as we possibly can, so thanks for this!

Just to answer the injuries question, units do get injured from time-time. So if they've been in battle and have taken a lot of damage, that will show after battle. Some times they have mental effects, some times they'll have physical effects so depending on the outcome of your match will depend on how it has effected your units.

 

[Brascus]

Speaking if injuries, are there plans to implement a robust injury table? It may sound silly, but a massive part of the enjoyment of the tabletop game for me was the advancement mechanic, both the positive aspects of increasing your warrior's stats and skills, and the negative aspects of horrific scarring, lost limbs, stupidity, mental toughness.

Good news! At least some injuries are in game. Just got horrifically scarred so the unit is now supposed to cause fear.

 

[morjax]

Just got horrifically scarred so the unit is now supposed to cause fear.

This is gonna be good >:]

 

[Brascus]

This may be another thing that is planned in the works, but I would really like to see a deployment option. Instead of the game automatically deciding where my guys go it would be nice to have some control over that.

In the same vein as this, could some logic be implemented that would prevent opposing units from being placed directly next to one another? Started a match a bit ago, and my captain was within immediate striking distance of three enemies whilst my warrior was at least 3 turns of movement north.

 

[Big Muuk]

Good news! At least some injuries are in game. Just got horrifically scarred so the unit is now supposed to cause fear.

Haha! I loved rolling that injury on the tabletop!

 

[Overwatch]

This may be another thing that is planned in the works, but I would really like to see a deployment option. Instead of the game automatically deciding where my guys go it would be nice to have some control over that.

In the same vein as this, could some logic be implemented that would prevent opposing units from being placed directly next to one another? Started a match a bit ago, and my captain was within immediate striking distance of three enemies whilst my warrior was at least 3 turns of movement north.

Depending on what game mode you're playing will depend where your units will deploy! But deployment as a whole is something we're still working on, as in some cases your units can deploy quite close to one another making it difficult to make a move. Thanks for the idea on being able to control where you deploy! That's not something we've took into consideration yet I don't think.

 

[Mendeleev]

If you're trying to keep the game as close to the tabletop as possible I figure it should already be the case but my number one concern is : don't extend variables !

That's my biggest problem with City of the Damned : You don't have 4-6 wyrdstone but around 20 on a single map. You don't have 1-6 stats but 1-20 stats... and it really decrease the attachment you could have for you units : If you loose one unit with 4 balistic skill... you're really sad. If you loose one uint with 13/20 balistic skill... whatever.

For the same reason, don't make a "by player choice" skill system. Keep the random system from the tabletop. It's waaay more funny to have some randomness in the lvl up system (if you can choose every skill, you care less if you lose someone, you just start the same build).

 

[Overwatch]

If you're trying to keep the game as close to the tabletop as possible I figure it should already be the case but my number one concern is : don't extend variables !

That's my biggest problem with City of the Damned : You don't have 4-6 wyrdstone but around 20 on a single map. You don't have 1-6 stats but 1-20 stats... and it really decrease the attachment you could have for you units : If you loose one unit with 4 balistic skill... you're really sad. If you loose one uint with 13/20 balistic skill... whatever.

For the same reason, don't make a "by player choice" skill system. Keep the random system from the tabletop. It's waaay more funny to have some randomness in the lvl up system (if you can choose every skill, you care less if you lose someone, you just start the same build).

Each player in your Warband has an individual "skill tree", where you can choose what you want to progress. You have the ability to structure your Warband how you want and at the moment we don't have any plans on changing that, as it seems to work quite well! Thanks for the feedback though it's definitely something we haven't quite considered but will definitely keep it in mind!

 

[Mendeleev]

A skill tree can be fun but have to be really balance, because you can have realy quickly a "best way" that everyone use because it's just the best path.

That's what I love with randomness : you don't really need to balance too much and you keep a better diversity.

The best system for me is a semi random skill system : as in Bloodbowl.

• 2D6 system
• You have a list of skill that you can buy with any result, you can always pick a skill, whatever the 2D6 result is.
• On a double you can buy a skill from another list (for exemple : an agility skill for a dwarf)
• On a 8 result, you can choose between +1 I or +1 Ld
• On a 9, you can choose +1 WS or +1 BS
• on a 10, you can choose +1 T or +1 S
• On a 11, you can choose +1 A
• On a 12, you can choose +1W
  

With this system you still have control on the skill choice, but there is enought randomness to feel really attach to your units and make then unique.

 

[Brascus]

A skill tree can be fun but have to be really balance, because you can have realy quickly a "best way" that everyone use because it's just the best path.

That's what I love with randomness : you don't really need to balance too much and you keep a better diversity.

The best system for me is a semi random skill system : as in Bloodbowl.

• 2D6 system
• You have a list of skill that you can buy with any result, you can always pick a skill, whatever the 2D6 result is.
• On a double you can buy a skill from another list (for exemple : an agility skill for a dwarf)
• On a 8 result, you can choose between +1 I or +1 Ld
• On a 9, you can choose +1 WS or +1 BS
• on a 10, you can choose +1 T or +1 S
• On a 11, you can choose +1 A
• On a 12, you can choose +1W

With this system you still have control on the skill choice, but there is enought randomness to feel really attach to your units and make then unique.

This is an interesting idea, and something I had no idea was implemented in the original game. However, I have to play devil's advocate here and argue the other side. Random luck, at least for me, has no business being involved in any major way with character development. Nothing is more frustrating to me than rolling something that feels useless, and being stuck with it. For example, every time a marksmen leveled, I would be cursing the heavens anytime I rolled a 9 on your table. I want them to continue building a strong ranged offensive. I have no desire to waste time on an Intelligence, or Leadership stat when it could be going into BS, or a skill to improve their effectiveness.

I do like some random elements, like the injuries, chances of finding items, and things of that sort, but this is because they make sense to me. You can't control how you get injured in real life, so it makes sense to randomize it. Likewise, if you find a random chest, it makes sense to randomize it since you have no idea what's in it. Doesn't make sense in a character build though, because if you want to be able to swing a sword you're going to pump iron, not read up on Shakespeare.

 

[Mendeleev]

In fact you always have a choice, and are not stuck with something you don't want. Let say you roll a 8 and are not interested by more Initiative (the intelligence stat doesn't exist in the tabletop) or leadership... you always have the basic choice of chosing a skill.

There is always 100 of people to want more RNG and as much for more player choice, so my point is not really to say "I'd rather have this system, or this one" but to find the one that will be a good mix between both side. In this version you reach both sides : there is enought RNG for the "lore players" and enought choice for the "rule players"

My second point here, is the fact than a bit of RNG prevent balance issues. Mordheim (the tabletop) never was a game made for balance. And if you change the developpement system for something too previsible, you're in another kind of games : what i Call a "Blizzard system" (because this company always do this), you can always do every build you want. There is pros and cons for that : more flexibility but harder to keep the balance and you add a meta to your game.

For the long run I'll say the semi-RNG system is better : you will play it longer because you always want to have some very unique warband

From a seller perspective, I'll go for the no-RNG system : You will reach more player faster, but they will not play as long (until they find out every "best path" for each warband)

 

[Overwatch]

In fact you always have a choice, and are not stuck with something you don't want. Let say you roll a 8 and are not interested by more Initiative (the intelligence stat doesn't exist in the tabletop) or leadership... you always have the basic choice of chosing a skill.

There is always 100 of people to want more RNG and as much for more player choice, so my point is not really to say "I'd rather have this system, or this one" but to find the one that will be a good mix between both side. In this version you reach both sides : there is enought RNG for the "lore players" and enought choice for the "rule players"

My second point here, is the fact than a bit of RNG prevent balance issues. Mordheim (the tabletop) never was a game made for balance. And if you change the developpement system for something too previsible, you're in another kind of games : what i Call a "Blizzard system" (because this company always do this), you can always do every build you want. There is pros and cons for that : more flexibility but harder to keep the balance and you add a meta to your game.

For the long run I'll say the semi-RNG system is better : you will play it longer because you always want to have some very unique warband

From a seller perspective, I'll go for the no-RNG system : You will reach more player faster, but they will not play as long (until they find out every "best path" for each warband)

Got to agree with Brascus on this one! Having RNG for things like injuries etc is a really cool idea, and I think that'd really work well in the game. Especially when you're on the edge of your seat waiting for the battle results... BUT personally I wouldn't like an RNG system in regards to Skills.

I like being able to choose what skill tree to go down, and I also like seeing the progression of my units. When playing I tend to plan out what skills I want for each of my individual units, which usually involves me choosing a specific skill tree to progress through.

If you want to build your Warband in a wacky way or in the "Standard" way most players would, then so be it! I think having the option there is important. If there was an RNG system in place I'd find it frustrating being forced to choose from a set list of skills, because there could be skills that are presented to me that I have no interest in whatsoever.

I also think the "best path" will be totally dependant on the player, you may have a similar skilled Warband as your opponent but it's up to you to determine what will work best for your play style. Because you can choose how you want to skill your units, it's likely you'll approach a different Warband with a different skill-set, making the game quite un-balanced in that sense.

Very interesting ideas over-all though, it would be great having a system that uses both RNG and non-RNG in a way which makes sense to the player... So if you have any other ideas feel free to send them over!

 

[Brascus]

Got to agree with Brascus on this one! Having RNG for things like injuries etc is a really cool idea, and I think that'd really work well in the game. Especially when you're on the edge of your seat waiting for the battle results... BUT personally I wouldn't like an RNG system in regards to Skills.

I like being able to choose what skill tree to go down, and I also like seeing the progression of my units. When playing I tend to plan out what skills I want for each of my individual units, which usually involves me choosing a specific skill tree to progress through.

If you want to build your Warband in a wacky way or in the "Standard" way most players would, then so be it! I think having the option there is important. If there was an RNG system in place I'd find it frustrating being forced to choose from a set list of skills, because there could be skills that are presented to me that I have no interest in whatsoever.

I also think the "best path" will be totally dependant on the player, you may have a similar skilled Warband as your opponent but it's up to you to determine what will work best for your play style. Because you can choose how you want to skill your units, it's likely you'll approach a different Warband with a different skill-set, making the game quite un-balanced in that sense.

Very interesting ideas over-all though, it would be great having a system that uses both RNG and non-RNG in a way which makes sense to the player... So if you have any other ideas feel free to send them over!

I think there may actually be a best of both worlds option. It might not be particularly easy to implement, but I previously recommended a suggested build for leveling a character. You could provide an auto level feature that would randomly select features as described by Mendeleev.

This would give those that want it the added RNG, and those of us who prefer to plan have the control we want. This could create some balance issues I suppose as careful builds may perform better over the RNG selections, but I guess you'd have to take the good with the bad.

 

[morjax]

1. One of the biggest things that I wish more strategy games could do, especially on mobile platforms, isasynchronous multiplayer. I would love to have one or two simultaneous games going where I could hop in, take my turns with whomever has initiative, and when it gets to my opponent's turn, send them a push notification, and then sign out of the application. This way a game can last all day, may not consume your whole battery for one match, and you don't need to set aside an entire 30-60 minutes to play a game. You can just fit a game in during your normal work day.

Any thoughts or news on asynchronous multiplayer? I suspect it would be a tremendous technical undertaking, but would add a gigantic amount to the replayability and competition of the game.

Along the same lines and something I don't remember hearing mentioned is a friend's list and being able to set up matches with a specific opponent. Again, this would be a far-from-trivial implementation, I suspect, but would add a social competitive aspect to the game, similar to what makes many facebook games very popular (My best pal has a higher score than me on Candy Crush? THIS SHALL NOT STAND!).

Also, a side effect of the above mentioned friends list and being able to set up matches with specific warbands is that it opens up the opportunity for TOURNAMENTS in which players enter in to only play against other players in the tournament. This was the absolute lifeblood of Mordheim: City of the Damned in early access. Tournaments were a fun way for people to take the system for a test drive and test their mettle in an exciting way.

Also also, friends-list-PVP would allow for local groups to play against each other (for example, the guys I used to play the tabletop with, or having a LIVE tournament at a local game shop).

So, what news on the PVP front?

Cheers!!<3
~Morjax

edit: This is a long shot, and not as important as the things above, but an in-game tournament system would be A-M-A-Z-I-N-G (like a leaderboard mixed with a twitter DM group - you can add players/warbands to the list, and then scores are tracked for that group separate from the global leaderbaord). This seems like it'd really be tricky, but an in-game tournament system would absolutely supercharge it's stickiness, in the same way that players like me were committed to the tabletop!

 

[Trafalgar Law]

Hotsead Mode with friends on my tablet would be really nice!