Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread

[shawb]

@alkexr is there any news as to when the next version is going to be ready?

Looking forward to trying the Isengard/Rohan changes.

In regards to feedback when playing with my friends we are finding that for the good guys stacks of rangers seem to be the norm. So some tweak to them (increase in cost/lower stat/limited in number) would probably be worth considering in my opinion?

Overall we love your map though!

[alkexr]

@shawb

is there any news as to when the next version is going to be ready?

Development is progressing very deliberate step by very deliberate step :grinning_face_with_sweat:
In other words, at this rate I might be able to finish an early beta version by the end of summer!
Yeah, I know.

As for rangers, I'm not yet entirely sure what I'm going to do to them, but I'm aware that they are too strong. (It's hard to miss y'all shouting at me! :smirking_face: )

[zlefin]

Starting to get into this map again. It feels a bit wrong that Rivendell is such a rush target. Rivendell seems like a place that should be very hard to take; and be very well defended. Maybe it should get back that Flood defense power it had many versions ago. While taking all the starting forces to try rushing a particular target is always going to be a thing in triplea maps, Rivendell just seems like it should be a bit tougher to take.

Are rivendell changes amongst the changes found in the beta versions of the map?

a weird thing: I'm getting different numbers in battle calc that I can't account for; there's some people playing on a lobby bot, and when I look at their game, if I put hobbit archers defending Tharbad, they get 6 defense per (which is incorrect). Whereas if I run a game in a lobby bot myself, or offline, they get 4 defense per. I can't find any reason for the discrepancy to exist, since the versions of the map are the same. maybe it's yet another thing affected by the bots not being fully updated; but if that were the case then how come there wasn't an issue when I ran a test myself in a different bot?

[alkexr]

@zlefin Here, have this! Although I reckon this will raise more questions than it answers...

As for the battle calculator thing, you should probably ask @LaFayette, I don't think the issue is map-related.

[pact_of_plastic]

Are there any larger mirrored maps? I.E. both sides look exactly the same, have the same units (like in chess or checkers)?

[alkexr]

A quick update on the upcoming version

• There is a new player, the Orc Holds of the Misty Mountains (the original Orcs player will go by the name Moria)
• River crossings have new unique mechanics
• Tharbad is now owned by Arnor

More details in this five-minute video.

[zlefin]

Tharbad owned by Arnor? that sounds like a very significant shakeup. As do the other changes; and I haven't even learned the current version that much yet I look forward to seeing them and pondering what these changes will bring. Bunch of big theater changing stuff.

[Goatenstein]

The update looks cool. Hopefully this will make the northwest a little more interesting.
When you're done with the update, I'd love to help with playtesting.

[alkexr]

Another quick update on the upcoming version

• Map changes around Moria, the Mirkwood and Cair Andros, including two new settlements
• Lórien and the Woodland Realm merged into a new Silvan Elves player

More in this video.

[Cernel]

Maybe you should leave the current one as it is and make these changes into a second edition, meaning a new map. I think these are more changes than going from WW2 Classic to Revised, and adding Revised didn't cause the Classic map to be overwritten. It may be still good then to remove the first edition from download list.

[rsnorunt]

Love the new Mirkwood changes! Hopefully the additional distance will give Dol Guldor some time to grow and consolidate before the elves and northmen hem them in. And I think it'll open up some interesting strategic decisions for the Sylvan player about which of the 4 theaters they should devote their forces (Saruman, Moria, Dol Guldor, and Angmar/Gundabad). Not really sure what you mean about the woodland realm being weak. They honestly feel quite strong compared to Dol Guldor in the current edition. This is the turn 1 I've been using recently

Dol guldor has to choose between east mirkwood and the narrows, since they can't hold back the northman counter attack in both places, and that leaves them open to a can-open into west mirkwood. It's hard to see Dol Guldor reaching Eryn Galen or Greenwood the Great before turn 3-4, especially if the Northmen send a raider or two to the Bight and or Anduin Bank/Wilderland every turn. And by then the PU discrepancy seems too great to overcome.

A little worried about the new Moria player losing access to goblins. Gameplaywise it seems difficult to hold territory in Lorien without levy troops on the rivers, and lorewise orcs and goblins are the same (and the movies/other media have goblins in Moria). But I love the change to the Methedras/Nimrodel area, and the 2-space Drimril Dale. It lets Lorien and Fangorn interact much more easily, but it also stops the ents from terrorizing the mountains between moria and isengard as effectively.

I'm a fan to the changes around Dale and Esgaroth, it makes them more distinct as settlements (and makes esgaroth more defensible), but also allows Rhun to potentially unite the forces on either side of the Celduin before they have enough trebuchets to take a city. I'm a little worried about the changes to Ered Mithrin though. I feel like a big part of the early Angmar game is figuring out how to consolidate your dragons without the dwarves killing them. By splitting up the withered heath, this seems harder, though I guess this is offset by erebor no longer bordering the withered heath. I'm also a fan of connecting the grey mountains to west forodwaith rather than the west grey mountains to forodwaith.

Have you looked at Rhun/Rhovanion yet? I feel like an extra settlement for Rhun in the Balchoth lands or southwestern Rhovanion could be cool, and allow Rhun to play much more dynamically on the west bank of the Celduin / the brown lands / can-open more easily for Dol Guldor. Also I definitely feel that the restriction to 8 production hits Rhun much harder than other players, though I could see it happening to Moria or Angmar in the new version.

Also, have you figured out a new turn order? I feel like combining Lorien and the Woodland Realms, adding Gundabad, making Rivendell less useless early game, and giving Tharbad to Arnor all have pretty massive can-opening potential. Most of the theaters of war have multiple players, and many of the players participate in several far-away theatres, so I feel like turn order and map design probably need to happen together.

[rsnorunt]

So I've been thinking about it, and my proposed turn order is:

Saruman, Angmar, Mordor
Arnor, Gondor, Sylvan
Harad, Dol Guldor, Gundabad
Northmen, Rohan
Moria, Rhun
Freefolk, Rivendell, Dwarves

I feel like this preserves a lot of the dynamics from current version, but gives evil a bit more initiative in turn 1, mostly at the expense of the Northmen and Rivendell. I tried to keep most of the can opens "less optimal" like they currently are (no cracking the walls of Osgiliath and letting the Oliphants trample through), but I might have gotten some wrong, esp with your planned new units. You're the designer and of course you know what's best, so feel free to take or ignore.

The turn order in each theater of war are below. Minor players are in parentheses.

Celduin: (Angmar), (Dol Guldor), Northmen, Rhun, Dwarves

• Same order as before, (Rhun still can opens for Dol Guldor against Northmen, and angmar can still potentially breach dwarven cities for Rhun, though this is often not feasible).

Mirkwood: Sylvan, Dol Guldor, Northmen, (Rhun)

• Dol Guldor now gains some much needed initiative in turn 1, but it's otherwise the same order

North Mountains: Angmar, Gundabad, Northmen, (Rivendell), Dwarves

• Angmar goes directly before gundabad, so can can-open or potentially breach fortresses for them, but at the same time, Carn Dum is pretty far so Angmar probably won't have a ton of troops. Rivendell is far enough from the Dwarves that they probably can't can-open too much, and the northmen don't have enough mountaineers to do too much damage, but this is probably the swingiest front in this turn order.

North Anduin: (Angmar), (Sylvan), (Dol Guldor), Gundabad, Northmen, Moria, Rivendell

• Gundabad can opens for Moria against Rivendell instead of vice versa (I get the sense that Gundabad will be much stronger up here than Moria because of Goblintown), and the Northmen can block. Angmar or Dol Guldor could potentially can-open a bit, but their production centers are pretty far from Rivendell. Rivendell can can-open for Sylvan mountaineers.

Central Misty Mountains: Saruman, Arnor/Tharbad, Sylvan, (Rohan), Moria, (Free Folk), Rivendell

• Moria can-opens for Saruman against Sylvans once again. Arnor could can-open for Sylvans, but they probably won't be next to each other too much. Free people can-open for Rivendell and Arnor instead of vice versa so you won't have two high elves suddenly letting 30 ponies through. Rohan no longer can-opens for Sylvans against Moria.

Gap of Rohan: Saruman, Gondor, Sylvan, Rohan

• Same as before

South Anduin: Mordor, Gondor, Harad, (Dol Guldor), Rohan

• Same as before. Dol Guldor is after harad, so you won't have 2 wargs breaking a screen and letting oliphants hit Rohan's army.

Southern Gondor: Gondor, Harad

• Same as before

Eriador: Angmar, Arnor, Gundabad, Freefolk, (Rivendell), (Dwarves)

• Gundabad can break Arnor's can-opens before the free folk can seize all the territory. Gundabad can-opens for Angmar, so Arnor can recover from dragon attacks.

[zlefin]

I'm concerned about merging woodland elves and lorien. Being able to theater-shift expenditures easily makes a big difference, and they seem like places where each theater should have their own issues to focus on. They are of course also separate kingdoms in the lore.

I wish there were an intermediate build, without all the big changes; that just focused on the changes to bug-fix and balance tweak the present version.

[zlefin]

Ran into a problem again on the existing map: I keep forgetting that Front Porch is a cave instead of a mountain; because the graphics on the map look like a mountain province. I know the area has been reworked for the coming version; I just wanna be sure that provinces terrains are highly visible, since Mountain vs Cave in particular matters an awful lot, as mountain blocks pathing for many units. I'm gonna lose a large stack in my present game because of forgetting.

Most (maybe all) of the other cave provinces also have settlements, which makes them have a visual style quite distinct from that of mountains; but front porch looks almost identical to mountains.

[alkexr]

@zlefin You should probably ask @Hepps about that (though I haven't seen him online in a while).

[zlefin]

How is the "all units blitz" option supposed to work exactly? I expected it to work like in World at War, or most typical maps; any unit could walk through capturing an empty territory and keep going if it has movement, no other limits or exceptions. But that's not what happened. Instead for unclear reasons, units could sometimes grab multiple territories, and sometimes they'd be stuck on the first one they captured, and sometimes they could leave the first one they captured, but only to go back to friendly land, they couldn't go onto to another hostile territory. It's possible that the reasons for that related to the terrain of the province they captured or tried to move into afterwards.

I tested this going through several different nations on the first round, and the problem above kept coming up.

[zlefin]

I noticed recently that once a nation's capital is taken, any territories of its that are taken back by allied nations go to that allied nation rather than the original owner. I'm torn on the topic; in some cases in game I'd rather it go to the original owner, in particular if its a factory that would enable them to produce. On the other hand, if a nation has no factories at all, it's better if they don't get income they can't use.

I have a nation in my current game with a mild income and some cash, but no factories left; it'd be great if a freed factory could revert to them so they could finally spend their money.

[zlefin]

Please put info on Fortresses in the notes: I just found out that fortresses repair every round during battle. I didn't realize it before. It'd be helpful if that was in the notes. I've always read the notes thoroughly; but that detail isn't in the present version, and I'm not sure if it was in past versions or not.

It also makes for a bit odd gameplay, as siege can still wipe out fortresses entirely in the first strike stage; which makes a huge difference in how the battle turns out.

[zlefin]

I'm wondering if there's anything we could to do help expedite the next release, some xml work or some such. What remains to be done? We've been playing some games, and getting a strong feeling that good has a significant advantage, and are looking to the next version addressing that somewhat.

[zlefin]

An uncertainty about the intended rules, on which we'd like clarification, it may've been discussed before but worth bringing up anew.

When a flying unit attacks hostile territory, and then the 'retreat' action is taken, the flying unit can remain over the hostile territory. It then survives since air can now survive hovering land. This means there's a hostile unit contesting that territory, so units friendly to the controller of the territory can't move there in noncombat, though they can move there in combat and engage the flying units directly albeit without the help of other allied forces in that territory; and it also means that any units of the territory's controller (especially walls) will have to attack the flying units on their turn. This matters particularly in terms of dragons, who might attack, but not fully win the battle; then be left hanging over some hostile walls. The way the engine does things now, the walls then attack the dragons on their turn, and cannot retreat.

Is that the intended gameplay? If not, how should it be handled?