Disciples II

[Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS]

Been making my way though a backlog of games and found another gem. Disciples II is a TBS but one that unabashedly embraces uber-stacks. You have a similar company construction mechanism, a la Kohan, but the number of elements is capped based on the leader in the party (the more powerful they are, the less units you can carry). Your guys actually gain experience as well, which is where the city improvement comes in. Which buildings you construct determine what your units morph into once they've leveled. There is also some tactical combat akin to HOMM, but it's pretty limited because of reduced unit count and no movement. It's also pretty hard. It took me some time to beat the first mission, but to its credit, I enjoyed replaying it with different tactics and leaders.

Check it out!

Jeff

[Urban Ranger]

I played Disciples: Sacred Lands and found it a rather bad game. I managed to drag myself through the human and dwarven campaigns before deinstalling the game.

I found the game sterile. There are also a lot of very strange design decisions that drove me batty. It's just pure hack-and-slash with very little strategy needs.

There are several differences, for example, the stonger the leader in the original game, the more "slots" he can control. I used "slots" because some creatures take up more than one slot.

[jackshot]

I picked it up a couple of days ago and can't stop playing it.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

I found the game sterile.

Wait! Don´t mention the expression 'sterile' to someone who played CivIII!!!



Now you have done it. I am sick again.

[Pembleton]

Well I had a brief initial interest in the game but it faded quickly. I won't go into the details because I've already explained at length in the Strategy First forum.

On the other hand, the vast majority of the people who have played it love it, for what it's worth. I'm one of the small minority who is disappointed.

[yin26]

I've been playing it the past day or so and am now restarting the first mission as I realized a number of things I was doing wrong. While it's too early to make final comments, I will say that I am enjoying the graphics and overall style of the game immensely. I also LOVE that (contrary to HoMM) since your number of units is so small and each plays such an important role that you simply can't afford to be foolish with your battles. So far at least, there seems to be a whole lot more strategy in this game, at least in a sort of 'chess like' way ... and I really, really like that.

The pace seems more deliberate that that in HoMM, but that could well be because I am just learning the game (never played D1). Perhaps the best thing I can say about it as that contrary to other games I have been playing lately, this one had me glued to my seat for about one continuous 3-hour stretch last night. In other words, it has that 'just one more turn' feeling that Civ3 certainly lacks.

If the gameplay pans out, combined with the awesome style overall, this game could really prove to be one of my favorites. And I look forward to going back and playing the saga from the other 3 perspectives. I'm playing as Empire on my first run.

By the way, I haven't noticed any bugs or strange slow downs or anything. Oh, I'm sure there will be some, but to have NONE after a few hours of focussed play is quite a nice change from other developers that think releasing $50 betas is standard practice.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
Wait! Don´t mention the expression 'sterile' to someone who played CivIII!!!



Now you have done it. I am sick again.

Com'on. At least Civ 3 has interesting ideas.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Pembleton
Well I had a brief initial interest in the game but it faded quickly. I won't go into the details because I've already explained at length in the Strategy First forum.

Post a link to your post

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by yin26
I also LOVE that (contrary to HoMM) since your number of units is so small and each plays such an important role that you simply can't afford to be foolish with your battles.

That's true. Still, since your units only gain experience from the bad old D&D way - from battles - you want to fight as many battles as you can.

Originally posted by yin26
So far at least, there seems to be a whole lot more strategy in this game, at least in a sort of 'chess like' way ... and I really, really like that.

Not really.

***SPOILER WARNING***

I am speaking only from Diciples experience. The easiest way to win is to form a hammer group. Find the best character for your faction, then form a group with that. In the case of Empire (humans) this is the Archmage, so you form a group with the Archmage with some spellcasters in the back and fighters in the front. Another thing you'll need is the improvement that lets you heal in a town. So build that the first turn. And you're set.

Once you have a battlegroup, send the party out and kill something they can handle, if this involves capturing a town, so much the better. When a unit die in the process don't worry about it as long as you can win the battle. You can pay to have it revived in a town.

Once you capture a town, consider putting in some appropiate defense units. Upgrade a town if you have the spare cash.

Wait for your group to heal. Capture next town or kill next group of monsters. Repeat.

*** END OF SPOILER ***

Originally posted by yin26
The pace seems more deliberate that that in HoMM, but that could well be because I am just learning the game (never played D1).

The AI is really stupid. Your opponent - if you're Empire then it's propably the demons, whatever they're called - always start a scenario with huge amount more stuff than you do. I always dislike games with such a design, since it shows only laziness on the side of the developer.

What's worse, when you get to play the demons the humans have a lot more stuff than you this time around. Just a little contradiction in there somewhere

Originally posted by yin26
Perhaps the best thing I can say about it as that contrary to other games I have been playing lately, this one had me glued to my seat for about one continuous 3-hour stretch last night. In other words, it has that 'just one more turn' feeling that Civ3 certainly lacks.

Granted, this is the case in the beginning. After you finish a couple more scenarios the game becomes a drag. All scenarios are MOTS (more of the same). What's worse is you got to grind through - literally - stack upon enemy stack. What's fun in the beginning becomes completely boring

[yin26]

Well, I don't mind going for lots of battles, since it's a battle game more or less. Just as long as the battles involve some strategy and are nice to watch. So far so good.

I also don't mind resource skewing as long as the AI itself doesn't continue to cheat within the game or make really bad decisions -- and I haven't played the game yet enough to know if that's the case. I *have* seen the AI be pretty careful and exploit me wisely. If that's not done through cheating, I'll be pretty happy. Again, I don't mind if the AI starts with more resources.

[yin26]

What's fun in the beginning becomes completely boring.

This is true of most any game. What's important is how long it grabs you, and whether or not the community has the tools to keep things fresh.

[SixArmedMan]

It has an editor which lets you edit events for your scenarios!

Scenarios??? Events???? Wha'????

[Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS]

"The AI is really stupid. "

You can definitely trick the AI to bounce between two cities by defending one and not defending the other, then reverse. I'm still playing the second mission, which is getting pretty frustrating. Not only is it like a 8 hour affair (unless I'm doing something wrong, which I may be), but I just ran into the undead faction, who are invulnerable to my attacks! I really wish there was a list of the objectives required to win the game, since the 'briefing' is really more of a movie than anything else.

My favorite Empire pack was the knightish leader, with two archers and a squire. The multiple attack spellcasters were neat, but it seems really important against higher level enemies to be able to destroy the ranged units first. Since then, archers (and all their flavors) are my favorite units.

Jeff

[yin26]

Agreed. These episodes can run an awwfully long time. I think they might have erred on that point since, while certainly a challenge, people need a sense of progress and direction to keep interested.

I'm still enjoying the game immensely, but it certainly isn't something you just fire up for an hour an expect to resolve. This is advantages and disadvantages, I suppose, but most people aren't going to be happy taking 8 hours to finish one episode! (Freaks like me, might. )

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by yin26
If the gameplay pans out, combined with the awesome style overall, this game could really prove to be one of my favorites.

Please keep us informed. The game just arrived at my shop. If you still like it after some more play, I am tempted to buy it.

Btw: Have just worked for 2+ hours at my domestic/economic/political model. Current # of variables: 93, and increasing; and this is only the Iron Age. No one is going to complain about a lack of complexity, so much for sure.