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.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
At least Civ 3 has interesting ideas.

Dunno. Can´t think of much except Resources and Culture.

Resources: Infinitely better: ImperialismII.

Culture: Infinitely better: EUII. (With Domestic Policies, Cultures differ in quality instead of quantity. You don´t have 'more Culture' or 'less Culture'; instead, the question is: What Culture does your nation have?)

[yin26]

There's a big holiday coming up here in Asia (Lunar New Year), so I'll have some solid days of gaming bliss. I hope to gorge myself on Disciples 2, so I'll get back to you then. I'm just glad I have a game to look forward to come the holidays!

[Comrade Tribune]

Happy New Year!

[yin26]

Thank you, sir! You know, in China, they get like 3 weeks off! Can you image 3 weeks to play computer games? At least I'll get 5 days to play D2 ... I shouldn't complain too much I guess.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by 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 have seen other, even stupider things. For example, the computer players have a tendency to attack netural monsters. I don't know if there are any in D2, but there are many of them in the original, blocking roads or guarding treasures.

Anyway, the CPs tend to send waves after waves of stacks to take on these neutral monsters, even if they keep getting slaughtered.

Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS
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!

How so? the undeads weren't anything special as far as I can tell. The werewolf unit, IIRC, is invulnerable to physical attacks. Yet another good reason to use the Archmage. Besides, you want a leader who can use the many artifacts that are lying around.

Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS
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.

Usually, the objective is to wipe out the other side. You can't go wrong with that Seriously, usually it's either convert a certain percentage of the land or to capture a certain town. I think there's a menu option that tells you what the objective is.

Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS
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.

Archers are good against spellcasters, but my experience is you don't need more than one. I use my archers against enemy archers to preserve my own spellcasters. Enemy spellcasters can usually be taken out by your spellcasters since they are low on hit points. Also, since the Werewolf unit is immune to physical damages you will need magic - and lots of it - against the undeads.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by yin26
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.

The problem with the game is there are just too few variables to be interesting. For me, it was interesting for about 1 1/2 scenarios, the rest was more of the same.

[yin26]

I may well experience the same problem if the scenarios aren't interesting enough. Supposedly huge effort was put into them, but that could well be just hype.

[jackshot]

I've been impressed with the units, everything is useful. The scripting language is interesting, maybe still a bit primitive but a big change from D1. Another change from D1 is allowing the units to advance past their max upgrade, it works well and cuts down on all the creature swapping you had to do in the first version. You now want to keep the stack together.

I'm knee deep into the undead saga; I've got a Nosferatu with a necromancer, a deathdragon, and a dark lord - I rack up 150+ HP on each square on the board every turn, not to mention the dark lord who whacks some front row big guy for another 100. Of course bring death immunity to the party and watch my guys all run away...

I think they have a winner here. The biggest complaints I've heard so far center around the limited nature of the system, but IMO the simplicity is deceiving. Under the hood, the creature/leaders all seem modeled well and advance well, and the way all the elements (spells, weapons/attack, combined arms) so easily add up to a neat system - that doesn't make you go through drivers ed first - is no mean feat.

They are definitely trying for the TBS/RPG hybrid, some of the little scripted events look a lot like something from Bioware if you squint and let your cat distract you while they happen.

[Grumbold]

Disciples 1 was an interesting game that I felt was more of an advance on the Warlords game than anything else. It had its faults but in 3 seperate sessions (separated by months) I completed all four campaigns. My biggest beef was the later game scenarios when one enemy spell could kill all the non-fighters in a group. You had to use bait-and-lure tactics (and reload) to make sure your prime stack did not get eradicated because clever defensive casting was not sufficient. Similarly one nuke of yours would turn the enemy's best stacks into easy pickings.

When Disciples 2 crosses the pond I'll be happy to spend moneyto try it out. Warlords Battlecry was such a disappointment it can only be better

[yin26]

I just completed my first quest (leaving the saga for later). Some things I learned is that I needed to power up ONE group, plants rods ASAP, and actively seek the enemy's power stack early (and it seems the comp is not as good at doing the above, so you have an advantage early). I had the enemy hemmed in (on his very doorstep) within some 20 turns, after which I just powered up a bit more before finishing him off. Call it a TBS rush.

Still, I find the pacing to be a challenge, as has already been pointed out. You really need to settle in for a good, long haul if you want to complete anything in one sitting. The thing that makes it worth it, though, are the wonderful production values and some solid strategy elements. For example, do you try to pick off the enemy group on its way to sell some treasure (and thereby really hamper his ability to produce more units) or do you retreat back, power up and not risk losing your best units?

Lots of little decisions like that keeping you on your toes. I noticed they even tried to keep the game somewhat interesting by having pirates show up. While that was a nice touch the first few times (since I wanted to bring over a spy across the map but lost him to pirates), it really doesn't add too much of a meaningful challenge and only serves to draw out the inevitable. Of course, my game was a bit lopsided, so I can see how these neutral bands can really throw a wrench in the works.

Man, the graphics are just awesome! That's not what a strategy game should be based on, of course, but when I saw my stone golem for the first time, I really felt that I *earned* seeing him in his brutal splendor.

[Zealot]

Oh, now I remember, I played Disciples 1!
I just wasn't getting that it was that HOMM clone you were talking about!
So, the D2 is substantially better, huh?
It better be; otherwise it won't stand a chance to face the upcoming HOMM 4!

[Pembleton]

Originally posted by yin26
I just completed my first quest (leaving the saga for later). Some things I learned is that I needed to power up ONE group, plants rods ASAP, and actively seek the enemy's power stack early (and it seems the comp is not as good at doing the above, so you have an advantage early).

One group: something that is still *behind* HOMM in gameplay "technology". From what I understand, and it makes sense from the design, HOMM4 will no longer feature the "superhero" or in D2, "superparty" strategy. From 1 to 3, the general strategy 95% of the time was to produce one superhero and the other heroes were defenders/errand runners.

Rods: it depends on the locations of the mines and if it's worth spending 450 gold early (300 for unit + 150 for rod) or to wait 2-3 turns to get the mine "indirectly". In one game there was a town right above my capital that I didn't take right away in my first game. Instead, I planted a rod south of my capital immediately (well it took a day's worth of movement).

In the second, by accident I decided to clear the path to the town north of the capital first, and noticed that the spread of "control" from my capital increased much faster, and the mine to the south was under the capital's influence in about a day anyway, thus saving 450 gold. You get +50 gold per day from a mine, so in essence, you "lose" 350 gold by not waiting the 2 days.

If the town to the north isn't taken, it took much longer to have the mine to the south under control. I noticed this, because I also tried to take a different mine farther to the east first to see what effect that would have on the early game.

I'm still not sure how this functions precisely in how the computer calculates rate of player control, but I've stopped playing the game, so I don't think I will be investigating the matter any further.

As a further side note, in my trips to the SF forum, and elsewhere, I have heard absolutely no mention of any bugs or crashes so far. SF decided to delay the game a *long* time, as I believe it was supposed to be released sometime last summer, and that has paid off (hello, Firaxis?). Of course, my issues with the game are very specific and detailed, and I won't go into them here.

[yin26]

I rather like the 'one group' approach. It adds a certain RPG element and makes you have to really think twice about when and where to attack. One of the things I didn't like much about HOMM is that 300 units die in a battle oh well I'll buy 300 more thing.

Having said that, HOMM also has outstanding production values and atmosphere, so no doubt I will be buying HOMM4 when it comes out.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by yin26
I just completed my first quest (leaving the saga for later). Some things I learned is that I needed to power up ONE group, plants rods ASAP, and actively seek the enemy's power stack early (and it seems the comp is not as good at doing the above, so you have an advantage early). I had the enemy hemmed in (on his very doorstep) within some 20 turns, after which I just powered up a bit more before finishing him off. Call it a TBS rush.

Ah, you're getting the hang of it.

In some sense it's very TBS like that you have to grab all the resources, just to deny the enemy from having them. You can try to "starve" your opponent by taking all the mana resources from the computer player, so it can't cast spells on you.

Empire has an advantage because it's rod planter is the flying archangel, which allows her to cross waters easily. Actually, I used her as a scout since she's cheap.

Later in the campaign the computer "bad guy" will have some rather disgusting stacks around.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Grumbold
Disciples 1 was an interesting game that I felt was more of an advance on the Warlords game than anything else

Hm, my take is Disciples 1 is inferior to Warlords 3, with far fewer strategic options.