Peoples reaction based on my testing

[APOKALIPTRIX]

i would do it gladly but i dont know anything about coding
what i can do is the creative part, you know, the description text.

[Stratego (dev)]

but i did not mean descriptions, there are auto generated informations about all effects too.
if u go on unit datasheet and u press effect that will open up and show all range damage lasting time and all other properties of an effect too.

have u seen these opened up effect informations? if not please check and tell me if they are good or not. they can still be too few infromations, but we can put in there anything needed.

( a description will not be that much help imho as will sound like "This effect will freeze the enemy reducing its speed" so in a textual descrition we must not put in values eg. how much speed decrement it gives - as that changes with constatn balancing - exact values are under the collapsing-decollapsing part of the effect row)

[APOKALIPTRIX]

i agree. the descriptions need polishing in several ways.
maybe we should add another section in the units help?
units, techs and effects

[Stratego (dev)]

we can do anything!

however i am asking for examples about what information is missing as i still have no any idea what is missing

[APOKALIPTRIX]

the roads and other terrain building tecsh have not description, iknow what they do but other players dont.
the enchant burning and lightning weapon dont have description either, ill look out for more mising descriptions.

[MaharajaInfernape]

AoS is not a complicated game (though it's also not simple; I don't like simple games). I think the most drawback of the game is its bad graphics, animations and UI. There are many games with bad mechanisms but very good graphics, and thus many players like these games. Because graphics and UI have a good impression on players which make them say that a game is good.

Ao games are on not liked by many players not because it is complicated but because of its bad graphics and UI. (I don't give graphics and UI much priority; and that's why I like this game so much.) They only think that the game is complicated, but it is not so.

Thus the main thing to be done to increase its players is to improve its graphics IMO.

[godOfKings]

1 thing we can try is make all units into animation like fire archer but they will only b slightly moving their body, shield, wpn etc.

[APOKALIPTRIX]

I thought about that too a while ago but I didn't want to ask. I agree this is a good idea
It has to be something simple but even a three frames weapon swing for all units can make a big difference
We all know it's not that hard to make pixel animations all we're asking is that: a simple three frames anim for all units
We should improve the games graphics once in a while instead of focusing only in more
units

[godOfKings]

U can try it if u want, its not hard to make a series of frames, but its hard to actually make the images look like the unit is a real moving human

[Hyuhjhih]

Att animation is already in. And the idle animation, like a few pixel changing as animation, won't be that much change imho.
All the images, most of them, are way too good, when considering our limit of 32x32 pixels. The best in its kind.

And even the high yielding games like terraria, are still pixelated. So even though the looks does matter in appealing, the game play is a much more important aspect which hold the players.

If we can get more possibilities from once the unity.v is completed, we can see a hope of better images.

[Hyuhjhih]

So first of all, we need to grab the presence of mind of a new player.

• a new or slightly improved GUI , like the layout of the main screen, opting for an optional one, which can be defaulted for new players, and within the settings. An animated or live one is better.
• a new way of apprehending the concept like, a tool tip for campaign , multiplayer, skirmish etc,
• an opening intro for new players, about the various aspects ingame like counters chart , analysis of different types of units.
• rearranging the upgrade list is a must, maybe, imo categorized under seperate tabs on style(normal,megabuilding,factory...), faction(human,insectoids,orcs,dwarves,...)
  race(chinese,Japanese,roman,imperials,goblins,phantoms,mercs,mordors...),
  type of attack(ranged,melee,utility,poles,...) and
  listing each in the progressive manner of upgrades and tiers.
• polishing underlying unit images is currently on going well,special mention for those who are contributing.
• since there is a limit on how much we can spent on the clarity of units,all we can do is modifying terrain sprites which is much less complicated

[Hyuhjhih]

Introducing player to the community is a great way of keeping the player attached to the game.

As i mentioned earlier, i have spent half an year behind the multiplayer and chats. At that period, the game was just a means of getting the time behind. Later once i joined the chats, slightly getting more and more active in multiplayer,helping out other players, and now its my 2.5th year in AoS, and now login in daily, taking turns, chatting in and doing discussions in chats, it all turns out to be a part of my daily routine.

What i am pointing at is, getting the player into the community tends to keep the player playing often. Mentioning AoS, there is a hundreds or maybe nearly thousand hiding behind the chats, which is not visible in chats, someof them go through chats, and check for any password of games shared, the others skip through the chats, directly joining matches.

So, is there any way to get a new player active in forums as well as chats. Atleast some inspiration? Like asking for help, a new currency type to represent loyalty, shared among the various players.

[godOfKings]

Ow ya the multiplayer and daily login r actually almost counter productive for the new players because, they will have to join multiplayer games to get daily login gifts, and if they join wrong game for them, or dont know how to create a game giving them the advantage, and end up losing, it will affect their confidence and interest in the game...

[Stratego (dev)]

AoS is not a complicated game (though it's also not simple; I don't like simple games). I think the most drawback of the game is its bad graphics, animations and UI. There are many games with bad mechanisms but very good graphics, and thus many players like these games. Because graphics and UI have a good impression on players which make them say that a game is good.

Ao games are on not liked by many players not because it is complicated but because of its bad graphics and UI. (I don't give graphics and UI much priority; and that's why I like this game so much.) They only think that the game is complicated, but it is not so.

Thus the main thing to be done to increase its players is to improve its graphics IMO.

i totally agree on the points

- UI will be totally new and hopefully modern with unity version
- the units... yes that is a problem redrawing or animating 500-1000sprites is a huge work - ithink that will never happen.
hoever we can make things like the over-effects (like the new attack animations, move dust animations like inWW2 tanks and so on)

the roads and other terrain building tecsh have not description,

can anyone suggest a text so i can put in?

the enchant burning and lightning weapon dont have description either

can anyone suggest a text so i can put in?

[MaharajaInfernape]

I thought of making a new forum but I don't know where should I make. So after reading these 2 posts I decided to write it here.

Btw i got a new idea but its kind of long term, completely removing upgrades section, wait there is more making a new upgrades section where all the national buildings and units, each unit and its upgrade techs, similar units and their ability related techs r all grouped together instead of being scattered, i wonder if its possible to refund gems so we can buy them again but properly this time

rearranging the upgrade list is a must, maybe, imo categorized under seperate tabs on style(normal,megabuilding,factory...), faction(human,insectoids,orcs,dwarves,...)
race(chinese,Japanese,roman,imperials,goblins,phantoms,mercs,mordors...),
type of attack(ranged,melee,utility,poles,...) and
listing each in the progressive manner of upgrades and tiers.

I have a quite large idea.

• Completing a map giving only 4 gems in maximum and needing so low amount of gems to purchase a unit/upgrade do not look good. I suggest that there after all the gems are refunded, as said by godOfKings, they will be multiplied by 20. The costs of the units will also be increased.
• Completing maps in hard campaigns will give more gems than completing maps in medium or easy campaigns.
• Completing a level will give some gems. The amount shall increase on reaching higher levels. (I would write fully completing a campaign should give some prize but I didn't because new maps are often added in new versions.) Similarly completing an achievement will also give some prize.
• There shall be 2 types of currencies—one gems and another diamonds. Diamonds cannot be got easily. Some units will need diamonds or both gems and diamonds to be bought. Also, 1 diamond can be converted to 20 gems or so but gems cannot be converted to diamonds. Diamonds can be sent from one Ao game to another.
• Similar as said before, some units/upgrades will need the player to reach certain level or/and have certain amount of stars to be bought.

[Stratego (dev)]

rearranging the upgrade list is a must

this would kill my whole idea of "incentiveness": eg. to be surprise what to open - so will make the feeling you want to open all - so game will not get "boring" when u get all.

after you have all you might get lost some interest (so this is an incentive)

-------------------------------
also i think the "sexy"ness of the game is more important - that was describe d above (about unit and menu appearance) not the in game upgrades - that is (in all games) a "myth" so you must get all to know all. (at least in most games)

There are games where you know what upgrades give, or how they look, but that case you can not get them but you get them by randomness.

i think that is rare that you have both:
a) knowing beforehand what is openable -
b) and you can open specific items - without getting it by random chance (like in daily "packs" or purchased packs something)

[Hyuhjhih]

Similar as said before, some units/upgrades will need the player to reach certain level or/and have certain amount of stars to be bought.

This seems good, but an issue will arise.

Like suppose you are new to the game, you playing with another player with least upgrades, ( we won't be getting a same leveled player as we are) we were making units like archers and swordsman and on seeing a single hoplite ramming through our low tier units we say, " mm... the hoplite is too good" . Then we buy hoplite and on next game, we rush for a hoplite at start, but a more advanced player using 2 poison archers and clearly wipe out the hoplite then we would say "ah, it's not fair " then we ask in chats were we head to poison archers, and once we produce a bunch of p.archers, a simple l.cav sweep them away. So our impression is like " ah the game is not set for me, i would better check out other apps".

- this was the reaction of the few players who joined the game as part of my recommendation. As you can see, it is a clear matter of inexperience that leads to boredom. So, this part would only works when the match takes place between players of same class of experience.

[Hyuhjhih]

rearranging the upgrade list is a must

this would kill my whole idea of "incentiveness": eg. to be surprise what to open - so will make the feeling you want to open all - so game will not get "boring" when u get all.

after you have all you might get lost some interest (so this is an incentive)

-------------------------------

Um... not in that manner stratego.

Surprise? Sure it keeps an excitement for new players but, this is not a way like opening capsules and chests to get a random troop or unit, we know what we are getting here, atleast we can head for players to ask or the complete(outdated) tree is in the wiki.

And even though we know where we are heading, its only (as i suggested) is the path of that single unit variants, and as this game proceeds in a counter anti-counter style, sticking onto a single branch is not ideal.
So it is a necessity to get almost all units but still getting the factor somehow to keep the distance between the early and advanced. The

also i think the "sexy"ness of the game is more important - that was describe d above (about unit and menu appearance) not the in game upgrades - that is (in all games) a "myth" so you must get all to know all. (at least in most games)

I am not sure what it is interpreting, but assuming it points to

a new or slightly improved GUI , like the layout of the main screen, opting for an optional one, which can be defaulted for new players, and within the settings. An animated or live one is better.
a new way of apprehending the concept like, a tool tip for campaign , multiplayer, skirmish etc,

A new look didn't mean to kill the style nor a complete elevation, so as to copy the cliche standard of other games, but sticking on the the actual design, but getting a new impression in a new player.

To explain it better , let me explain what the change i truly meant,


This the the old school galaxian, and

This is the "new school " sky force.

Looking at them, they both have the common style of play. But

• a guy who first played the galaxian, and after a long period playing sky force, he term the sky force as "a new variety" and term the galaxian as "nostalgic old school"
• a kid who first played sky force and later the galaxian,
  he will term the sky force like "good for trying" and the galaxian as "old , pretty bad, low quality, cheap class, no graphics, "

This is the way i suggested we want a new style in appearance, but keeping the game's actual flavor.

[makazuwr32]

I think it is better to keep game looks as they are now. Easier a bit for drawers and also will not require any resprites for units and tiles.

Also current looks do not distract from actual gameplay which is nice for me.

And additional thing: current visuals are rather easy to handle for not so new devices. If we will make new visuals with much higher resolution (not 64x64 but 128x128 or even 256x256) this will take much more time to load game itself (not match but game) and also much more heavy for devices. Even if it will be optional — it will still cost memory.

[Hyuhjhih]

Lol, i just mentioned the menu appearance and gui that may need a new look. Not the entire game nor sprites , just subjecting a beginner's approach on impression

[makazuwr32]

Not sure what changes in gui are needed. It is very comfortable as for me.

Menu is good enough. Could be better but i am not designer or drawer.

[Hyuhjhih]

Maybe the upgrade to unity.v may open possibilities, but it entirely depends on stratego.

[MaharajaInfernape]

A new look didn't mean to kill the style nor a complete elevation, so as to copy the cliche standard of other games, but sticking on the the actual design, but getting a new impression in a new player.

To explain it better , let me explain what the change i truly meant,


This the the old school galaxian, and

This is the "new school " sky force.

Looking at them, they both have the common style of play. But

• a guy who first played the galaxian, and after a long period playing sky force, he term the sky force as "a new variety" and term the galaxian as "nostalgic old school"
• a kid who first played sky force and later the galaxian,
  he will term the sky force like "good for trying" and the galaxian as "old , pretty bad, low quality, cheap class, no graphics, "

This is the way i suggested we want a new style in appearance, but keeping the game's actual flavor.

I am absolutely of the same opinion as yau.