Age of Wonders III coming later this year!

[mikeck]

Are you saying that if you create a character and save it, it may be chosen as a random opponent on a random map?  That's freaking AWESOME!!!!

I'm not quite as thrilled. In fact I would love to see that made optional.

Can't you delete the character you created if you are not using it?

So, now that you guys have had an opportunity to mess around with it, which would you say is the deeper and more complex game: Fallen Enchatress with all the expansions or AOW III?

[Gusington]

^Yeah great question, I'd like to know that too.

Also - AoW III worth 40.00 right now?

[skeptical.platypus]

To me, they are pretty much on par in terms of depth and complexity, almost across the board. They are VERY similar games. I prefer AOWIII mostly for the graphics, but I also waited until it was under $10.00. I'm happier with that price than currently $40 for AOW3.

[bbmike]

Can't you delete the character you created if you are not using it?

So, now that you guys have had an opportunity to mess around with it, which would you say is the deeper and more complex game: Fallen Enchatress with all the expansions or AOW III?

You probably could delete the character but I wouldn't really want to do that either. Maybe there's a way to move the character files into an archive.

For me, FE seems deeper and more complex than AoWIII. But I'm having more fun with AoWIII at least for  now.

[PanzersEast]

Fallen Enchantress <> Age of Wonders III

I have played both and I have played a lot of both.  Just some observations for those who are wondering.


In terms of complexity and features the games are very similar, however they differ in some areas.

Unit/Hero/Ruler Customization - Fallen Enchantress allows a more robust method of customizing your units, both allow customizing your heroes and ruler and are similar.  Unit variety to me are close with neither really having the edge.  I like the options given to me in AOW3 where I can absorb cities I conquer and then produce their unit types, however there is no real penalty other than just waiting turns to absorb then and then we are all one happy family.....  however, I really like the option of unit customization in FE so it is a trade off.....

Map - I feel AOW3 map is more robust with independent towns and creatures and plenty of areas to explore both above and below ground.  Also you can use water ways.  I also think the random map is better in AOW3 than FE.  The map graphics itself are far better in AOW3.  The wondering creatures in FE are ok but can become annoying and in AOW3 it can get a little tedious once some independent nations go to war with you.

Combat - I feel that AOW3 combat system is better, however both are similar.  The tactical maps are better on AOW3 and FE maps feel very repetitive.  AOW3 has many features like flanking, line of sight bonuses/penalties outside the basic buffs etc.... and I feel AOW3 gives you more feedback when trying to make decisions.  As in all 4X games, as the game goes on it becomes a grind to the finish.

Diplomacy - Right now I fell the diplomacy is better in FE and needs some adjustment/work in AOW3.  Both have the basic features, but as of right now AOW3 need a little more time in that area.

I like how AOW3 where everyone starts as neutral and there is not defined Good or Evil... it evolves over time from decisions that are made... so you never know who is good or bad.  In FE they are clearly defined.

AOW3 has a randomized Spell research method..... FE is pretty straight forward.

AOW3 lets you possibly face rulers you have created... which I think is a very cool option.

Modding has not been opened up for AOW3 right now, however it is suppose to with the possibility of Steam Workshop.

As I think of more I will post them.

PE





 

[undercovergeek]

Modding has not been opened up for AOW3 right now, however it is suppose to with the possibility of Steam Workshop.

As I think of more I will post them.

PE

the editor has just come on line - it shouldnt be long now

[Gusington]

Thanks for the above PE. I have a feeling I will prefer AoWIII because I have enjoyed Civ V so much.

[PanzersEast]

Thanks for the above PE. I have a feeling I will prefer AoWIII because I have enjoyed Civ V so much.

No prob.

Also, you can gain loot on both games from exploring or doing quests.  One feature AOW3 has is that once you have a forge you can begin creating unique items and FE allows you to craft certain items once the appropriate research is done.  Crafting in AOW3 seems a little overpowered to me, but that is just me.

I also like when you defeat certain heroes/units in AOW3 you gain their loot from a drop.  I don't remember having that option in FE.

When your domain grows in AOW3 like FE you can absorb certain resources on the map that offer bonuses in addition to the buildings you create.  AOW3 however will force you to take those areas as they are normally occupied with a creature/creatures, once defeated you gain the bonus/resource.... in FE you simply have to build on that area.


PE

[mikeck]

Thanks PE...I think I will dive into AOW3.

[Tuna]

If my Son's machine plays Rome II ok, it should be fine with this right? (think his CPU might be just below min requirements)

[PanzersEast]

If my Son's machine plays Rome II ok, it should be fine with this right? (think his CPU might be just below min requirements)

I would think so.... but I am not sure.  I would not think that AOW3 would take more resources to run than Rome II.  You will want to use the Beta patch, there are some reported issues with performance or resolution issues.  The beta patch corrected the res issue for me.


One thing I forgot to mention was that on the tactical battle maps there are some random effects that can change the environment in which the battle takes place.... for example strong winds that cause archers to have some negative effects etc....


My border skirmish with Merlin is now a full scale war... I have lost 2 heroes fighting him and had to retake a town to my North.  I am now brining in 2 armies from the east and raising another to begin to go on the offensive... but, he does have some powerful units and I looked at one army with multiple heroes....

PE

[Nefaro]

If my Son's machine plays Rome II ok, it should be fine with this right? (think his CPU might be just below min requirements)

Yes.  I would think so.

Rome 2's campaign side runs like crap IMO.  This one could use more optimization too but it seems to run fine. 

I had to turn down the gfx on my i5 laptop with the slow GT640M, but I also lowered it on my new i7 desktop because it was running the processor warmer than I think it should on that one.  Someone mentioned forcing it to run on only one core, in the latter case, until they patch it.  I've seen mention that it does this with some i7 processors.  Probably runs better on older ones - that seems to be the case with some games lately.

[tgb]

I have an I3 with 8Gb RAM and a superclocked Geforce GTX 650 TI, and it runs just fine.  Loading times are especially fast.

[Martok]

I'm enjoying AoW3 so far, but it feels less like "fantasy Civ", and more like a wargame.  Everything -- cities, research, spells, economy, resources, special sites, etc. -- feel like they're geared towards a single goal: building a military machine to grind your enemies to dust.  Conquest is the only way to win (although you can also win with allies if you enable that particular option).  I do like the game overall, no question, but it clearly focuses more on the military aspects IMO. 

In contrast, FE:LH is much more like Civilization in a fantasy setting.  Combat is still important, of course, and designing your Sovereigns and units are fun, but there's no question the game has a greater emphasis on, well, building your civilization (or in this case rebuilding civilization) and reclaiming the world from the Cataclysm that broke the land. 



Those are my impressions for now, anyway.  I've not played AoW3 as much as some, so you should feel free to take my words with as many grains of salt as you're comfortable with. 

[mikeck]

Interesting. It doesn't bother me that it is geared towards combat . I mean Dominions 4 is one of the most complex fantasy games ever created and it is completely geared towards military and destroying your enemies.  That's not a bad thing but I do see what you're saying in terms of "it's just a different kind of game". Sometimes you want to build a civilization other times you just want to kill stuff