We are not stacking units… that works great if we focus ONLY on mass combat, but we have PCs/aces here which cannot be stacked and would come off very weak in comparison to heavily stacked unit, already discussed that.

Support range within a tactical map makes no sense, that’s a strategic sense, and most strategic decisions are not up to the player anyways so that’s moot.

4e is about the flattest thing I’ve ever seen this side of gaming. Yes they have certain good ideas, but it also completely trashed the adaptability that was 3.5e’s best part. My opinion and those of my friends is - it’s good for the amateur DM, bad for experienced DMs who really wish to drive their game beyond the normal and commonly accepted. All of those archetypes are already used in 3.5, just prebuilt only in precons…

Refrain from any ideas simply require too much work, this is not a game company with significant resources… always keep balance of costs in mind.

Lothair, if characterized merchant-wise, might make the player/Exelar draw wrong conclusion about him. How do you view a crafty person other than distrust? Even when he really aim for your benefits, and treat you more than a friend.

Canan, assasin type who hates her work, but still do it nevertheless. Her ability to gather information means she’s skilled at social skills and subtlety, quality which is no different than Lothair’s diplomatic skills.

I wonder if these similarity (my ideas about Lothair’s personality) could pose more problem than what you need?

Lothair is involved more with administration and civil stuffs, and in this place, diplomacy is the only way you succeed. Aoric is direct and commanding. Lothair? I’d say he’s easygoing and charming by outside appearance, and when it comes to ‘business’, he’ll be very subtle, doing things indirect way (such as Aorin’s business to Exelar), and when inside his head, he always assess silently about profit and tactics to get what he want.

When it’s serious, he’s like a merchant about to _giving you a deal_.

When it’s not formal, he loosen his coat (Arioc zip the coat all the way to the top).

When things doesn’t go his way, he’ll sigh and tell you how he always think the best to you. How very lucky you should have him, and… stuffs.

Yeah, it’s pretty different than the original design, but clearly very antagonistic in personality to Aoric, and more distinct as a character^^

Taking another point of view as a player. There must be clear reason why I want to spare Gallagher, either because he has a cool characterization or may be hinted he’s going to be recruitable. Therefore when the recruitment happens it’ll feel more valuable. Also do the same for Miros, make him interesting instead of another leader of ambush attack.

Umm… use Aoric once in a battle? That’s okay, but specifically CHA? What reason players might opt to do this instead of other battle-useful attributes? Unless Aoric may get boosted performance with CHA increase and the player have the chance to know it beforehand, I guess.

This is worth to consider; Gallagher joins, if not, Miros join, if not, Sylvanna join. An IF function, but players won’t not getting any of them which might hinder their battle ability. For balance, I do prefer the idea that you can only recruit one of them.

Oh yeah, I do really hope Penthiae will be enough hinted at the beginning of the game, so it doesn’t looks like a random-new-planet-found-it’s-so-amazing kinda plot.

(At this point if there are newer, revised draft, there’s good chance I haven’t read it yet)

Battle encounters might take 30 minutes to one hour to finish, and we may not know about the final product’s loading time, handling time, special effect, event and such, which I estimate to 30 hours. To make a player finish the game after all those hard work and time investment, only to notice he made the wrong choice 10 hours ago or having one less point to the target score, and get bad ending, to delayed game over is a brutal punishment in my opinion.

I’m sure most of us have experienced this kind of situation from big commercial products, so what’s wrong with that? I think it’s totally wrong. It’s a bad design that unconsciously ingrained and become a habit in both playing and designing, and I think it has to change.

Solution: make it easier to get one play through = one path good end with intended girl.

After all, three arcs is already way too demanding and intimidating for a player to replay. Let them finish one play through with satisfaction, and I’m sure they wouldn’t mind to play once (or twice) more. Don’t you think it’s damn cool already if many players would give their best shot completing your 30+ hours game? I won’t demand more than that.

I’m going to take example of a case that could be redesigned; Basileur. A player may choose not to give Basileur to Aorin _because the player care for her_. I think it’s a logical choice and I myself would ponder that decision _when I’m aiming for her path_. If the player just notice that mistake in Astraea Arc and he has to repeat everything all over from the middle of Earth Arc… well that’s no good at all.

What I’d love to see will be different scene altogether. When denying her of Basileur, at that instance Exelar managed to convince himself (and the player) that he don’t want to see Aorin hurt more. This is a mistake off course, because Aorin’s self-confidence will plunge furthermore as she realized that she totally failed her mission (given from the late mother) as his bodyguard.

This is new conflict, and conflict = story. This opens a new way the story could develop. At Astraea Arc Exelar might finally realize his mistake, and further (alternative) drama will envelop. It’ll be more work for sure, to create more alternative dialogue scenes (event CG not necessary, as long it’s reusable), but I think this definitely worth it, as a player might replay for Aorin’s path once again! @___@

And yeah, the original Astraea Arc’s ending and the rest of Penthiae events for Aorin can be used with no change as it’ll affect only her path before Astraea Arc’s end.

For any other dialogue branches, I propose that _there will be no bad decision_. In any dialogue branches, options should be made so players will assume that all the options are logically and emotionally equal. Reward equal amount of attributes increase, otherwise it’ll be there to reward power gamer instead those who would like to explore the story. And those options will branches to different/alternate event/dialogue but still feel rewarding all the same, not punishing.

Another suggestion; saving Rika first doesn’t hinder the player in chasing Sofiya; just make Rika’s path easier–not harder on Sofiya. Vice versa. Just using plus in relationships might be easier to predict and program, instead of dealing with minus and making it more unpredictable.

Finally, all these are merely subjective opinion about VN design. I don’t think these ideas are good, implementable, or anything. However I want to say that some of these are worth some consideration.

(Haven’t read new Aorin draft, exhausted after reading 7 hours non-stop)

A. Scaling down large unit into a single one for gameplay’s sake doesn’t have to merely simplify it. Playable is good, adhering to reality is good but sometimes those two doesn’t correlate, so an optimal balance is desired.

I propose a modifiable idea based on Suikoden 2 system, which has more layer where there are 4 values in one field avatar (I call it avatar to avoid confusion with unit):
1. Leader/Commander
2. Type of unit (rifle, bazooka, assasin, artillery)
3. Quantity of unit (nein to legionnaire)
4. Quality of unit (morale)
* you can say unit is like minion under your command

Leader has values that affect morale (quality of the unit they assigned to) and type of unit they are proficient with (suitable equally on sniper/range and frontal/melee, but not on massive artillery). Quantity of unit may also be adjusted from zero (main character are their own unit) to millions if you want to. Leaders have strategy (or you can call it, usable skills/magic/tech) that are unique and may bring special outcome on the battlefield.

B. Logistic/Supply/Support avatar may be placed and given huge importance in the game. This single avatar have low mobility and always-active support range. Other avatars that begin their turn outside the support range will be weaken considerably. So this support avatar must be protected at all cost (giving you hot tension in an ambush scenario). Hikari-like characters might be suitable to be the leader of this avatar, you see.

C. Borrow D&D 4th ed DMG and check out the battle encounter design. The fact that D&D now align more to miniatures and grid battle system is a boon to SRPG designer. Creatures in D&D4e are distributed not only as mere soldier and commander but also brutes, minion, controller, artillery, lurker, skirmisher, elite, solo and stuffs. All have their own ’style’ and strategy that will bring unique tactical element to the encounter at whole.

It’s way easier to design an encounter as a DM in D&D4e, since everything is used like block system. You should check it out!

D. Reinforcement.

For example the next battle will be hold at three area simultaneously, player may/may not choose to play one of them but they still will play one. Let’s say they play battle in map A. Player must distribute their resources (all NPCs leaders and unit) to this three maps and consider their strategy. In the battle instances, after each end of round, player will receive updates on what happen at other two maps and may assign command/strategies that instant.

Here’s the interesting part. Player can choose to allocate most of their resources to map A in hope to finish the objective ASAP with aggresive strategy, however it’ll weaken the force on other maps so it’s pretty risky. Player can also choose to allocate more to the other maps, so they play defensively hoping their allies can clear their own map in time: to bring reinforcement to the player’s battle (with neat position, from the enemies’ rear for example!).

–

Woo yeah. I type this reply with the expectation that you’ll read and reply though. So if I had no response from you in few days I’m going to e-mail you directly or something. 8D