Keeper specialization

[Danimal]

This was discused some time ago, and i think its good to know everyone opinion to this;

The idea is to make keepers able to specialize in 3 different paths. The keeper can only choose one path, for that reason many rooms and creatures are path neutral and accesible by all keepers (hatchery, treasure room...), same for spells like create imp, healing or ligthning . Each path will have special bonus, rooms, spells and creatures, the player can decide wich one to take at the start of the level and researching on a library is the only way to advance on it. When the total number of research point passes a quantity, the ability that needed a certain amount of them gets unlocked (ex. 50rp fireball, 100rp thunder., 200rp war-room...).

Possible development of paths:

Path of war:Brawns over brains, emphasis on melee troops
Bonus:
Cheaper creature wages
Cheaper lair and hatchery construction
Extended max number of creatures (high on the research tree)

Rooms:
Arena -> attracts ogres; make orcs become warlords once they pass certain level
Barracks-> attract minotaurs
Fire pits-> Imps become firelords (a mixed warrior-mage)

Spells: support only
Mass healing
Rage
Protection
Crusade


Path of magic: we have a good couple of fireballs, more magic users and undeads
Bonus:
Cheaper libraries
Undead have low wages
More mana generation
Necromancers and liches can rise zombies and skeletons from a dead creature on the spot (only living and humanoid creatures)

Rooms:
Hall of bones -> Attract bone golems, Skeletons promotes to Death Knight, ; once they pass certain level
Hall of flesh-> attract abominations, cultist becomes necromancers
Dark temple-> warlocks becomes liches

Spells: mostly damage dealer and a few curses

Path of Stealth: a balanced mix with invisibility capable units
Cheaper casinos
Gains a small amount of gold constantly
Expert torturers, faster conversion
More traps and defenses than the other paths

Rooms:
Den of thieves: Attracts Cuttroaths, promotes goblins to goblin rogues
Safe-room: Attracts Shadow Knigths, promotes Imp to "Shadow Lord"
Room of horrors: Attracts our OD "Dark Mistress" clone? because we need a sadistic lady ,

Spells: a mix of damage support and curses


All of the above is a possibility, its nothing that i can decide alone, so i would like your input, thanks!

[nido]

Most of this is my opinion which may disagree with previous decisions that are already made. In those cases I would ask you to point it out and your forgiveness for chalenging the decision.


In the original dungeon keeper, the hatchery and lair where among the cheapest of rooms and extra large versions weren't required nor particularly useful. Since most times you only need a room to be a certain size, I also doubt whether the 'cheaper rooms' perk would be particularly useful for any keeper as building rooms would be more or less a fixed investment per game.

I think that as the 'path of war' concentrates more on agression then defence, it should be allowed direct damage spells. Mass Heal, whilst handy with a large agressive force, doesn't really align with the objective of doing damage. A typical 'war keeper' would start out by build the lair hatchery and trainingroom, grab the portal, and dig to his enemies; keeping his creatures in the training room until the enemy has been sighted. The cheaper wages perk is generally more useful in a prolonged scenario and in my opinion, path of war is more about defeating quickly.

To that effect, I propose an increased portal effectiveness over a lower payment rate (to increase the effectiveness of early combat), and perhaps other perks which increases the 'base' effectiveness of a creature (e.g. creatures do x percent more melee damage). With the emphasis on direct confrontation, I think the ultimate spell of the war keeper should be the original dk's armageddon spell, summoning every creature on the board to his heart/temple for an all out final battle.



For the 'path of magic', I feel concentrates on preparation and keeper involvement then the path of war. For reasons mentioned in the path of war, I propose an increaced research rate rather then cheaper libraries. Where the war keeper would rush towards his enemies, the magic keeper would rush along the tech tree and superiour keeper spells available when the war keeper breaks into his dungeon, as well as creatures which, whilst weaker physically, can use magic to ward off groups of enemies effectively.

The modus operandi of of a magic keeper would be to train a group of mages until they are powerful enough to to damage a melee fighter before reaching them, and then send this group out to the enemy, whilst keeping it alive manually should he meet exceptional resistance. In line with the suggestion for the pat of war, i would like to suggest this keepers' creatures get bonuses to their magical powers, so when excluding all other factors, a magic keepers' mage would beat a war keepers mage, and a war keepers' melee creature would beat the one of the magic keeper.


As an idea for the 'ultimate spell' for this keeper (though I am not quite sure myself), I would consider an 'destroy creature' spell, which for a fixed cost unconditionally removes a single reature from the game (including any king units that automagically win you the game).



The 'Path of Stealth', I invision this is the kind of keeper most likely to wall itself in and create an economy for itself, not really caring what the outside world is up to or at least minimising its influence on that economy. In the quest of world domination, this would be the kind of keeper would keep the outside world in chaos whilst slowly growing his territory. This would be the kind of keeper who already considers itself ruler of the world; opposition only exists because they are either useful or entertaining.

He send out a small numbers of invisible creatures and remove them manually if discovered, digging direct routes between
opposing factions and/oro pecking away small unguarded groups and converting them to the cause, trying to take over or destroying your only hatchery or treasury so your creatures desert, rather then direct confrontation; keeping the big superiour force only as backup if someone decides to visit his dungeon instead.

This being the kind of keeper emphasising extended games, I would like to put the lower creature wages perk here rather then the 'constant gold suply', as this would be the primary sink of the comodity anyhow. I would suggest this keepers' creatures get bonuses in their noncombat skills to strengthen the need to avoid confrontation. As for an ultimate spell, I would think this is the kind of keeper more concerned with not losing rather then winning, to this extend i would suggest a 'reset' spell which removes all creatures (except essential 'king' units) and perhaps research, so this keeper can recover from any potential losing scenario, safe from direct confrontation in his well trapped keep.

[Danimal]

You rised some valid points, and since im only speculating, things can be changed; but lets wait and hear what the others have to say.

Anyways i see the path of war as the warlord path; meaning lots of uneducated troops being lead by a total psico, if you also give him powerfull spells he becomes far too overpowered. Thats why i gave them to the magic path, to help them keeping away the attacking hordes. You will think before sending your legion agaisnt a mage if he can electrocute all of them even before reaching him, they need that extra punch to compensate for weak infantry. The stealth path i think you explained quite well.

About the spells, i dont like Insta-win ones and they shouldnt be added, since they tend to be really unfair and game breaking.

[nido]

Anyways i see the path of war as the warlord path; meaning lots of uneducated troops being lead by a total psico,

I agree with your description.

if you also give him powerful spells he becomes far too overpowered.

It is not my intention to give him powerful spells; rather that I would see him wield a direct damage spell as his primary magic; rather then indirect control by affecting the (unedicated, thus unspecialised) troups and enemies. Perhaps as an emphasis on his focus on numbers, he should have the most direct route to convert imps into useful fighters.

Thats why i gave them to the magic path, to help them keeping away the attacking hordes. You will think before sending your legion agaisnt a mage if he can electrocute all of them even before reaching him, they need that extra punch to compensate for weak infantry.

I agree the magic keeper should have the upper hand on keeper spells. My apologies for implying otherwise. I think though that the magic keeper would be the type more inclined to use control spells to incapacitate invadors or reduce their effectiveness then the warlord would. More directly I envision them to have trained defenders which they can magically keep alive, or recycle as corpses. Given the focus on death magic mentioned earlier, attacking, but not directly defeating a magic keeper would be unwise regardless, since they would gain big advantages from the corpses generated.

The stealth path i think you explained quite well.

thank you for your compliment.

[Bertram]

@Danimal: Could you add that somewhere in the wiki, for instance?

[Danimal]

Im not sure about passing to wiki, this is pure especulation. It should be refined further before that.

[nido]

What more information would you need? I would be happy to elaborate on whatever I think, though that may not match with what the rest thinks. Perhaps we can continue discussing this subject whilst some of this will already be posted.


Related, is there an "owner" to this keeper specialisation idea? Unles there is someone else more exprienced with the subject I would like to suggest Danimal becomes this owner.

[Danimal]

Ok, but then i needs differents to nido´s and mine

[Bertram]

@Danimal: What kind of feedback do you need?
As for me, I do think this was well discussed already. And discussion will always stay open, right?

Best regards,

[nido]

As for me, I do think this was well discussed already.

If this is true, a link to the previous discussions would be helpful. We can incorporate these discussions in this thread and keep a this thread as the primary location for information regarding this subject. Alternatively, we could publish the ideas on which we have reached consensus on the website, giving an incentive for people to look on the forum to see what's going on.

And discussion will always stay open, right?

Also true; still it would be benificial to have easy acces to the current consensus, as this would help prevent us to reinvent the wheel every time new forum people arrive. Having the current consensus does not mean one needs to agree with it. Provided good arguments, the current consensus can change. I believe I have demonstrated my ability to disagree with it on numerous occasions.

[Danimal]

Disscussion rigths are the mother of liberty, i like people with different ideas since they bring new ways; Sadly all about the specialization was said over skype, there is no voice record of it, thats the reason i started this topic.
Its just that we are more than three persons in here and i would like to hear more on ideas about new rooms or special creatures. But i guess having this guidelines beat having nothing at all.

[Bertram]

Hi

If this is true, a link to the previous discussions would be helpful.

I was speaking about this very topic and don't know about any others.

If this is true, a link to the previous discussions would be helpful.

I think you can go ahead and add something to the website if you have access. I'm sure Elvano, ReZ, Skorpio and the others will comment if there is something they find unclear/wrong.

Best regards,

[Danimal]

I cant connect to redmine OD project page, am i the only one?

[Elvano]

@Danimal: Sadly the redmine is temporarly down

[Bertram]

@both: Ah? Well, I thought it would be rather wanted to gather the pages in the website. Are we going to use redmine as a wiki?

[nido]

I have no particular opinion on where this should be documented, as long as a single location is used for this purpose.

[Danimal]

Are you guys fine with the monsters i proposed? arent some of them way too "mainstream"? you all can propose others as well, kudos to you if they are strange but cool.

[paul424]

Kudos , if you can provide some new 3d models ...

[Danimal]

i wont work on something that goes unused, so this here topic is very important since it will mark the future modelling

*EDIT* Im also fearing that we wont have enough personality, dk had a lot, their monster were quite unique, war for the overworld also has quite a lot. While the heroes are your generic armorclad bastards, monster are not; any ideas?

[Skorpio]

Ancient Beast has some pretty cool creature concepts which we could use or modify.

[Danimal]

I liked this ones:

Dark priest
Swine thug (so-so)
golden wyrm
Scorpius
swampler
uncle fungus
Miss creeper
Marauder
Magama Spawn
Headless

Who voiced the monster names? we need to recruit him/it

[Danimal]

A lot of those monsters already have some model in more of less a finished form. Dont you guys have a favourite?

[nido]

*EDIT* Im also fearing that we wont have enough personality, dk had a lot, their monster were quite unique, war for the overworld also has quite a lot. While the heroes are your generic armorclad bastards, monster are not; any ideas?

I would like to suggest a separate thread for the discussion of creatures. Though I do agree they do make a lot of the atmosphere, I think we should limit ourselves here to which creatures are keeper-specific. Related to this point, do we have a thread about rooms?


In regards to keeper specialities (do we have a summation of earlier agreements outside this thread?), I think a keeper should be able to work without choosing any specialisation at all; the specialisation should add to a keepers repertoire, but not replace it.

Regarding the original summation, the war keeper has 4 unique creatures, out of three unique rooms.I think perhaps the barracks should be available for anybody and have the same function of the same named room in the original dungeon keeper.

I would suggest we keep the firepits and make this the primary kobolt (imp) to 'warrior' training room. I would also suggest these firelords will be lords mostly in name, I suggest to give them purely spells which affect an area, to which they themselves are not immume. This to keep the maximum effectiveness of the 'free' (not counting time/money you put into it) unlimited size army it produces in check.

Regarding the magic keeper, I think the necromancer and liches have more or less the same function. Also the dark temple is more or less a less powerful hall of flesh assuming creatures are equal, so I would like to suggest to drop the dark temple and perhaps share itis ability in the hall of flesh.

In regards to the stealth (I would like to suggest 'shadow') keeper; I agree we need a "Dark Mistress", but I also think the others should have access to them. In compliance with the other rkeepers having 2 unique rooms in my previous suggestions, I suggest the room of horrors would be dropped as well.

[Danimal]

I would like to suggest a separate thread for the discussion of creatures. Though I do agree they do make a lot of the atmosphere, I think we should limit ourselves here to which creatures are keeper-specific. Related to this point, do we have a thread about rooms?

Agreed; no room topic yet.

In regards to keeper specialities (do we have a summation of earlier agreements outside this thread?), I think a keeper should be able to work without choosing any specialisation at all; the specialisation should add to a keepers repertoire, but not replace it.

I agree as well; no, there is no summary.
I think i gave enougth basic creatures to a basic keeper but you proved me wrong;

I would suggest we keep the firepits and make this the primary kobolt (imp) to 'warrior' training room. I would also suggest these firelords will be lords mostly in name, I suggest to give them purely spells which affect an area, to which they themselves are not immume. This to keep the maximum effectiveness of the 'free' (not counting time/money you put into it) unlimited size army it produces in check.

I actually wanted to introduce the imp as a new creature, a weak warlock-like damage spellcaster and promote him to something like the blood demons of korm from Warhammer 40k.


To summarize:
- Only two special rooms per spec., this rooms will attract each one unique creature and promote a basic creature to advanced versions (2+2 new creatures per spec).
- We need our own version of the Dark Mistress
- We need ideas for weak and strong worshop workers

[nido]

I agree as well; no, there is no summary.
I think i gave enougth basic creatures to a basic keeper but you proved me wrong;

I haven't a good idea about our 'default' creatures save vaguely recalling a list somewhere. I'm not claiming 'we have not enough default creatures' as a fact, but as a concern; apologies for being unclear on that.

I actually wanted to introduce the imp as a new creature, a weak warlock-like damage spellcaster and promote him to something like the blood demons of korm from Warhammer 40k.

Apologies; I thought you meant 'imps' as in the original dungeon keeper, which inadvertently merged with my idea of giving the war keeper the easiest kobolt->warrior transformation.

- Only two special rooms per spec., this rooms will attract each one unique creature and promote a basic creature to advanced versions (2+2 new creatures per spec).

Not commenting on the number of rooms, but this proposes essentially 6 similar rooms, the difference of which is the creatures it attracts/upgrades. I think we might want to have rooms perform unique services. a fairly obvious choice would be to give the magic keeper something like the DK2 dark temple, which allows the keeper to extract mana from the creatures active in said temple. I have no direct idea for the war/stealth keeper though