Skip navigation

a few complaints.

Forum NavigationHome > Forum Index > Hegemony > a few complaints.
Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: True neutral
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 1:09 am

Don't get me wrong, this is a great game and I can easily see how this can become an epic franchise on pair with Total War or Civilization, but after playing a while I have come across a few things that can be game breaking.

One of the things that me and apparently many other people find annoying is that units just stand there while they're being fired upon by ranged units, and the same goes for garrisons in un-walled cities just standing there while their cities are being taken by a single unit of pelltists. The game could also probably benefit from diplomacy and AI that is just as aggressive towards each other as they are the player.

But two things that I find annoying that I haven't heard other players complain about yet is the group pathfinding and too many generic cities.

what I mean about the group pathfinding being bad is that whenever I try to tell a large group too cross the bridge or a narrow Pass they stopped right in front of it and then commence spend months lining up 2 x 2 across the length of Greece, and only then do they actually cross the bridge 2 x 2. I actually find myself yelling at the computer that it's a f-ing BRIDGE not f-ing Noah's Ark LOL! I can fix this by simply selecting each individual unit and placing them on the other side of the Bridge, but this can get extremely tedious with bigger stacks. This one thing is actually a major game breaker for me because it makes moving my armies or supplies extremely tiresome.

The other thing is that I feel that there are too many generic city is cluttering the map. It just seems like there are too many cities that just seem like there are too many cities that just have almost no real strategic or economic value cluttering the map. For example, on the three finger peninsulas off the Peninsula just east of Pella are two cities on each peninsula that are completely unnecessary. The same thing goes for the two Athenian cities just east of Amphipolis which should really should be one province. These cities and a couple others just seem like a waste of time and resources to capture because they have no strategic or economic value. a good idea that might fix this is to get rid of these cities and had some sort of new town building on the map that gives you population points and a small amount of food and gold and can be captured by moving a unit into them or capturing their adjacent city.

although this is a good game I feel that it has way too much micromanagement and while I like some micromanagement sometimes it can get really tedious but fixing these things should fix that.

Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: Chaotic good
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 1:21 am

First of all, when your not using the pause button when something is red on the map then go everything threw and then unpause nobody can help you. ;) If you would do this than you wouldn't have too much problems with your units not charging after ranged units.

I think there should probably be a guard button included on which units wouldn't move regardless if they are attacked by archers or not and normally they should chase them down. That would probably be the best solution

As for your city complaint, well these cities have been there at the time you can't just take them out =] This is not an imaginary game with trolls and orks where you can put cities where you want :P

Also when you cross narrow paths with groups of armies try to have their final distination setup in a place where NO unit is marked "red". This will cause huge problems to their pathfinding because they don't want to go where they can't really stand in the first place so they will just stay where they are ^^
This seemed to help me alot.

Level 8 Human gamer
Alignment: True neutral
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 5:21 am

The game could also probably benefit from diplomacy and AI that is just as aggressive towards each other as they are the player.


I dont really agree with that. I fear diplomacy will make things too easy if you can negotiate peace treatys.
And when the ai is agressive against each other, like against the player, I think that the game will become much easier for the player too.

Of course your suggestions will make the game more realistic. But will it enhance the game expirience?

Diplomacy should be real tough. For example giving one or more Citys back to the ai for getting peace for one year or paying much tribute.
But I can pay easily 1000 Gold tribute to Athen and it will be much cheaper than my fleet.

Level 8 Human Student
Alignment: Chaotic
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 7:41 am

I disagree about the number of cities. Greece was a pretty rugged place and many towns didn't have a great deal of economic value, instead relying upon (usually) maritime trade; Athens itself had to ship grain from the Black Sea. As for towns which have little strategic value - every town has value in the game because it increases your population points, and are simply too dangerous to be left unconquered, unless you like dealing with raids.

For me the number of towns adds welcome historical flavour.

Pathfinding isn't great but I can live with it - I usually move my units individually anyway. I agree about the lack of response to ranged attack (though I'm getting better at the micromanagement) and I've taken to simply stationing garrisons outside my unwalled towns to avoid instant capture.

It's a great game though, with masses of potential.

Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: True neutral
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 3:16 pm

well, what I mean about the cities is that some places just seem to be overcrowded with small cities that could probably being something else. from my knowledge of military tactics most commanders would take out the most important military, strategic and economically important cities and Expect most the smaller settlements to follow. What I was thinking about was replacing some of those cities with some sort of town building that works sort of like a farm or mine. These towns could give you population points and maybe a little bit of food or gold and could be captured just like any other building on the map. I also think that they should have maybe one or two market and Port nods so they could take the place of many cities on small islands, which shouldn't really need very much force to take anyways. it also might be a good idea to increase the amount of food, Gold and population the cities can produce and hold to balance it out.

The game could also probably benefit from diplomacy and AI that is just as aggressive towards each other as they are the player.


I dont really agree with that. I fear diplomacy will make things too easy if you can negotiate peace treatys.
And when the ai is agressive against each other, like against the player, I think that the game will become much easier for the player too.

Of course your suggestions will make the game more realistic. But will it enhance the game expirience?


Many strategy games have diplomacy and as a result can be very immersive, with different factions making alliances against the player and against each other and some factions rising, and others collapsing. And I agree with you that diplomacy should be hard and expensive in this game. Depending on the faction's hostility towards you and how much you have been fighting them, getting a peace treaty could be either very easy and cheap or very hard and expensive; and you probably wouldn't be able to afford to have a peace treaty or an alliance with more than three or four factions at once.

Except for a few little problems and oversights that is still a very good game with a lot of potential.

Level 8 Human Tyrant
Alignment: Chaotic good
Location: UK
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 3:43 pm

Thing is about diplomacy is that, for better or(and) worse, this game isn't a historical sandbox. At first I was shocked at diplomacy's omission, but then I had an image of what this game would be. Having played a bit and discovered that the game was not like I had preconceived I realise that diplomacy really isn't necessary!
So far, garrisons in walled-border cities have sufficed for me. Several states don't even seem to bother me without provocation, so far Epirus and Thessaly have yet to do anything sinister and the Chalcideans did naught - my campaign has begun against them however :)

As for the number of cities, I see your point. Historically, Philip beat the Allied Greeks at Chaeronea and the Corinthian League submitted accordingly. I assume in this game things aren't so easy :P
But I have always been fascinated by the city state culture and I like the number of cities, brings the Greek/Hellenic world to life a bit more. More so than Rome: TW did anyway! Eep, might have to dig Spartan out for a go :)

Level 13 Extraplanar Programmer
Alignment: Chaotic good
Location: Toronto
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 5:26 pm

Thanks for your very constructive criticism. As has been mentioned, those cities were placed for historical accuracy, but I can see how it would work in a future game with settlements being more loosely defined, rather than the discrete objects that they currently are, and we definitely want to improve the way groups work at some point. Diplomacy is almost certainly something we'll add to Hegemony eventually. We could really keep working on Hegemony forever, but at some point we had to draw a line and say "This is how the game will ship".

Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: Chaotic good
Posted on June 2, 2010 at 7:20 pm

Thanks for your very constructive criticism. As has been mentioned, those cities were placed for historical accuracy, but I can see how it would work in a future game with settlements being more loosely defined, rather than the discrete objects that they currently are, and we definitely want to improve the way groups work at some point. Diplomacy is almost certainly something we'll add to Hegemony eventually. We could really keep working on Hegemony forever, but at some point we had to draw a line and say "This is how the game will ship".

I don't see any problems in the number of cities... my biggest complaint in empire total war was the lack of cities (france beeing 1 city + strassburg it was really easy to deafeat france lol...)
Please don't take away from the lively world you created. =)

Please when you add diplomacy (no doubt you will ;) ) please stick to your system and make it really expensive to pay others off. I think the game would get very easy if your able to pay off 4factions at a time.
Also great to hear that you're going to give the grouping system more love ( I honestly think you could improve the grouping system alongside with the much anticipated ability to charge after troops when attacked)
Oftentimes the problem with grouping is that one unit or 2 may be involved in fighting while the others just stand and watch instead of helping out. This makes you having to issue every single unit to attack. As it is until now I only use the grouping system as means of movement and when I encounter the enemy army I will destroy the group to fight.

Level 8 Human gamer
Alignment: True neutral
Location: Ireland
Posted on June 3, 2010 at 5:23 pm

Great game! Only had it a day and I think I'm addicted.

Have to agree with nrm19 on all his issues. The game needs a little tweaking.

Glad to hear diplomacy is on your to-do list and thanks for making this game. I've already lost a day of my life to it!

edit: all issues except the 'too many generic cities' one. Not really an issue for me. The sheer quantity of cities is one of my favourite attributes in the game. Anyway, enough rambling!

Level 8 Human Student
Alignment: Chaotic
Posted on June 3, 2010 at 7:18 pm

As regards to grouping of units, it might be more user friendly to have a button which instantly disbands a control group into individual units. Currently it can get a bit tiresome to have to double click to select individual units when they've all become mixed up in a battle.

A better idea might be for a double-click on the unit portrait when a group is selected to select that one unit only. I like to detach my cavalry from groups when they get into battle, seeing as they are somewhat vulnerable in melee, and the current system can mean I have to pixel hunt in order to select them and get them out of there.

Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: True neutral
Posted on June 3, 2010 at 9:06 pm

After playing a little bit more and getting more used to the controls I am actually starting to see what other people mean by the amount of cities adding more depth to the game(:. I guess I'm probably just a little bit too used turn-based strategy games like Rome total war where one city controlled a large province.

Also, I agree with the above poster that a un-group button would be very useful (:

Level 9 Human gamer
Alignment: Chaotic good
Posted on June 4, 2010 at 1:40 am

After playing a little bit more and getting more used to the controls I am actually starting to see what other people mean by the amount of cities adding more depth to the game(:. I guess I'm probably just a little bit too used turn-based strategy games like Rome total war where one city controlled a large province.

Also, I agree with the above poster that a un-group button would be very useful (:

Thats nice to hear =] I knew nobody could hate the city layout xD

Yeah adding an ungroup button is a good idea! (also i really agree with your point of troops leaving a unwalled city before it gets captured. I got a city with my companion cavalry + a phalangite brigade in it captured by one peltast unit only because I didn't pay attention for a moment in the heat of battle at 3 fronts hehe If they would have left the city they wouldn't have died xD - but its really kinda minor and doesn't happen if you pay enough attention and use pause and the minimap alot)

Level 13 Extraplanar Programmer
Alignment: Chaotic good
Location: Toronto
Posted on June 9, 2010 at 2:16 am

A better idea might be for a double-click on the unit portrait when a group is selected to select that one unit only. I like to detach my cavalry from groups when they get into battle, seeing as they are somewhat vulnerable in melee, and the current system can mean I have to pixel hunt in order to select them and get them out of there.
Actually, you can just single-click on their portrait.