• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
  • Notice the new look? We've updated to a new version of Xenforo, please read our latest post.

The Chunder and other love/hate monsters. A long term solution

Lex Talionias

Dwarven Worker
Feb 10, 2014
28
5
35
49
#1
So the Chunder is easily one of if not the most loved AND hated creature in the game... what to do about it?

I'm personally in the hate camp on this one, i don't like the creature. its not my style at all. I had the same problem in DK2 with the bile demon, i thought it was a stupid ugly gas bag. However there was the troll that i did like so i simply just booted it whenever it came to my fortress. this brings me to the solution for this creature, just add an alternative workshop creature (or creatures) down the line somewhere. This means if you don't like the Chunder you can simply recruit a different creature for your dungeon and only face the Chunder when your killing it which people whom don't like it should have no problem with.

Though another issue with DK2 was you had to either tediously design your dungeons to have the perfect number of room spaces not to attract excess of a type of creature and dump unwanted ones as soon as they showed up. That level of micro management was just annoying so another feature i would like is to be able to set a limit on how many of each type of creature that can come through. this would make things less fiddly and let me focus on important things like raising undead armies or slaying my foes.


For the record i know dev resources are limited so i dont expect alternatives to the chunder to come out tomorrow or even in the next month... it is a long term suggestion. I would just like to see it down the line, sorry if this has already been suggested or is in bold on some 'planned features' list.
 
Nov 13, 2013
634
257
380
20
#3
For the record here is the augre, I hope you like his face better then chunders :D (hammer arm still work in progress)
 

Lex Talionias

Dwarven Worker
Feb 10, 2014
28
5
35
49
#4
"and other love/hate monsters"

*facepalm* but i do admit I forgot all about the augre somehow. The main point being that there should be other monsters for every role, not just 1. its more fun and varied that way. Also a way to stop chunders even entering would be nice too.
 

AvatarIII

Huntress
Founder
Apr 20, 2012
1,713
758
570
32
Worthing, West Sussex
#5
well, the way to stop Chunders entering your dungeon, is to not build a Foundry, and then don't build one until after you have already built a Garrison, so you should get Augres instead at that point.
 

Mozared

Juggernaut
Founder
Feb 17, 2013
1,132
836
520
28
#6
well, the way to stop Chunders entering your dungeon, is to not build a Foundry, and then don't build one until after you have already built a Garrison, so you should get Augres instead at that point.
I'm pretty sure it won't work this way. Best case scenario you'd get your Chunders very late, but I am not even sure if all units are on the same timer (they might each be on their own).
 

AvatarIII

Huntress
Founder
Apr 20, 2012
1,713
758
570
32
Worthing, West Sussex
#7
I'm pretty sure it won't work this way. Best case scenario you'd get your Chunders very late, but I am not even sure if all units are on the same timer (they might each be on their own).
you would certainly get a lot less Chunders, but I wouldn't mind if you simply stopped getting Chunders as soon as you are able to get Augres. they both fulfil the same job, and similar functions in combat. perhaps they should be counted together in the same "pool" for spawning calculations so that you can at least throw away Chunders to encourage more Augres to spawn.
 

Mozared

Juggernaut
Founder
Feb 17, 2013
1,132
836
520
28
#8
you would certainly get a lot less Chunders, but I wouldn't mind if you simply stopped getting Chunders as soon as you are able to get Augres. they both fulfil the same job, and similar functions in combat. perhaps they should be counted together in the same "pool" for spawning calculations so that you can at least throw away Chunders to encourage more Augres to spawn.
I'm not sure why people keep assuming the game was designed with the idea in mind that creatures are completely replaceable. While it's not like your entire army will fall apart if you throw away your Chunders when you have Augres, this doesn't mean they're expendable and can be discarded without any real loss. An ideal army simply has units of all types, it's that simple. If you hate Chunders so incredibly much that you absolutely don't want any of them in your dungeon ever you should be penalized for missing out on a specific tactic. I also honestly don't mind that players would have to go through the micro of tossing them away. These kinds of decisions have no place in any kind of competitive play, PvP or PvE.

If you want to make them in non-competitive play, then there is no issue to begin with: you'll have mutators and the My Little Dungeon map to completely adjust the game to your wants.
 
Likes: mishko

AvatarIII

Huntress
Founder
Apr 20, 2012
1,713
758
570
32
Worthing, West Sussex
#9
Like you said, your army will be worse without Chunders, but as the foundry is one of the only rooms that has more than one unit that works it, and they are the worst at it, they are more expendable than pretty much any other unit. I myself have nothing against Chunders, I am merely trying to placate those that do.
 

Fireeye

Augre
Backer
Dec 30, 2012
1,155
687
515
Ze Germany
#10
I second what AvatarIII and Mozared said. Not using the Chunder at all simply is plainly absurd, especially when considering the enormous disadvantage you put yourself in just for pleasing your eye.
 

Evi

Witch Doctor
Backer
Nov 14, 2011
665
372
445
25
#11
Wasn't the thing of WftO for each creature to have a use, a purpose so there won't be any useless minions?
Make the Chunder the best Forger and the Augre the worst to balance out their combat prowess. :3
 

Noontide

Award Winning Community Manager
Dev Team
Dec 8, 2012
2,095
1,759
700
Brighton, UK
#12
You could always stick your Foundry in the most remote section of the Dungeon with a small lair and slaughterpen, lock them in and leave them to it. Ignoring their existence while still producing defense parts for you. ;)

Personally, I like the chunder, seeing them brightens by day and makes me smile.
 

Noontide

Award Winning Community Manager
Dev Team
Dec 8, 2012
2,095
1,759
700
Brighton, UK
#13
Wasn't the thing of WftO for each creature to have a use, a purpose so there won't be any useless minions?
Make the Chunder the best Forger and the Augre the worst to balance out their combat prowess. :3
I believe that at this moment all units working in a room contribute equally to that room. With that said Augres have other jobs to fulfill and are more tanky than Chunders, meaning they will leave their post in the Foundry to fulfill their Garrison duties and Underlords may wish to train them more than their Chunders if they're going for tanky while still making defences.

So on one level Chunders are better than Augres for the Foundry as it is their only job.
 
Likes: Evi

v0id

Programmer
Dev Team
Nov 18, 2011
2,428
1,008
580
Germany
#14
From the stats I can look into and from what i know about the system:
- building no Foundry assures that no chunders will come
- you could build a larger Garrison first and a smaller foundry later and smoothly extend always the garrison with the double size first before you extend the foundry half size
- in addition you could always only have as many Lairs and Slaughterpens as needed (currently the Chunder weights them more important than the Augre which might be even just an user input fail ^^)
In this case its at least very unlikely to get many Chunders and Augres would be much more prefered ;)
However you should not learn how to do it, because we are likely changing it often till release.
Only after the belancing is pretty much done, it makes sense to figure a good way to get a specific unit (or not)
But a rule of thumb: the more free workslots in the main working room of a unit type are available and the less of the same type is already present, the more likely it is that the creature will come into your dungeon, on the other hand no unit would come without finding a free slot in the rooms it requires

PS.: I like personally the chunder because he's so funny to watch.
 

mishko

Witch Doctor
Founder
Feb 27, 2012
866
238
440
24
Michigan
#15
I think its obvious the Augres are going to be more efficient in the workshop because 1.) they are late game and 2.) in the lore they are the the most skilled smiths from what i understand.
 
Sep 8, 2013
27
6
145
29
Parts Unknown
#16
I do think it's excessive to just complain that "serious play has no place for sentiments" and "You have to use the right strategy to win". Games are not puzzles. Some overlap does exist but- good game design avoids puzzles as much as possible. If I just wanted a puzzle game I'd play chess.

So, what am I suggesting?

A mutually exclusive strategy to the use of chunders, besides just avoiding them by 90 degrees through going down wrath or whatever.
The strategy doesn't need to be flamboyant. Rather, it shouldn't be flamboyant.

In any case, the game already has creature sacrifice in its designs. So, given that you're going to sacrifice creatures, there should be advantages to sacrificing only one type of creature. Of course the reverse should also have advantages. IE creatures should have some degree of rock, paper, scissors relationships.
 

Mozared

Juggernaut
Founder
Feb 17, 2013
1,132
836
520
28
#17
I do think it's excessive to just complain that "serious play has no place for sentiments" and "You have to use the right strategy to win". Games are not puzzles. Some overlap does exist but- good game design avoids puzzles as much as possible. If I just wanted a puzzle game I'd play chess.

So, what am I suggesting?

A mutually exclusive strategy to the use of chunders, besides just avoiding them by 90 degrees through going down wrath or whatever.
The strategy doesn't need to be flamboyant. Rather, it shouldn't be flamboyant.
Oh, but I'm not saying that every strategy requires Chunders. They are simply pretty much required to do virtually anything in the early-game with a Foundry, or (as an indirect result of this) as a heavy Sloth player. If you want to play without using Defences and by never building a Foundry (and instead put all your points into, for example, Potions), you should be able to do this just fine. I'm simply saying that you can't play a strategy that normally uses Chunders without ever actually getting Chunders and still be competitive, and that I'm perfectly fine with that. This by no means indicates that players are forced to use Chunders in every situation - playing without a Foundry should be a very viable strategy. It's just that a player should always want to have them in order to form the most effective army composition.
 
Sep 8, 2013
27
6
145
29
Parts Unknown
#18
The issue of note is- the foundry is basically the core of sloth. Obviously I can avoid chunders by not using foundries. I can also avoid Zerglings by playing Protoss.

However, I can also avoid Zerglings by ramping resource production, and praying the enemy doesn't notice that I'm practically an empty shell militarily, until I get out Mutalisks.

Rather than winning without a foundry, it should be viable to go up sloth and neutral, ignoring the foundry in the early game, taking defensive spells and resource boosts, and then rely on Augres to man the forge later in.

I think development is pushing too hard towards a parasitic instead of open environment.

To give better definitions-
Magic is open. WoW is parasitic.

Parasitic isn't technically bad design. Most MMOs, most sports, etc... tend to rely on putting players into "lanes" wherein victory and defeat depends on execution. This makes balance a lot easier, and insures players will improve with practice. But it diminishes abstract gameplay.
 
Likes: James

Mozared

Juggernaut
Founder
Feb 17, 2013
1,132
836
520
28
#19
The issue of note is- the foundry is basically the core of sloth. Obviously I can avoid chunders by not using foundries. I can also avoid Zerglings by playing Protoss.

However, I can also avoid Zerglings by ramping resource production, and praying the enemy doesn't notice that I'm practically an empty shell militarily, until I get out Mutalisks.

Rather than winning without a foundry, it should be viable to go up sloth and neutral, ignoring the foundry in the early game, taking defensive spells and resource boosts, and then rely on Augres to man the forge later in.

I think development is pushing too hard towards a parasitic instead of open environment.

To give better definitions-
Magic is open. WoW is parasitic.

Parasitic isn't technically bad design. Most MMOs, most sports, etc... tend to rely on putting players into "lanes" wherein victory and defeat depends on execution. This makes balance a lot easier, and insures players will improve with practice. But it diminishes abstract gameplay.
It's funny you're saying this, we've been having some discussions about that within the Q&A team as well lately. I've dubbed these 'design choices' as "broad" or "narrow" tech tries, but they're essentially the same as what you're talking about. I completely agree on everything, but I think WFTO is currently actually doing the opposite: pushing WAY too hard into an open environment. Right now, it is very possible to go Sloth without Defences. The downside is that this means your path is completely carved out - since there are only 2 Sloth perks per tier and 1 one of those is a Defence on the majority of the tiers (there are currently 2 exception tiers), you'll end up simply grabbing "what isn't the trap" in every separate tier.
 

mishko

Witch Doctor
Founder
Feb 27, 2012
866
238
440
24
Michigan
#20
Games are not puzzles. Some overlap does exist but- good game design avoids puzzles as much as possible. If I just wanted a puzzle game I'd play chess.
One thing that Chess and RTS games have in common.... is that they involve strategy. I don't understand how good design is the equivalent to avoiding puzzles in games.
 
Top Bottom