一、關于后續(xù)魔典限制的討論

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/the-fact-that-you-can-unlock-every-single-tome-ruins-any-uniqueness-that-a-facion-might-have.1589539/

有官方人員答復的部分：

——————————

玩家 rulesred123 說:

　　1. Why is there no limit on the amount of tomes you can unlock. This is pretty much gamebreaking. In the three random games I played, I was unlocking extra tomes that I didn't need and they completely ruined all immersion and roleplay. There should be a hard limit on the number of tomes you can have. I was able to research over 20 tomes in a single game which makes me wonder what was even the point of this system. The max tome limit should be 9 and you should only be allowed to have two tomes from a single tier.

　　為什么沒有限制可以解鎖的魔典數(shù)量，這絕對是對游戲的破壞。在我玩的三場隨機游戲中，我一直忙于解鎖那些我并不需要的額外魔典，這完全破壞了所有的沉浸感和角色扮演。當一場游戲中能夠研究超過20本魔典時，這讓我懷疑這種機制的意義何在。應該對玩家所能擁有的魔典數(shù)量做硬性限制，魔典應該限制T1～T4每級2本，最多9本。

　　2. The fact that you can unlock every single tome ruins any uniqueness that a facion might have

　　玩家可以解鎖所有的魔典，這破壞了讓一個派系擁有獨特性的可能。

官方（Triumph Jordi）答復：

　　1. We had something like that, it wasn't fun and it went against what we try to achieve with Age of Wonders 4. The thing is that the game is balanced around you getting your 9 needed tomes plus 1 or 2 more by Games End. Just everybody and their Grandma is getting knowledge income to the degree that they are unlocking more tomes and much faster than we expected.

　　我們曾做過類似的限制，但這并不有趣，并且這與我們在《奇跡時代4》中試圖實現(xiàn)的目標相悖。實際上，當玩家在每次游戲結束前只獲得9～11本魔典的情況下，游戲是處于平衡狀態(tài)的。只是每個人和他們的奶奶都在快速地獲取知識，解鎖更多的魔典，以至于達到了超出我們預期的程度。

　　2.This is definitely a problem but you also were never meant to actually get that many tomes in a typical game.

　　這絕對是一個問題，不應該允許玩家在一次游戲中獲得那么多魔典。

——————————

玩家 Sadorhael 說:

　　If somebody wants this, make it a possible setting when configuirng a realm, then it can be a player’s choice.

　　能否（把魔典做硬性限制）做成地圖選項讓玩家自選？

官方答復：

　　You can't do something like this. You can't have a game with two different rulesets and ensure a balanced experience for both.

　　不可能，我們沒法做到讓一場游戲有兩個都能達到良好平衡體驗的規(guī)則設置。

——————————

玩家 tcat2437 說：

　　My question, as it was in another thread, is what is more valuable after you research your Tier 5 tome, more research income or gold/mana? Going through the story realms some of my games went long and after obtaining my Tier 5 tome I am generally converting research posts to something else. Anyone else doing the opposite? Why?

　　我的問題在另一個帖子里提過，在研究完T5魔典后那種策略更有價值？研究更多的東西？還是（獲取更多的）金幣或法力？打劇情世界時，有些游戲在我獲得T5魔典后還持續(xù)了很長時間，這時我一般都會把研究站（行?。┺D換為其他類型，有沒有人用相反的策略？為什么？

官方答復：

　　For most people it is more so delaying the later Tomes to grab the earlier once. While we accounted for Enchantment Stacking in the design of Unit Enchantments, when picking quite literally every single one Units tend to be rather strong. That stacking is basically the ultimate goal they're targeting.

　　對大多數(shù)玩家而言，為了獲得前期的魔典而推遲后期魔典的情況更多。我們在設計單位附魔時就考慮到了附魔疊加的問題，每一次附魔都會讓單位變得更強大，這種疊加基本上是他們的終極目標。

——————————

玩家 Mesudaraon 說：

　　What is the difference between designing the game around 10-11ish tomes at the end of the game and actually having a system during scenario creation to limit number of tomes (default value being 11 or 12, but can be set to any number by players)?

　　通過游戲設計來實現(xiàn)讓玩家在游戲結束時大約獲得10～11本魔典，以及通過地圖選項來硬限制魔典數(shù)量（缺省值可以是11或12，玩家可以自定義），這兩者有何區(qū)別？

　　You yourself claimed that players aren't supposed to research that many tomes in a typical game. If players aren't suppose to research that many tomes, then having a system to limit number of tomes is not against your design philosophy, because according to your game vision players should have on average certain number of tomes. This doesn't create two different rulesets to balance, because you'll be balancing the game around players having 10-11 tomes by the endgame anyway regardless. As such, putting a hard limit on this during the scenario creation is not against this philosophy but actually in-line with this design philosophy.

　　根據(jù)你們的說法，你們不支持玩家在一場典型游戲中研究那么多魔典。如果是這樣，根據(jù)你們設想的愿景，玩家擁有魔典的平均數(shù)量是確定在某個數(shù)的，那通過系統(tǒng)來硬限制魔典數(shù)量并不違背你們的設計理念。這并不需要創(chuàng)建兩個不同的規(guī)則設置，因為無論用哪種方法，都是圍繞玩家在游戲結束時大概有10～11本魔典的情況來做平衡設計。因此，在地圖創(chuàng)建選項中增加（魔典數(shù)量）硬限制不但不違背，反而是相當符合這一設計理念的。

官方答復：

　　A hard Tome Limit like that goes against the idea of Player Fantasy. Only allowing X amount of Tomes immediately means that there are builds and fantasies/roleplays that would no longer be possible to achieve.

　　對魔典進行硬限制與玩家幻想背道而馳，只允許特定數(shù)量的魔典意味著有一些夢幻build、角色扮演不再可能實現(xiàn)。

——————————

玩家 Jolly Joker 說：

　　So now Jordi comes in telling us that the game is designed around a limit of tomes anyway. But that means it's designed around Magic Victory then, doesn't it? Which would still leave a lot to desire, if you don't like that way to win the game. After all, there ARE the other VCs.

　　所以現(xiàn)在Jordi告訴我們，無論如何，游戲都是圍繞著魔典限制而設計的。但這意味著它是圍繞魔法勝利設計的，不是嗎？即便你不喜歡以這種方式贏得比賽，這仍然會留下很多想象空間。畢竟，還有其他的勝利方式。

玩家 Leyrann 說：

　　The game is designed at a pace where it ends when you have 10-12 tomes. Whether that's trough magic victory, expansion victory or conquest victory doesn't matter. If expansion victory consistently comes online only once people already have 12-16 tomes unlocked, that just means the tuning is off, and it should require fewer provinces. If conquest victory consistently only happens once people are already at that number of tomes, that means conquering others should be easier, or building a dominant army should be quicker (note: that lever is harder to adjust in a way that does this because by nature both the offensive and defensive player benefit from it).

　　游戲節(jié)奏的設計是，當你擁有10～12本魔典時游戲就會結束，無論是通過魔法勝利、擴張勝利還是征服勝利都是如此。如果擴張勝利總是發(fā)生在玩家解鎖12～16本魔典之后，那就意味著（擴張勝利條件）存在不平衡，達成擴張勝利應該需要更少的行省數(shù)量。如果征服勝利一直只發(fā)生在玩家擁有這個數(shù)量的魔典之后，那就意味著征服難度應該下調一些，或者讓玩家建立優(yōu)勢軍隊的速度變快（注：這個調節(jié)方法更難平衡，因為從本質上講，攻方和守方都從中獲益了）。

　　……

　　By definition, a game is designed for all victory types (excluding, usually, a score victory) to occur at around the same time. If that is not the case in practice, that does not mean the game is designed only around the quickest victory. It just means the balance of the different victories is off.

　　根據(jù)定義，一個游戲被設計為所有的勝利條件都會在差不多的時間內達成（通常不包括得分勝利）。如果實際情況與此不符，并不意味著游戲設計方偏向某種勝利方式，只意味著不同方式的勝利條件還沒有達到平衡狀態(tài)。

　　官方認同上面玩家的說法：This is a pretty solid answer/explanation.? 這是一個非常贊的答復/解釋。

——————————

玩家 Jolly Joker 說：

　　3) Research cost should increase with # of tomes after some time. That makes sense anyway and no matter what.

　　（游戲開始）一段時間之后，研究消耗應該隨著魔典數(shù)量的增加而增加。道理就這樣，沒有為什么。

官方答復：

　　I know people have been experimenting with scaling research costs, but personally I'm not convinced by it. You'll end up with Skills from a T1 Tome that takes as long to research as a T4 Tome Skill while the effect of the Skill is still the same.

　　我知道玩家一直在試驗擴大研究消耗，但我個人認為沒啥用。你最終會發(fā)現(xiàn)，研究多個T1魔典技能與研究1個T4魔典技能花費的時間一樣長，而技能的影響仍然是一樣的。

——————————

玩家 Ita Bear 說：

　　From reading these posts I'm increasingly getting the impression that fantasy 'roleplay' is the #1 focus for this game; strategy and decision making seems to be coming in a distant second. Any and all proposals to limit the absurd combinations in game are shot down with claims it will destroy the roleplaying and fantasy in the game.

　　通過閱讀這些帖子，我越來越感覺到，夢幻的 "角色扮演 "是這個游戲的第一重點；戰(zhàn)略和決策似乎排在了第二位。任何限制游戲中荒謬組合的建議都會被否決，并聲稱這將破壞游戲中的角色扮演和幻想。

官方答復：

　　It's not the #1 but all games have a set of core Game/Design Pillars that they use to test decisions against. You would be correct that the Player Fantasy is one of them, amongst a couple more. Anyways, not all proposals are shot down, they're barely shot down. In most cases I explain why the proposed solution wouldn't work or indeed go against our goals for the game. Just implementing a hard limit or going back to a system we already tested and didn't work would be nothing more than shifting the problem. We need to lock down where the core of the issue lies.

　　它并不是第一位的，但所有游戲都有一組用來測試決策的核心游戲/設計支柱。你說“玩家幻想是其中之一”是正確的，但（除此之外）還有其他的（目標）?？傊?，并不是所有（玩家）的建議都被否決了，它們差一點就被采納了。在大多數(shù)情況下，我都會解釋為什么（玩家）建議的解決方案不起作用，或者確實違背了我們對游戲的設計目標。僅僅加一個硬性限制，或者回退到我們已經測試過確認行不通的方法，那屬于是跑偏了，我們需要鎖定問題的核心所在。

——————————

玩家 Mesudaraon 說：

　　Furthermore, stuff you tested before was tested with small internal testing team, and you guys implemented design decisions which you thought was good according to feedback from internal testing team. However, feedback from small sample size is not very reliable (surely you are aware of this already).

　　此外，你們之前測試的東西是由小型內部測試團隊測試的，你們根據(jù)內部測試團隊的反饋實施了你們認為不錯的設計決策。然而，來自小樣本量的反饋不是很可靠（你肯定已經意識到了這一點）。

官方答復：

　　Well not just the Dev Team but also our Beta Members, who come from various different experiences. We also don't disagree that some things need to change, but the question is how things will be changed.

　?。ㄎ覀儯┎粌H有開發(fā)團隊，還有我們的Beta成員，他們各有不同的經驗。我們并不反對有些事情需要被改變，但問題（重點）是這些事情該如何去改變。

——————————

玩家 Mesudaraon 說：

　　Umm.... Only Jordi's first post talked about why it would be problematic to balance two different rulesets. I already shared my thoughts on this and explained why I think this wouldn't be an issue and he didn't bring this up in his further replies.

　　嗯……Jordi只有第一個回帖談到了為什么平衡兩個不同的規(guī)則設置會有問題。我已經分享了我對此的看法，并解釋了為什么我認為這不是問題，而他在后續(xù)回貼中沒有提到這一點。

官方答復：

　　So I tackled that bit elsewhere. While you can make changes to your game experience, changing Game Speed to slow f.e. still derives from the default balance. Disabling a Victory Conditions doesn't change the rules of the game, only a method of victory. Something like a setting for (Hard) Tome Limit and No Tome Limit changes things quite fundamentally. Tome Skills now need to be balanced while keeping in mind that it needs to work in both scenario's and depending on the ruleset a change can have very different effects.

　　其實我在其他某處提到了這一點。盡管你可以對游戲體驗進行改變，例如把游戲速度改為慢速，但這仍然源自于默認平衡。禁用勝利條件并不改變游戲規(guī)則，只是改變了勝利的方法。但提供“魔典硬限制”和“魔典無限制”兩種設置會從根本上改變事情，這需要對魔典技能進行平衡，需要同時確保一個技能在兩種情況下都能發(fā)揮作用，而且根據(jù)規(guī)則設置的不同，這種改變會產生無法預料的結果。

　　Changing Game Speed or Victory Conditions doesn't fundamentally change how the game is played, while a Tome Limit setting like that would. That's kinda what I meant with it.

　　改變游戲速度或勝利條件并不從根本上改變游戲的玩法，而像“魔典限制”這樣的選項則會，這就是我的意見。

二、飛龍更新補丁相關信息

• （龍之黎明）不是第一個資料片，它只是一個內容包，它圍繞特定主題提供內容。第一個資料片是將于今年晚些時候發(fā)布的《帝國與灰燼》。

• 雖然始終建議在重大更新之前完成游戲，但我們盡量不破壞“已保存的游戲”。我們已經對主游戲中的幾個存檔進行了兼容性測試，這些測試沒有遇到任何問題。游戲創(chuàng)建時，世界基本上被保存了。因此，雖然已經活躍的游戲中不會出現(xiàn)新內容，但這也意味著它是更新證明。只要內部沒有刪除資源，所有存檔（不使用模組）都應該能夠加載。

• 擊殺單位獎勵的靈魂獲得，從1/2/3/4/5 增加到 2/3/4/5/6，基于敵人的等級。因此飛龍更新補丁之后，擊殺1級單位將獎勵2個靈魂。