Funded! This project was successfully funded on March 8, 2013.

Update #12

To Battle!

While At the Gates is an empire builder at heart, there's no denying that late antiquity was a time when you were far more likely to die by the sword than resting peacefully in your bed. Appropriately, combat has a large role to play, and getting it right has been a major design focus for me.

The analogy I like to use to describe warfare in AtG is a well-developed game of chess, where each side is waiting for the other to provide an opening, and once this occurs the match is resolved fairly quickly.

So how is this accomplished in our game? Supply.


Wherefore Supply?

You can have the largest, most advanced army the world has ever seen, but it means nothing if they're starving and their morale has broken. Supply is something I've touched on it a bit in previous articles, but today we'll go into the nuts and bolts of how it works.

The first question is obvious: why did I even bother with supply at all?

One of the main reasons was that I really want play up the evolving map in any way possible. AtG's very first feature was the seasons, and I knew I needed to find a way to tie combat into it somehow. Attack and defense bonuses are nice, but their overall strategic impact is limited.

Another factor that pointed me towards supply was history. The weather had a huge impact on the way wars were actually fought during this era. When your goal is a fun game mechanics always have to win out over realism, but an important secondary objective is to deliver a particular feeling. The closer you can get to hitting player expectations the more satisfying their experience. You might be able to create a fun strategy title about the fall of Rome where you're running around in tanks, but it's probably not what most folks are looking for!

Another bonus supply provides is an easy way to deter "uberstacks." If all you have to do to be successful in battle is amass the biggest pile of units, then there's not much strategy to consider.

As more units are stationed on a tile, the amount of supply available to all of them drops. This represents the limited resources available on a plot of land, coupled with the logistical challenges of keeping a massive number of soldiers fed. A larger army is still be better in many cases, but managing it will require a bit more planning than is the case in most 4X games.

So how does the system actually work?

Every unit needs at least 3 supply in order to remain at full strength. This can come either directly from the tile or from nearby supply "nodes." Settlements provide 2 extra supply to all nearby tiles. Supply camps do the same when within range of a settlement, or when chained to one through other supply camps.

The base amount of supply provided by tiles varies based on their terrain. Fertile tiles produce quite a bit, while snow, unsurprisingly, produces zero. Terrain obviously changes with the seasons, so planning ahead is critical - attacking in the middle of winter is very difficult unless you have a strong supply network. On the flip side, depending on where you're fighting it might be possible to campaign in the summer without any external assistance.



The Effects of Supply

In my first design, when units lacked enough they would start taking damage. This was no small penalty since damage can only be healed in a settlement, and once weakened you can often find yourself entering downward spiral.

After some initial playtesting I found this to be too brutal, particularly when it came to map exploration. You were walking on eggshells from turn 1 because a single wrong step by your scout could very easily lead to his death. I was too excited by the strategic implications of being unable to heal while out in the field, so rather than neuter this effect I knew I had to find another solution.

The answer I came up with was "provisions," which basically act as a supply buffer. Any supply deficiency first comes out of a unit's provisions stockpile, and once that hits zero you then start to take damage. This provides a bit of leeway in order to make a gambit, or simply to continue exploring during the winter.

A unit's provisions are restocked when it has access to more supply than it needs, or after pillaging a settlement or farm. This opens up some interesting possibilities, as players can pillage a farm they really want (or even own!) in order to keep their army in the field. These are the sorts of trade-offs that make strategy games great!

The addition of provisions helped soften the harshness of the system dramatically, but the huge difference between the amount of supply available in the summer and winter was still hard to balance. An easy solution would be to make the difference smaller, but this is a fine line to walk, as if they were too close then the system loses its teeth, and thus its entire purpose.

The answer I came up with was giving units the ability to "encamp," which gives them a small supply boost. The drawback of doing this is that exiting the state costs a full turn, making it extremely risky when battle is likely. Once again, the goal is to reward planning, and encamping offers a new "knob" that clever players can take advantage of - without watering down the desired harshness of supply.

Another supply-related mechanic I added was the ability to besiege cities. This allows a prepared attacker to slowly reduce the amount of supply available in a city tile. However, if the city is on the coast a siege is only possible if you have a ship next to it. I wanted to simulate the ability for cities to be supplied by sea, which is one of the main reasons why Constantinople avoided capture for so many centuries.




Alright, that's a lot of talk about supply - how do the battles themselves actually play out?

In my first design, combat resolution used to be fairly straightforward. Defenders would get a small bonus from the terrain, there would be a random factor and each side would do a bit of damage to the other. I wasn't really happy with this though, as it was too simple and lacked interesting decisions. Do you have the advantage? If yes: attack. If no: delay until you do. Hmmm - I think we can do better!

I wanted there to be something important to consider when choosing whether or not to give battle. I brainstormed new possibilities, drawing on history and other games. And what did I come up with? Morale.

Each unit has a morale meter in addition to a health meter. As with health, the lower a unit's morale the less effective it is in battle. Unlike health, morale regenerates automatically. This gives players the option of pushing their luck and trying to continue fighting with low morale, or withdrawing temporarily and building it back up for a turn or two.

That's a lot of fun, but where morale really shines is with the resolution of combat.

In a battle, attackers loses a small amount of morale but a large amount of health, with the reverse being the case for defenders. If a unit's morale hits 0, it is routed and retreats to a nearby tile, taking a large amount of damage in the process.

This gives attackers a strong incentive to roll the dice, go all-in and try to punch through when they think they can. If successful, the defenders will be decimated and knocked out of position - but should this gambit fail, the attacker's much greater loss of health will often prove crippling. AtG is very much not a game of stalemates and slow, methodical advances!

That's a pretty good summary of how the supply and combat systems work, but I haven't yet touched on the units themselves yet. Let's remedy that!




A question I've received a few times is how many unit types AtG will feature, and how the list compares with other 4X games.

Given how early we are in development I can't provide a detailed list yet, but what I can say is that our focus with the units is to make each one distinct and interesting. Upgrading your spearman into a pikeman in Civ is satisfying, but doesn't really provide a lot of bang for your gameplay buck - after all, they're basically the same unit with slightly different stats.

In AtG, every unit has its own role. Infantry are the basic line soldier, light cavalry are best at cutting off and protecting supply, heavy cavalry are an expensive rapid response to major threats, scouts do... exactly what you would expect.

Some players will miss the gradual upgrades, and following individual units over the course of a game, but as with the rest of AtG our focus is on high-level strategy over low-level tactics. If AtG is successful there's always the possibility we flesh out this corner of the game down the road, but we have to first make sure the big questions are answered!

Combat is one of the best examples of how we're really trying to bring something new to the table. I'm sure there will be some bumps along the way, but I'm confident the end result will be a strong and fresh new take on on this venerable stalwart!

- Jon


If you’d like to discuss this topic further (or anything else related to AtG!) be sure to stop by the official Conifer Games forums, and become a member of our growing community!


    1. Airport_2012_-_220_-_kickstarter.small

      Creator Jon Shafer on March 2, 2013

      @S.W. Leefers:

      I'm a big fan of the Paradox games as well, and you're correct in pointing out that they take a very different approach. I think their titles tend to scratch a completely different itch, and in many ways are more "story" games than "strategy" games.

      I've been playing the hell out of Spelunky (roguelike platformer, in case you haven't heard of it), and THAT game is NOTHING like the ones I've made. It breaks many of the "rules" for good game design that I've learned over the years, and yet it's still able to be incredibly fun. It feels like there's a whole other universe of game design out there that I have yet to explore. One thing I'm sure of though is that trying to mix the two does not end well! :)

      - Jon

    2. Cerberus60x60.small

      Creator S.W. Leefers on March 2, 2013

      @Jon Good point about realism v. fun. That is one thing I always liked in Civ, the way fun was clearly put before realism. I do like the EU series too, even though they mostly take the opposite approach. Odd. But it makes sense to take At the Gates more into the direction of Civ. I agree that having supply modifying morale would probably not be fun, too many similar stats.

      The only thing is that lesser realism may sometimes be counter-intuitve; I'm thinking perhaps losing morale after a victory is a bit iffy. A different term could be chosen, such as "weariness" or "endurance", or whatever. But perhaps it doesn't matter.

    3. Airport_2012_-_220_-_kickstarter.small

      Creator Jon Shafer on February 28, 2013

      @S.W. Leefers:

      Morale and health are lost at the end of a single battle between armies.

      We very well might add more modifiers to morale, but they have to make sense with the design, and determining that takes time. Tying morale to supply is something I've thought about, but I decided to keep the system fairly clean for now, so that you always know what factors in. If you attach to many inputs then it becomes hard to keep track of what's going on.

      You have to be careful, because taking the approach of attaching morale to things simply because that's how it was in history can often lead you down paths which make the game less fun! You might reward behavior you actually don't intend to.

      - Jon

    4. Airport_2012_-_220_-_kickstarter.small

      Creator Jon Shafer on February 28, 2013


      That's our goal at least! The focus really is on tying combat into the map though, so it doesn't include a lot of fiddly mechanics. Supply is merely a means to an end. I'm sure the design will change as we continue playtesting, but I'm confident the base concept is sound.

      - Jon

    5. Airport_2012_-_220_-_kickstarter.small

      Creator Jon Shafer on February 28, 2013

      @Joshua Johnson:

      I hear ya. Some of my favorite gaming moments are multiplayer. But it has a limited audience with TBS games and we have to make sure we nail the core experience. I can't promise anything, but if AtG does really well there's a very good chance we'll do MP for the next game.

      - Jon

    6. Cerberus60x60.small

      Creator S.W. Leefers on February 27, 2013

      A very interesting update, as ever! The supply system sounds good. I have a few questions about morale, though.

      You wrote: "In a battle, attackers loses a small amount of morale but a large amount of health, with the reverse being the case for defenders." — Does this mean during a single battle? Or at the end of each battle? I would expect victory to be a huge boost to morale as in reality!"

      Would it be an idea to have morale return to a base level with time, but with events that can push it higher or lower? A unit would start out with 0 morale and a base level of 0. If it is at -4 morale at a certain time, it will take 4 turns to regenerate to 0; if it is at +4, it will drop to 0 in 4 turns if nothing else happens. The unit would be routed and flee if morale fell to, say, -5, taking lots of damage.

      In this system, a victory could add +1 to morale temporarily, a defeat -1. Some extra cash might be used to boost morale temporarily too.

      If the general population is unhappy, this could make the base level for all units -1, for example, so that they would slowly return to -1 from whatever level they were at (instead of towards 0). Being with a strong leader could boost the base level by +1. I would expect poor supplies and near-death to have a negative effect on morale: troops hate fighting badly wounded and on snow. They could lower the base level until the unit is healed or supplies are provided.

    7. Missing_small

      Creator Michal on February 27, 2013

      Indeed, that update really shows that game would well fit into multiplayer. I hope that after vanilla version, there will be possibility to add that feature:)

    8. Missing_small

      Creator saluk on February 27, 2013

      Great update as usual. You do really well at putting us in the designers chair.

    9. Tinydan.small

      Creator alcaray on February 27, 2013

      So many games have supply rules that are typically turned off by the player. I hope your supply rules will make the game more fun to play, unlike so many that are out there.

    10. Unnamed.small

      Creator Joshua Johnson on February 27, 2013

      I'm really loving how in depth this is. The fact that you can't just spam tons of military units and expect to steamroll anyone who hasn't do that as quickly as you is really cool.

      I'm really sad this game isn't getting multiplayer. I would have a blast fighting it out with friends :(

pledged of $40,000 goal
seconds to go
  • Pledge $1 or more
    You selected

    95 backers

                        ● Our sincere appreciation for your support, along with a digital hug... act now, while supplies last!                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $10 or more
    You selected

    15 backers

                        ● An exclusive “Sponsor” badge to be displayed next to your name on our official forums showing off your generous support of ‘At the Gates’, upon request.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $25 or more
    You selected

    1562 backers

                        ● A digital copy of 'At the Gates', five dollars off the planned release price.                     ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $30 or more
    You selected

    837 backers

                        ● A digital version of our 100+ page manual/strategy guide, including designer notes (to go with your digital copy of 'At the Gates'.                               ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $50 or more
    You selected

    219 backers

                        ● An invitation to the 'At the Gates' private BETA testing group. Starting January of 2014 (approximately), you will receive beta builds of the game through the Internet and be granted access into our private testing forum.                     ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $80 or more
    You selected

    157 backers

                        ● An invitation to the 'At the Gates' private ALPHA testing group. Starting July of 2013 (approximately), you will receive alpha builds of the game through the Internet and be granted access into our private testing forum.                     ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $125 or more
    You selected

    70 backers

                        ● Full access to the 'At the Gates' design documents in Google Drive.                     ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $200 or more
    You selected

    19 backers Limited (131 left of 150)

                        ● A autographed boxed copy of 'At the Gates' ONLY available by contributing to our Kickstarter campaign. Also contains a 100+ page manual/strategy guide with designer notes. *See “Reward Tier Details” below.                           ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
    Add $15 USD to ship outside the US
  • Pledge $250 or more
    You selected

    13 backers

                        ● Name one mountain range AND river AND lake which will be added to the ‘At the Gates’ random map generator. *See "Reward Tier Details" below.                       ● Your name or online handle will be added to the special thanks section of the credits, upon request.                           ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $500 or more
    You selected

    3 backers

                        ● Name a CITY belonging to one of the barbarian factions, which will be added to the 'At the Gates' name generator. *See “Reward Tier Details” below.                        ● An invitation to an exclusive Skype chat Q&A session with the development team. One session is scheduled for a weekend in April 2013 and a second for a weekend in May 2013. Should you be unable to attend either you'll instead have the opportunity ask questions via email.                     ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $750 or more
    You selected

    0 backers

                        ● An invitation to the 'At the Gates' release party and the opportunity to hang out with the development team. All travel arrangements are the responsibility of the backer.                           ● Name one SEA, which will be added to the random map generator. *See "Reward Tier Details" below.                           ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $1,000 or more
    You selected

    0 backers Limited (10 left of 10)

                        ● The development team will write a 1000+ word article on a game design topic of your choice, to be posted on on the official 'At the Gates' website and Jon Shafer’s design blog. Your name will be credited as the inspiration for the article, upon request.                        ● Name one CONTINENT, which will be added to the map generator. *See “Reward Tier Details” below.                           ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
  • Pledge $2,500 or more
    You selected

    0 backers Limited (4 left of 4)

                        ● Design the visual look, gameplay traits, etc. for one of 'At the Gates' barbarian factions and its leader. *See “Reward Tier Details” below.                           ● All of the above rewards.                  

    Estimated delivery:
Funding period

- (30 days)