Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, elit eget consectetuer adipiscing aenean dolor

I have an issue with constructs

So constructs were broken down a bit so the class wouldn’t be huge. However, the only construct in the game right now, that was originally a construct, is fortress gate. The rest were add in as a secondary trait. Also, there’s 7 mechs compared to 4 constructs, but that is more understanable. What isn’t understandable is why the mechanic class is still suit for constructs. The character who teaches the class to you, upgrades mechs with his skill, and is traited to help mechs. The kingdom you get the class from, only has mech classes. It simply does not make sense logically, or even in the lore to have the mechanic class be able to be a construct, and not a mech. Making the class a mech would open up more variety (7 more units to pair with) and allow for more bonuses with the kingdom (being able to get both mech bonus, and kingdom bonus, much like you can get giant bonus and broken spire bonus with warlord). Construct simply does not make sense for the mechanic class, and I personally think it was just overlooked in the update and was meant to be changed to mech. Hopefully the devs can either fix, or explain their reasoning for not wanting to change mechanic class to being able to be a mech unit. Also, if you do plan on changing it, please change the third trait as well (which is meant for constructs, but should be meant for mechs).

EDIT: Also, I did some looking at the classes, and I really don’t see a reason to not just make constructs into mechs.

We have:
27 Humans
12 Giants
21 Daemons
17 Knights
10 Divine
10 Dragons
19 Mystics
14 Fey
20 Undead

What’s it going to hurt to instead have 11 mechs, rather then split the class?

3 Likes

@Sirrian
@Nimhain

What is the development team’s logic when determining the difference between a Mech and a Construct?

I find myself in agreement. The type was weak enough that it didn’t need further subdivision. Maybe there’s a Grand Plan with unreleased troops that will make it all make sense; with the toys we’ve currently got to play with, I’m not seeing it.

2 Likes

I’m guessing this one was just over-looked in the stress of getting the update through…

The way I see it, in the current patch the devs mostly cared to properly assign troops into types, even if some types have too few troops in them. After all, they can always add more troops later.

I assume they wanted a new type for something that’s artificially made but is not a machine, and the name Construct was the best fit, so they took it for the new type, and named the machines Mech instead. It seem perfectly reasonable to me, and I see nothing wrong with the low troop count for the new type, since most other new types also have few troops (see Naga, Orc, Tauros, Wargare).

I can understand the troop count, however the hero should be changed since it’s clearly meant to be mech, but the devs either forgot to change or didn’t think of it.

I am going to make a bold prediction and say we might get a new kingdom that contains a few summoner class troops and a whole lot of constructs, think magical totem carvers.

The Mechanist class counting as Construct instead of Mech is a bug, and appears in the Known Issues thread as fixed. Is it really not fixed for you?

2 Likes

This was actually my thought. Fortress Gate was the only thing that was actually put in a different group, every other former Construct is now a Mech, and everything else currently a Construct was given it as a dual type in addition to what they were before. As much as I question some decisions, I have faith here - the only logical reason to make this distinction would be to prep for adding more Construct specific stuff and separate it from “Mech” stuff like Sparkgrinder’s ability and the Clockwork trait (which is intended to be Mech specific, not Construct, and if not working like that now, will be fixed).

Weird, my phone must not have been updated since they fixed it, because it’s showing fine on my PC, except that the 3rd trait is still for constructs and not mechs, which should be fixed.

EDIT: Especially considering it was meant to be a boost for your hero, and hero is now a mech.

As I said in my troop types thread, most types right now (other than the ones listed above) are sitting on 4-5 troops…

I have to assume this is in preparation for a relative explosion of new troops being added in the near future. Otherwise there wouldn’t really be a point.

Fortress Gate + Golem + Archon Statue + Flesh Golem is a rubbish team :stuck_out_tongue:

Honestly of those four archon statue and flesh golem are the best on the team.

Well Fortress Gate is actually kind of nice against a Maw team. No longer worried about leaving skulls for them to pick up.

The distinction seems like one that was made for philosophical ones and not pragmatic ones. The distinction they’ve made between them makes perfect logical sense to me, it just stinks for the purposes of making teams.

1 Like

mechs are usually made of metal and constructs are usually stone or flesh… at least thats how i thought of it…

1 Like

Only @killerman3333, @Studs and @kzintiwife were on topic. This wasn’t about the Hero Class.

I agree with @kzintiwife’s definition pretty much. Wonder if development agrees.

Wha? Literally 64% of the first post is about the Machinist class.

Wish machinist worked for constructs and mechs

good point. Also a mech is usually controlled by a human(oid) whereas a construct could be acting for itself.
Contradicted by the current use of it in gow nevertheless.

2 Likes

I posted about this discrepancy initially in the Known Issues thread. My post was general, saying it was still geared (:smiley:) towards constructs and not mechs. After that, the first trait, Construct Bond, got changed to Mech Bond, and the hero type was changed from Construct to Mech. However, nothing happened with the Clockwork trait. I think, like @Jainus said, it’s just an oversight. They’ll get around to fixing it soon enough.

Until then, my mech defense team is taking a well-earned break.