From the very beginning the combat system of Ash of Gods was a mix of classic TBS (turn-based strategy) and a card game. However, all of this started trivially: with a blank sheet of paper. I’m sure if you’re interested in playing a tactical game armed only with your pencil and a scratchpad while waiting for a plane, you’ll consider this to be a pretty good beginning. We were playing in our old office, even before we’d quit our previous jobs and started our own company. We gathered as a small group during lunch break to play, using tables drawn on a sheet of paper. We constantly changed the rules, trying to find the ideal variation. It was very entertaining. For instance, we left the opportunity for each player to shout in the middle of the battle: “I came up with a new rule! From now on,

if I hit you this way, you’ll die immediately! It’s cool, isn’t it?”.

If such a rule didn’t piss anyone off or interfere with gameplay for a day, we kept it. When the number of rules exceeded 5-6, we discarded all the superfluous aspects. It’s hard and boring to hold too many rules in your head when you have to calculate everything mentally or on paper.

So, a few days later we threw away the dice and forgot about the random factor completely. Its place was taken by cards. The cards and characters on the field allow you to build a battle strategy on the basis of the card pack you have – while the characters define your tactics. To be honest, I can’t remember a single game with similar mechanics. Heroes of Might and Magic may seem similar in concept, but the feelings and emotions from this game are completely different.

A little later, when I wrote the web prototype of the game, I endlessly asked Dmitry (our game designer): “Would you play it again and again, regardless of the storyline and the plot?”. At some point I was even afraid that he would punch me for the phrase “To experience vivid emotions”. Well, when you’re using a card in Ash of Gods, it’s a chance to intervene in the global battle rules and it can sometimes be very annoying. It may seem bizarre but the best sign that we’re on the right path was when we started swearing. Those shouts of your friends: “What a f…ng bastard you are!” – when you’re playing the card “Hypnotism” and, if you’re the lucky one, exchanging your semi-dead unit for the headliner of your enemy’s team… That was the best indicator of what we’re trying to do. To piss you off but not to the degree that would make you quit. For instance, sometimes you can win in the battle where you have only 2 units against 6 – given that your team was lucky with the cards while your opponent made minor mistakes. Or you may win in a situation when your opponent is completely sure that fortune is on his side. In such situations, all those offensive and obscene shouts are the drug that makes you want to continue.

The canons of strategy games

When I first showed our combat system to somebody I didn’t know, a user from some indie forum, he said to me very arrogantly:

“This combat system sucks, because you went against all the canons. In your game a player shouldn’t only use up energy to perform actions, but health as well. How is it possible to kill a unit for making a move?! You’re not allowed to break the canons! You’re crap!”

But I just love breaking canons. The battle turns out to be dynamic and sharp and you feel as if you’re in a slasher game when you’re dealing with the level boss. In that type of game you have to decide: should I hit harder or will this guy get me? In our game, in turn, you have to decide next: should I spend some of my health to hit my opponent with maximum force and kill him, or isn’t it worth it? Should I choose defensive tactics or throw my units forward and suppress the enemy? The abilities of your units push you towards impulsive decisions. For instance, the archer is able to kill almost any of your opponents’ characters with just one shot – but the price for this will be almost 90% of his health. One shot. From a distance of half the battle field. Isn’t it tempting? At the same time, we were very eager to constantly demonstrate the price of each mistake, when wrong steps made at the beginning end up leading to defeat. So, in story mode it will lead to a situation when your archer won’t feel at his best – and if your party has no strixes (the stones which are the global resource in the game and which provide the defense against disease which the Reapers are sending), the archer will die in story mode. And – I will always say it, even the main protagonist will die if you let him fall in battle without resources or time to heal.

As for me, I suppose that we broke the canons three times. The first time was when we forced some classes to pay with their health for the most attractive abilities (I mean those situations when you spend 3 units of health to produce 6 units of damage and gain 1 unit of attack). Each character in our game has a set of three main parameters: health, energy and attack. All actions are derivative of attack, as is the price you pay for these abilities. If your attack rate is equal to 3 while the ability which you want to apply costs 2 points of attack, it means that you will expend 6 points of health or energy. Some abilities are free to use, some require you to spend health or energy. A part of the archetypes is built exactly on this principle. Now the second time we broke the canons was when we, in an attempt to move away from an extra “poker-like” approach, added the rule of “empty energy”. When a character’s energy falls to zero, any incoming strike against energy causes double damage. “What the heck?” – you may ask. Well, it is what it is. You can deprive the opponent’s character of all his energy and then finish him off with a couple of strikes. Or you can apply to the opponent the card that exchanges health and energy parameters – and the unit with zero energy will die immediately.

Since then more than 200 people from all over the world have played the prototype with me and my friends. Their advice is often like real diamonds – we tried to choose people who play TBS or state that it’s one of their favorite genres. These real-life players are the ones who helped us to get rid of rules which were obviously weak or too complex, as well to change and add some things in the mechanics. So, if we we knock on your door one day and ask for help – please find a couple minutes for us, check out the game and tell us what we can do better.

Next is the third canon that we broke. All the abilities of the classes are based on the fact that you can change the levels of health, energy or attack of your or your opponent’s units. In most cases you are the one who chooses whether a unit will strike at an enemy’s health or energy. So, the “Swordsman” can cause slight damage, receiving a little bonus for his attack each time he does it. If you overlook such a unit you’re doomed, because his attacks will become stronger than that of the other units. Then there is the “Templar”. He isn’t very strong but he can reduce enemies’ attack index. If you waste your time hanging around near him, your unit will turn into harmless sheep with zero attack.

Current edition

A little later we transformed everything into the following criteria: “Dynamics“, “Mood“, “Originality‘ and “Challenge“. If you offer a rule without explanation what criterion it could improve – we’d throw it out.

The storyline of this game moves pretty fast and unpredictably and the dynamic combat system should maintain the tempo and mood which are set by the plot. Each of your moves should be important and have a value. We’re trying to balance character classes so as not to let the combat session last too long: just 25-30 turns for a team of 6 units. And we set the timer for each turn in such a way that you’ll remember what adrenaline is.

I don’t think that the edition  available on (the public prototype) is the final one . At the time I’m writing these lines, we’ve been able to change the balancing and part of the combat system’s rules four times. So, the first editions were ideal for fans of poker: the defending side was able to choose the defending skill already after the enemy had chosen how exactly he would attack. The current edition is dynamic and very simple to understand – that’s what I’ve been telling you about all this time.

I want to end with a barebones list of important rules that we’re using now.

  • Obviousness of a character’s archetype and behavior. If the player faces a certain class for the first time, he must be aware of what he should expect from this class and how to use it – and he has to choose this class consciously. He must understand how to build effective mechanics during the battle with the help of this class.
  • Modification of a character’s tactics during the battle. This changes a character’s tactics after a few turns, depending on previous actions, both yours and your opponent’s. It allows us to make the battle picture more diverse and avoid boring “one-button” classes. The “Swordsman” class is one of the archetypes where this principle is exaggerated.
  • Transparency of the consequences of your decisions. You’re thinking about the action and, even before you apply it, receiving the information about the possible consequences of this action. You don’t have to spend your time calculating it by yourself.
  • The possibility of counteractions. You can set an action for your character which will affect the next turn of your opponent. The “Guardian” class for instance is the living embodiment of this principle: he moves forward, constantly attacking, and at the same time shifts to deep defense or counter-strikes each time somebody attacks him.
By Nikolay Bondarenko
Watch the news
  • Imkariel

    is look like a banner saga game ….

    • Bisty

      And Banner Saga looks like Eyvind Earle art works. imho – It’s ok when two different things is a similar. Much more important is details. For example – Warhammer 40k and StarCraft both with “space marines”, but anyway these games are very different. Don’t you think?

      • Imkariel

        LOL …. Same village same ambiance … StarCraft and w40k WE are 2 unit who have small very small ( same name but thé semblance stop ) semblance each other …. Ash of god are a russian copy of baner saga ….

        • Bisty

          Same village? What are you talking about? Can you share screenshot?

          About SC2 and WH40k – this is your opinion, many peoples won’t agree with you.

  • Aleonymous

    Thanks for the dev diary entry! Hope you have time to update this as you go. Being 4-5 weeks behind schedule is nothing! Hope your “lag” stays like this throughout the whole project. In my opinion: take your time, don’t rush or clip content; assuming that you can afford it, of course…

    • Konstantin Korneev

      Thank you, we plan to post these regularly.
      Hopefully we will find a way to catch up on these 4-5 weeks – we would still prefer to be on schedule 🙂
      And either way – we will make sure the final version has everything that we think should be in it and is a great game before releasing it.

  • VisCouTT

    Looks great. Keep calm and do Your best – we ARE waiting! 🙂

    • Konstantin Korneev

      We will, thank you 🙂

  • George M.

    I mean come on, It’s not a new approach. I like the game a lot but don’t lie, it’s very similar to Banner Saga. Nothing wrong with similarities, I love Banner Saga and want to see more games like it but this is not a new approach

    • Konstantin Korneev

      This article covers specifically our approach to developing the ruleset for the combat system: it describes how we wanted to create something that respects tactical RPG traditions but still breaks the rules and has some unique mechanics to it. This is what we’re speaking about when we talk of a “new approach”,

  • Carlos Irala

    Come on, go on, do it bigger. This is an amazing project. I hope it would be a great game!

    • Konstantin Korneev

      Awesome, thank you.

  • Роман Ривенсинг

    Да, действительно будет интересно посмотреть на остальные карты. По поводу лора: выходит, что власть северным народам вернулась восвояси, а религия менгиров стала менее актуально и, получается, вернулась старая или люди придумали новую веру?

    • Nikolay Bondarenko

      После катастрофы, постигшей Терминум, наряду с развившимися языческими верованиями, воцарившимися на части его территории, появились два Храма. На севере им стал Храм Гнева Богов – с жертвоприношениями, инквизицией, жесткой иерархией, который подчинил постепенно себе местные королевства. На юге – Храм Кары Богов, который сросся с местной знатью, но оказывает влияние на властителей более сдержанно и, может быть, более удачно. Оба эти Храма исповедую одну и ту же религию – поклонение святым-магическим камням, обладающим даром исцеления, и так называемым – неизвестным богам. Оба эти Храма грозят своей пастве концом сущего и воздаянием за грехи и ересь, подтверждением чему служат случающиеся в Терминуме жатвы. В клире обоих храмов присутствуют странные сущности, которые незримо правят всем происходящим в Терминуме.

  • Genos Studios

    Hello Konstantin. I’ve replied to your post here:

    Good luck with your project.

    • Konstantin Korneev

      Thank you, man, I guess I will try to answer you there.

  • Pingback: Комикс, саундтрек и вопрос – Ash of Gods()

  • Pingback: Комикс, саундтрек и вопрос – Ash of Gods()

  • Pingback: Комикс, саундтрек и вопрос – Ash of Gods()

  • Tingelbub

    I believe there is a banner saga easter egg in the game, where you meet two strangers, “John” and “Arnie” in the wastelands. One of them states that they used to follow the banner of a leader equipped bow and axe (probably Rook). Furthermore John noted that there was a long adventure and something about “three times”. I believe this is a reference to the triology of banner saga

  • Tingelbub

    Oh and Thorn does look like Rook.