Additions to 1.1

from Elemental Forums

I'm very excited about 1.1, the first big gameplay patch, since it seems to plan to address some of my biggest frustrations with the gameplay. We have been given some information about 1.1, but it doesn't sound like the final list of changes is set in stone. That means that there may still be time to get a few other things into 1.1

 

What else would you like 1.1 to do for Elemental? Please keep it realistic...this is just a patch, and thus changes need to be reasonable, in keeping with the level of changes that have already been put out. Thus, we can get some small additions and alterations, such as changing the way mana works, but 1.1 is not going to add real time battles or anything like that.

 

Here is what I would most like to see:

 

1) Battle Setup: So far we are getting an initiative system, which could be very cool. Many of us have also asked for some way to setup our forces before a battle starts so that we can apply better tactics. I think this will be especially important since SD says that 1.1 will encourage larger armies. I could see this being done in two ways. 1) Same as current where units are basically randomly thrown on the map, but allow players to reposition units within their deployment zone. 2) Create a deployment window with all units in an army and allow players to drag each unit onto the map and place them in the deployment zone.

 

2) Separate Movement from Attack: As part of the change to Initiative for combat, this is really important. This would fix the 'fast sword adds movement' problem. You could also create units that are fast, but don't have tons of attacks, which would help balance combat. Right now, an archer can shoot several times each turn, mages can cast several powerful spells, etc. Limit each unit to one offensive action or add a new stat that determines attack, separate from Movement or Combat Speed / Initiative. Link the attack to movement to prevent the 'kite' strategy where an archer runs away from a melee opponent while shooting. This should be possible only for fast skirmishers and light cavalry.

 

3) Ammunition: Limit the amount of ammunition for ranged attackers. Each unit should have enough ammo for a normal battle, but should not have infinite  ammo, thus allowing things like the kite strategy against much stronger enemies. This would help balance ranged attackers. You could also create things like special ammunition (bodkin arrow, poison arrow, etc) or extra ammunition as a kit item.

 

4) Create larger / longer battlefields: Currently, there isn't much room to maneuver. Everyone just does a headlong charge, and you are then on top of each other. This makes tactical maneuvering, which is a key part of combat, impossible. The ranges are also so long that you can easily kill enemies in their deployment zone. A larger or at least longer battlefield would allow time for maneuver and formation setup and would prevent ranged attackers from engaging from turn 1.

 

5) Mod Guide: The mod tools are great, and the XML is powerful, but there is so much of it that isn't commented or explained. We don't need huge tutorials (Although that would be nice) but a simple guide explaining more of the XML functions would be nice, especially in how different things link together.

 

6) Quest Editor: We have some great mod tools, but nothing that lets people create new quests. We can certainly do it with the existing files, but it is cumbersome, and as in #5, we don't have a clear guide on what can be done. A nice Quest Editor would really help the community out. I think you would quickly see some really fun, interesting, deep quests, which would really help flesh out that section of the game.

elemental
29,523 views 54 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

The major thing I would like to see is a change in the queuing sequence that determines when each unit in the battle window acts.  Currently, it is 'side specific.'  All units of one side move/melee/range attack/cast.  Then all units of the others side act.  Change it to a unit specific queue.  This way, initiative means something.  All units of both sides are placed in the queue.  The unit currently with the highest 'initiative (not speed) acts first.  Then the unit with the next highest initiative, etc.  I have postred a detailed breakout of this elsewhere. 

 

Tactical Battles

 

Current system uses the ‘combat speed’ of the unit to determine its APs allotment.  One side acts, then the other.  Repeat until only one side remains on tactical field.  Side that acts first has immense advantage.

 

First change:  Determine APs based on the unit’s movement. Higher movement = more APs.

 

Now use the units ‘combat speed’ and change it to ‘initiative.’  (Actually, can leave the ‘label’ alone if you want…just change its function to initiative in the tac screen)

 

Finally, change the combat acting queue to be unit specific, not ‘side’ specific.  A complete cycle through the unit acting queue is a 'round.' Now assign every unit (of both sides) a place in the unified combat acting queue.  Ties are decided in favor of the unit currently having more APs. 

 

Each unit now is given commands when its ‘turn to act’ comes up in the combat acting queue.  When the last unit in the current queue ‘acts,’ the 'round' is over.  All units (except those ‘frozen, etc.) are now assigned a fresh set of APs to use.  The number of APs is based on their respective current initiative.  The PC now assigns all units a place in the next ‘combat acting queue.  Rinse, repeat.

 

Initiative per unit – not side.  Action points refer to how much a unit can do (already in game).  Initiative refers to when it can expend its APs.

 

This, all by itself, would remove the horrible advantage given to whichever “side” ‘moves (uses all its action points) first. 

 

Definitions of words/concepts:

APs = action points. 

Act = unit uses its APs to move/attack/fortify/cast. (User may now give it commands)

Initiative = units current ‘combat speed’ (as in current code)

Round = completing one combat action queue.

Combat action queue = the order/ sequence in which each unit of either side is assigned to act. Each unit ‘acts when its turn comes up in the combat action queue.

Initiative = determines where in the ‘combat action queue’ each unit is placed: highest initiative first, lowest initiative last, etc. Ties in the sequence are resolved in favor of unit with more APs, and if APs are =, then a random roll.

 

Immediate commands: (unit expends its APs immediately)

Move, melee, volley, cast, fortify.

 

Next design steps:

ALL UNITS: Reduce the strength of units that have zero AP’s remaining.  (say 10%?)  Defenders should have an advantage, just not the all or nothing of the current system.

 

ARCHERS: Redesign archers so that as range increases, the attack strength of the volley decreases.

Create various types of bows with various strengths and ranges.  Give archers a sight range increase if on higher ground then their target.

 

CONDITIONAL COMMANDS:

 

“Round” refers to when all units, both sides have, as permitted by each unit’s initiative, either expend their APs obeying an immediate command or have been given conditional commands. 

 

Immediate commands: (expends units APs immediately)

Move, melee, volley, cast, fortify.  (Already in game)  

 

Conditional commands are assigned to units so that they don’t use their APs immediately.  The APs are stored in the unit (for the duration of current round) and used to act (implement/do) the conditional commands currently given the unit.  Unit waits and responds to actions of enemy units.  APs are not, however, accumulated from one round to the next.  Once the round is over (all units of all sides have acted), any unused APs are gone.  The unit used its time doing the conditional command.  It may have acted in response to enemy actions, or it may have waited for an opportunity that did not happen.

 

Suggested conditional commands: Once unit expends its APs, it will only defend.

 

Close and Melee = engage if enemy approaches within x (trigger) distance.  X is assigned per unit, 1,2,3,4, as part of conditional command.  When triggered, the unit immediately moves towards E and melee attacks.  ((so, some units with an enhanced ‘counterattck’ would just defend, while units with enhanced attack strength would move towards E and attempt to attack first.))

Volley engage = archers volley at E if it gets within x distance.  X may be assigned per unit, 1,2,3,4,5.

Counter volley = archers volley against archer unit that just attacked it.

 

MAGIC USERS: Redesign MU (magic users) so that as spell levels increase, so does the related casting times.   Also, the number of levels the caster is above the actual spell being cast reduces casting time of that spell.  The following is illustrative.  I really don’t know what percentages, etc. would be effective.  However, consider the pace of the battle given the above ‘round’ system…  Developers decide percentage, AP cost, etc… [or allow user to modify these in a game customize input page.]

 

Level 1 MU casts level 1 spell = uses 100% of base cast time.

Level 2 MU casts level 1 spell = uses   90% of base cast time.

Level 10 MU casts level 1 spell= use   10% of base cast time.

Level 10 MU casts level 5 spell= use   50% of base cast time.

 

Each 10% of MU time consumes an AP.  So, some spells take a long time to cast – perhaps the MU will stand and work on casting a powerful spell while the troops go through several rounds of movement.  Interesting?

 

 

 

CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

Just don't make it so that a fast-acting unit has to give up a turn to let a slower acting unit go first.  It's nice to have tank-types suck up all of the counter-attacks, or let catapult dump their load before I spend mana.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting nniles, reply 3
Just don't make it so that a fast-acting unit has to give up a turn to let a slower acting unit go first.  It's nice to have tank-types suck up all of the counter-attacks, or let catapult dump their load before I spend mana.
End of nniles's quote
Maybe a wait until end of turn button so you can have them stand back until the rest of the team has gone?

That said, with initiative, it would make sense to use mana to get rid of any problems on the opposing side if you have the chance before using your tank or catapult or whatever.

I'm curious to see how this plays out.

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

I want ponies.

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

The ability to create events in the map editor. Currently there is a stub that allows you to add triggers and their results, but you cannot define the effects of the results without filling in the XML manually.

Reply #8 from Elemental Forums Top


1) Battle Setup: So far we are getting an initiative system, which could be very cool. Many of us have also asked for some way to setup our forces before a battle starts so that we can apply better tactics. I think this will be especially important since SD says that 1.1 will encourage larger armies. I could see this being done in two ways. 1) Same as current where units are basically randomly thrown on the map, but allow players to reposition units within their deployment zone. 2) Create a deployment window with all units in an army and allow players to drag each unit onto the map and place them in the deployment zone.
End of quote


Yes, yes and yes. Another way to implement this might be to allow the configuration of your armies to have default settings, or settings that you specify. You should still be able to change these settings just before a battle begins, if you so choose. Also, if you are surprise attacked by invisible units, your army should not be in your preferred configuration.



2) Separate Movement from Attack: As part of the change to Initiative for combat, this is really important. This would fix the 'fast sword adds movement' problem. You could also create units that are fast, but don't have tons of attacks, which would help balance combat. Right now, an archer can shoot several times each turn, mages can cast several powerful spells, etc. Limit each unit to one offensive action or add a new stat that determines attack, separate from Movement or Combat Speed / Initiative. Link the attack to movement to prevent the 'kite' strategy where an archer runs away from a melee opponent while shooting. This should be possible only for fast skirmishers and light cavalry.
End of quote


I agree here as well. Just add an 'Attacks per round' statistic. You should then be able to have the 'Movement' stat work inside and outside of combat, thus getting rid of 'Combat Speed'.


3) Ammunition: Limit the amount of ammunition for ranged attackers. Each unit should have enough ammo for a normal battle, but should not have infinite  ammo, thus allowing things like the kite strategy against much stronger enemies. This would help balance ranged attackers. You could also create things like special ammunition (bodkin arrow, poison arrow, etc) or extra ammunition as a kit item.
End of quote


Also a good idea. However I do think that infinite ammunition should be achievable via magic items.



4) Create larger / longer battlefields: Currently, there isn't much room to maneuver. Everyone just does a headlong charge, and you are then on top of each other. This makes tactical maneuvering, which is a key part of combat, impossible. The ranges are also so long that you can easily kill enemies in their deployment zone. A larger or at least longer battlefield would allow time for maneuver and formation setup and would prevent ranged attackers from engaging from turn 1.
End of quote


This is something we should be careful with I think. Depending on the size and type of the armies, a battelfield that is too large might make maneuvering tedious, i.e. you'll spend half the battle just trying to inch troops forward. Perhaps the size should scale accordingly?


5) Mod Guide: The mod tools are great, and the XML is powerful, but there is so much of it that isn't commented or explained. We don't need huge tutorials (Although that would be nice) but a simple guide explaining more of the XML functions would be nice, especially in how different things link together.

 

6) Quest Editor: We have some great mod tools, but nothing that lets people create new quests. We can certainly do it with the existing files, but it is cumbersome, and as in #5, we don't have a clear guide on what can be done. A nice Quest Editor would really help the community out. I think you would quickly see some really fun, interesting, deep quests, which would really help flesh out that section of the game.
End of quote

Yeses as well.

 

*[EDIT]* I don't know why the post is all muddled up like that. Little help?

Reply #9 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting ElanaAhova, reply 1


MAGIC USERS: Redesign MU (magic users) so that as spell levels increase, so does the related casting times.   Also, the number of levels the caster is above the actual spell being cast reduces casting time of that spell.  The following is illustrative.  I really don’t know what percentages, etc. would be effective.  However, consider the pace of the battle given the above ‘round’ system…  Developers decide percentage, AP cost, etc… [or allow user to modify these in a game customize input page.]

 

Level 1 MU casts level 1 spell = uses 100% of base cast time.

Level 2 MU casts level 1 spell = uses   90% of base cast time.

Level 10 MU casts level 1 spell= use   10% of base cast time.

Level 10 MU casts level 5 spell= use   50% of base cast time.

 

Each 10% of MU time consumes an AP.  So, some spells take a long time to cast – perhaps the MU will stand and work on casting a powerful spell while the troops go through several rounds of movement.  Interesting?
End of ElanaAhova's quote

I like this idea very much.

Reply #10 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Jandurin, reply 4
Maybe a wait until end of turn button so you can have them stand back until the rest of the team has gone?
That said, with initiative, it would make sense to use mana to get rid of any problems on the opposing side if you have the chance before using your tank or catapult or whatever.
End of Jandurin's quote

Really depends on how the whole system works.  The above only works if there ARE turns.
An initiative system does not necessarily imply a turn during which every unit gets to act once.

It could also mean a semi-turn system where a timer is kept and every unit regenerates action points depending on it's speed. Like the "continuous" battles in Fallout Tactics.

There could still be a wait or overwatch system.  If you wait, you get to save up action points over your technical maximum. That lets a unit act after another unit (such as waiting with spells until after the catapults have blown their load) but still not "lose" it's action that it could have taken if it had acted immediately.

That would be the continuous turn equivalent to the UFO / Jagged Alliance system where you reserve points for reactive fire during the enemy's turn.

Reply #11 from Elemental Forums Top

I love the way things are going. My only real gripe is with the proposed sharing of the mana pool. It hasn't been explained yet in a way that makes sense to me, so I'll have to wait and see. But if you have your sovereign and other spell casting units all draw from the same source of mana, it takes away the individuality of the caster, and it becomes more difficult to differentiate the power and limits of each magic user.

I have stated this before, but I will put it briefly by saying that the amount of mana that a caster has access to, and the amount of mana that they can draw on per turn is the biggest indicator of that caster's power and level. I also wonder how this will work with regards to overland spells and enchantments.

 

Now that we are getting closer to a 1.1 release date, is there any chance of getting a few more details about the Global Mana Pool system?

If so, I have three questions to phrase:

1) Will the mana accumulate per turn into the player's pool?

2) Will all of the player's spell casting units have access to this pool?

3) Will there be differing limits on how much a caster can draw from the pool per turn, based on their stats or level?

 

My hope is that this will work more like MoM, as I have to say (yes, again) that sharing mana as some distributable resource really takes away from the enchantment of wizarding fiction. A wizards mana must be personal to that wizard and bound to them. That is of course my opinion, but I'd like to know what's in store for us either way please.

Reply #12 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Istari, reply 11
I love the way things are going. My only real gripe is with the proposed sharing of the mana pool. It hasn't been explained yet in a way that makes sense to me, so I'll have to wait and see. But if you have your sovereign and other spell casting units all draw from the same source of mana, it takes away the individuality of the caster, and it becomes more difficult to differentiate the power and limits of each magic user.

I have stated this before, but I will put it briefly by saying that the amount of mana that a caster has access to, and the amount of mana that they can draw on per turn is the biggest indicator of that caster's power and level. I also wonder how this will work with regards to overland spells and enchantments.

 

Now that we are getting closer to a 1.1 release date, is there any chance of getting a few more details about the Global Mana Pool system?

If so, I have three questions to phrase:

1) Will the mana accumulate per turn into the player's pool?

2) Will all of the player's spell casting units have access to this pool?

3) Will there be differing limits on how much a caster can draw from the pool per turn, based on their stats or level?

 

My hope is that this will work more like MoM, as I have to say (yes, again) that sharing mana as some distributable resource really takes away from the enchantment of wizarding fiction. A wizards mana must be personal to that wizard and bound to them. That is of course my opinion, but I'd like to know what's in store for us either way please.
End of Istari's quote

 

I have to say that I agree with you here, although I think that mana from shards is the way to go. Clearly, I'm conflicted about this. As an aside, I kind of wish they were keeping essence as mana "castable" per turn. So, essentially, essence would be the determinant of number of spells per turn for a given caster or number of turns to cast a very big spell.

I'm going to wait and see. The one thing I'm pretty sure I don't like is a mana maintenance per turn to have other casters imbued.

 

Anyway, my 2 cents.

Reply #13 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting JSJ101, reply 12


I'm going to wait and see. The one thing I'm pretty sure I don't like is a mana maintenance per turn to have other casters imbued.
End of JSJ101's quote

 

Yes, I think it should probably be a sizable once-off mana cost if essence is shifted to boolean. Otherwise the terminology should be changed from 'Imbue Champion' to something like 'Augment Champion', as that would make more sense as an ongoing cost.

Reply #14 from Elemental Forums Top

The usual.  let's fix the dynasty part of the game.

 

Succession wars. Inheritance. Marrying your kids/grandkids to champions.

Reply #15 from Elemental Forums Top

On top of the gameplay stuff, can we just get a "Play the single player version of Elemental, but in Multiplayer" setting?  All the reductions/limitations/changes in MP kind of drive me nuts, I just want to play the standard game coop with my friends.


I know we MPers are a small minority, but as of 1.09E the MP is... Hmmm, what's a constructive way of putting it.  The MP feels like a very primitive shell/framework of what I expect when I buy a TBS game with multiplayer (i.e. only small/tiny maps, seems like a reduced tech tree, no tactical battles, etc).  It feels like Elemental-Lite, or a RTS version of the game.  I'm not interested in either, I'm interested in the game, not a MP variant based off of it.

Thanks. :)

Reply #16 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Istari, reply 11
I love the way things are going. My only real gripe is with the proposed sharing of the mana pool. It hasn't been explained yet in a way that makes sense to me, so I'll have to wait and see. But if you have your sovereign and other spell casting units all draw from the same source of mana, it takes away the individuality of the caster, and it becomes more difficult to differentiate the power and limits of each magic user.

I have stated this before, but I will put it briefly by saying that the amount of mana that a caster has access to, and the amount of mana that they can draw on per turn is the biggest indicator of that caster's power and level. I also wonder how this will work with regards to overland spells and enchantments.

 

Now that we are getting closer to a 1.1 release date, is there any chance of getting a few more details about the Global Mana Pool system?

If so, I have three questions to phrase:

1) Will the mana accumulate per turn into the player's pool?

2) Will all of the player's spell casting units have access to this pool?

3) Will there be differing limits on how much a caster can draw from the pool per turn, based on their stats or level?

 

My hope is that this will work more like MoM, as I have to say (yes, again) that sharing mana as some distributable resource really takes away from the enchantment of wizarding fiction. A wizards mana must be personal to that wizard and bound to them. That is of course my opinion, but I'd like to know what's in store for us either way please.
End of Istari's quote

 

I was making some similar arguments in the GMP thread. I agree 100% that a global mana pool really hurts the idea of individual casters. I hate the idea of a powerful mage becoming helpless because someone else cast a bunch of spells in a battle on the other side of the map.

 

I'm willing to see where the GMP goes, because I think SD has some cool ideas, but I'm definetly wary of it because of the above reason. I would prefer for all mages to have a personal mana pool for their own use. A global pool could be used as well, and reserved for big, global spells.

Reply #17 from Elemental Forums Top

Im all for a global mana pool between the hero you imbued the champion... but children born and people with starting mana should have their own pools that can only be effected by champions they give magic power too.

So i would like to see a hybrid linked mana pool.

 

I would also like to see combat move determined by speed, and speed effected by item weight.  Making heavy armored units much slower than a no armor wearing dagger using crazy guy.

 

Dual wielding, we can do it with mods, but I would like to see it implemented.

 

resource nodes that caravans can collect from, taking a turn or two at the node and then moving back to town to give the player the resource.

 

Plundering and Pillaging enemy cities on takeover.

 

Exponential cost of pioneer units, depending on the number of active cities and active pioneer units.

 

Opacity maps, and team color on custom meshes, clarification or the tools required would be awesome!

 

 

 

 

 

 

The modeling tools, I want them sooo bad.

 

Reply #18 from Elemental Forums Top

Two things that I'd like to see most in the next patch (1.09e now) so I guess that is 1.10. 

1) An AI that actually attempts to preserve/protect itself.

2) on the Kingdom side, please scrub the Equipment Technology tree stats to ensure that as a player progresses so to does the  armor and weapons. It's been messed up intentionally since about 1.07.  If you do plan to make it idiotic, please explain the idiocy of the logic of doing so.  I truely want to believe you folks are intelligent developers.  You make a beautiful TBS game engine and then do some really bizzare things intentionally.  Please restore my faith.

 

Reply #19 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Gene1966, reply 18
Two things that I'd like to see most in the next patch (1.09e now) so I guess that is 1.10. 

1) An AI that actually attempts to preserve/protect itself.

2) on the Kingdom side, please scrub the Equipment Technology tree stats to ensure that as a player progresses so to does the  armor and weapons. It's been messed up intentionally since about 1.07.  If you do plan to make it idiotic, please explain the idiocy of the logic of doing so.  I truely want to believe you folks are intelligent developers.  You make a beautiful TBS game engine and then do some really bizzare things intentionally.  Please restore my faith.

 
End of Gene1966's quote

 

1) This has been a curse of strategy game AIs. Take a look at Total War with the 'suicide general attacks' where one enemy general (or even King!) would charge your entire army by himself. Now, this kind of thing should be able to happen from time to time, in a desperate situation, but it should not be the norm or common. In Elemental, I think the team is working on it, so we will see how the AI goes in 1.1. The problem is that the Sov and Champions are out doing quests and exploring, while you have armies running around. So even if you fix the problem with a weak enemy Sov or Champion attacking a big army by themselves, you still need to balance armies and heroes more. This is another argument in favor of having Armies, big slow with lots of troops, and Adventuring Parties, small, nimble groups of Heroes that can evade big lumbering armies.

 

2) What is the current issue here? I haven't gotten to play with 1.09 much.

Reply #20 from Stardock Forums Top

Any thing that gets away from the over simplistic and boring combat.  It feels like it was designed for 5 year olds.

Reply #21 from Stardock Forums Top

Short-cut Key, for repeating the Last Magic Spell cast. Currently have to click a few times to open spell book, choose spell etc. I would prefer to hit "M" and continue flattening mountains.. (From the Manual, Keyboard Shortcuts, M is still un-assigned.

Reply #22 from Elemental Forums Top

My suggestions for EWOM, either 1.1 or later:

1. Flexibility: 

Right now there are a lot of divergent ideas on various topics.  One example is the maximum number of individuals there should be in the regular units.   Of course right now that's 4/8/12 depending on which techs you have researched.   In order to make the game more inclusive for the community I suggest the maximum unit size be an option the player can set at the start of the game.    So, if someone had a fast computer and liked a game with a bigger feel they could allow units up to say 50 (a number chosen as an example not as a suggested max) individuals.   Of course this would require higher tech levels.   People who want to keep the somewhat more MOM feel of the current game could leave the slider at 12.

This same concept should be applied to other things such as:  monster spawn rate, monster max level, dungeon frequency, etc.   This way in sand box mode many more people could make the boundries of the game what they saw as right.  This addition would also help replayability.

2. Magic Items:

In the current game magic items do not have enough variety or interest as they do in MOM, AOW:SM, other turn based strategy games and for that matter most current RPG's.    We need to find items like swords that have "life stealing", "fire damage", and "double strike", etc.  This would really add interest to going into a dungeon.  You might find nothing, you might find gold, or you might find a magic item.   The ideal implementation of this would be for the game to create magic items (weapons, armor, rings, etc) with a random number and type of enchantments.   The tougher the dungeon the higher level item the player might find.   Even longer term this might allow for socketable items that allowed items to be upgraded with something like "shard fragments" created in the world upheavel before the start of Elemental.

3. Forge magic items

Add a technology to be learned that allowed the forging of magic items.     This would have to be a high level tech.    Then the player could put a magic forge in a city and make low to mid level magic items.   Not ones as good as could be found in dungeons (see 2. above) but still useful.  If this was not desired this could also be a choice in the game set up.

4. Bigger Dungeons

Right now the options when entering a dungeon or goodie hut are a. find item  b. dialogue to get quest  or c. fight monsters on a small battle field.    Entering a few dungeons should put the player in a large area with unique monsters, etc to fight with perhaps more than one treasure to be found. 

5. Unit retraining

As techs are discovered the player should have the opportunity to upgrade a unit from one weapone and armor outfit to that of a higher level for one or both.   The unit would have to stay in a city for some length of time and money would have to be spent.   This should also have an option to combine units of smaller size into one larger one.  Say two 4 individual units retained at cost to a single unit of 8 (assuming the tech for 8 was already known).

Reply #23 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting xaltotun, reply 22
4. Bigger Dungeons

Right now the options when entering a dungeon or goodie hut are a. find item  b. dialogue to get quest  or c. fight monsters on a small battle field.    Entering a few dungeons should put the player in a large area with unique monsters, etc to fight with perhaps more than one treasure to be found.
End of xaltotun's quote

That absolutely requires LOS rules so... tactical battles first.

 

5. Unit retraining

As techs are discovered the player should have the opportunity to upgrade a unit from one weapone and armor outfit to that of a higher level for one or both.   The unit would have to stay in a city for some length of time and money would have to be spent.   This should also have an option to combine units of smaller size into one larger one.  Say two 4 individual units retained at cost to a single unit of 8 (assuming the tech for 8 was already known).
End of quote

There have been many suggestions for this. They tend to be more or less messy because of the myriad of unit and equipment combinations possible in the game.
This is just my approach to work around the messiness.

Reply #24 from Stardock Forums Top

i might make my list after playing MoM played AoW though and Dominions3 would like to see Global enchants the most though

Reply #25 from Elemental Forums Top

[quote who="xaltotun" reply="22" id="2798930"]My suggestions for EWOM, either 1.1 or later:

1. Flexibility: 


2. Magic Items:


3. Forge magic items


4. Bigger Dungeons


5. Unit retraining

 

Some good ideas, but I think #1 is way too much for a 1.1 patch. #2 is certainly doable since modders can already create new items. #3, same as #2, although hopefully a future expansion will allow in-game design so that we can create new items just like new units. #4, more of a content expansion, so not really what they are doing with 1.1 which is mostly gameplay. #5, agreed...and hope to see some things like this in the future. I think Gazz has some good ideas on this.