Limboldt

I also see both in this case, more interesting enemys are welcome, and I like the idea behind giving wolves that trait, but dying in turn one is not fun, especially because I saw even really strong (but slow...) units die. And what should the adapted tactic be? Sending only one Level 8 tank into the battle or an initiative-Monster or pimping all of my units with magic just to kill some stupid wolves and hope that the wolves "only" deal 60 damage? The other possibility is

I like the direction the game takes. The fame-leads-to-heroes-thing is very nice, the window that appears telling you about a new hero feels like a real award. The new "Combat-mechanics" with Weapons and units having individual usable powers make fighting a lot more intersting and gives the term "Tactical combat" a deeper sense than before. I like the idea of more individual traits like the wolves thing (swarm-bonus), but perhaps the mixture of v

Are the battlefields really "smaller" in EFELH respectively is there no "approaching phase" anymore ? I saw a "Pre-Beta-Video" on Youtube, and there the melee units could directly fight each other. If this is a new "feature" I would prefer if this is optional. It would be a reason for me not to buy LH. I liked it to "sort" my troops before the battle, preparing some spells and it was possible to choose which unitis attack first. After my opinion It is always bad when in a strategy game s

Used it for the first time and got 2 new traits per usage.

So my units were in the town and this unit was on the town.

I played FE in all Versions a lot, and I would like to mention some little things that I noticed: It would be nice to have the possibility to make notes on the map concerning special locations or to plan things. In the ledger, I can see if towns have "free essence" for more spells, but I can not click on the "free" essecnce-slots to choose spells, I have to remember the name of the city, then go to the spell

[quote who="seanw3" reply="26" id="3255036"]If GalCiv is any indicator, the majority of diplomacy will be in future releases. [...] But I guess I am just a little ahead of the curve on wanting a more complex endgame. Time and resources are increasing come next week, so let's make sure this gets on the ticket for the 1.1 version.[/quote] May the force be with us ;) It is always good to see ambitious Modders around turn-base-strategy.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="25" id="3255035"] @Lim. I'm sorry you don't like the game. If you bought War of Magic prior to release, you get FE for free. I think there may be a language issue here. It appears there are certain features that you think a strategy game should have that FE doesn't have and therefore you don't feel its "finished" as a result. All I can say is that those features you mentioned are ones that I certainly agree w

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="20" id="3255012"] fwiw, there was a 1% chance that a quest location wouldn't have a quest. Appearance chance was 100 for all quests, but the rng rolled from 0-99, so you could get a very small chance that the quest location would be dead. That will be fixed for release. 280 hours of gameplay and I never saw it, but a player sent me a save with it and we were able to track it down. Sounds like what the op ran into.[/quote] Sounds good, thank you for

[quote who="Glazunov1" reply="21" id="3255017"]I agree that diplomacy is very under-developed, as I mentioned above. But let's be fair, Limboldt: who can forget that in all Civ games (except the fourth), an AI who liked you a lot would suddenly do a hairpin turn and tell you they hated you, and immediately declared war? Calls for help during war to allies often went unheeded, and you yourself could supply a single unit without hurting an allied relationship. And diplomat

[quote who="Mmrnmhrm" reply="22" id="3255020"]I'm not sure if he's trolling or serious. Calls the game unfinished with his first complaint being that there is no army organization screen or something, a feature I've never seen anyone request before. If this was something you wanted, why was your last post back last Spring? You had months to post your own requests. You chose not to and now you're flaming the game as unfinished because it lacks featur

[quote who="seanw3" reply="19" id="3254998"]Well I for one welcome someone to talk about the lacking diplomatic feel. My personal opinion is that since there are only two or so people designing the diplomatic system, they have lost perspective. It's frustrating because as I look into the xml, I see loads of potential for diplomatic interactions. But many of them are not fully implemented.[/quote] That is what I feel about the whole Elemental world. Someone h

But that is what gaming is all about: Feelings, illusions, We all now that everything is only based on algorythm and scripts and most games when you learned them to play very good or played them to often, you know what will happen when you do x or y. Master of Orion 2 had a very good illusion, but It was very easy to bribe your opponents with presents. In Civ V for example you have town states. When you know that another Civ has close relations with such a stat

[quote who="Glazunov1" reply="12" id="3254960"]I'd personally like to see options to bully a second player into declaring war on a third one, or the ability to start or join in an alliance specifically to topple another player. But I don't recall Civ's diplomatic options being particularly robust in any of its five games, either, so I'm not sure where one would get the feeling of intrigue and betrayal in Civ that he refers to. Some specifics would be nice.[/quote]<

[quote who="Polistes" reply="10" id="3254957"]Diplomacy has always been lacking in this game however, and its something that needs work, however despite the flaws present in the game it is ready for a release and is indeed light years ahead of WOM.[/quote] Yes ,thats right, but we are talking about the release version, and that is after my opinion disappointing, and that was the main statement I wanted to give with this post. Because this problem is not new and as I said, I expected a

[quote who="seanw3" reply="7" id="3254941"]Could you be more specific? I keep a tight handle on game ideas. Most people that make suggestions that sound good don't have a good grasp on what is possible with the current game. The ones that are good make it into my mod. Like more summons and city defense for example.[/quote] That`s right, It`s like with Endless Space, not everything is possible. Perhaps it is mainly my frustration that this should r

[quote who="seanw3" reply="5" id="3254933"] Sometimes an AI goes on a quest. That can leave what looks like an available quest on the map, but it is in actuality taken. My perception: minor UI issue, fine for release. [/quote] It was the Humble Inn directly beside my Capital. I did not journalize exactly what happened when, that is correct, my primary aim was to get an feeling what changed in the last month. But there

I read about so many interesting, fascinating and constructive suggestions for the game in that forum and in the current version I see not one of these suggestions implemented. So I personaly believe there are one or wto guys more that are not so lucky with the end result.

0992 is the version. I run aorund with my Sovereign (and an army perhaps) and collect goodies to equip them and then collect more goodies on a Civ-Map. The first part feels like Diablo to me. Because I am doing that on a Civ map I expected more from the game, my mistake. I played nearly every turn-based strategy game for 20 years. It is the big diappointment speaking out of me because this game had so much more potential. I never saw a game trying it twice the

So you want to release it, this is courageous... Since the last time I played a while ago besides the nicer design most of the game feels the same with all of its problems. Yes, some people will like it for a while, because it makes fun to play around in an Diablo meets Civ-way. But it is not or wants not to be an challenging strategy game. And it has to many beta-state bugs: Some of the quests I played in the recent version did not work

[quote who="Lantros" reply="181" id="3213552"]To "solve" the prob, i reduce the number of AI i play against. Take large map and play against 3 or 4 opponents and you will have more time to expand. [/quote] But don`t they establish huge empires then, too, with the only difference that they are far away?

[quote who="redskull2" reply="176" id="3212540"]Some short notes on it from my impressions: -tame beast doesn't seem to work anymore. I got resist on every attempt on every beast from a regular lvl 1 wolf to an umberdroth. All in all the gameplay is definitely headed the right way, mostly needs polish. [/quote] In my last games it worked very very well on any level of difficulty , I even tamed one of this very big sp

[quote who="Simplicity123" reply="175" id="3212535"]Suggestion Four: Make monsters more interesting. Give them abilities that use the battlefield. Turn based battles just seem to run all pretty similarly. But these things could be very interesting. Flying units. Teleporters. Creatures who can lock you down (spiders do it from a range, but I'm thinking more like the marking 4e D&D mechanic). Creatures with area effect spells. Howls that affect your army. Clouds that take up battlefield

[quote who="Satrhan" reply="173" id="3212363"]Pacing; Just seems off. The only sense of urgency I'm getting is the constant pressure to spam as many pioneers as possible, if you don't the whole world is soon covered with AI towns and outposts. Not only isn't this any fun, there's no strategy involved either. [/quote] Exactley my feeling! When I play on easier levels it is to inviting to just conquer other towns, on harder levels you have to fight

BUG: Sometimes the game decides to slow down and show combats in slow motion.