Alstein

I'd recommend Sager in your case, maybe ASUS. A little more expensive, but more reliable. ASUS's gaming models are super-reliable for gaming, they don't overheat. Check notebook forums before you buy anything to see the complaints. As for SSD's, they are good, but much depends on how you use a laptop- if you turn your laptop on and off a lot, SSD's are awesome, if you tend to leave it on, they'r

I'm thinking it might be there to discourage razing and maybe city spam.

The thing is I think most folks would prefer 1 powerful city to out-produce 3 weak cities. I'd like to see the minimum building time be level based, maybe level 3-4 cities cut it to 2 and level 5 cut it to 1?

The current rushing mechanic exploit (I'm going to call it an exploit) is unintuitive and well, stupid. One idea: could min turn build time be a function of city level (6-city level?), and could production be capped at x% of the production needed to build an item- Those things might help solve a couple of problems at once. (pop not meaning enough, and rush exploit. Maybe have extra min build for some things, and make them unrushable. &

[quote who="larienna" reply="44" id="3228553"] AI bug found, they don’t put any concern on player build up unless THEY dislike the player. Don't push that one too far, I always hate it where you are in harmony with a player and they suddenly want to kill you if you are too strong. Maybe having allied victory conditions would prevent an AI to turncoat on the player because he know he can win with him. With regard to unfair starting c

[quote who="zhukodim" reply="103" id="3228625"]I play AoW2. The game lives on multiplayer. There are a lot of mods. Each mode is 2.5 people. But a large Number of people play it in multiplayer patch. Where no "pink dragons", etc. Duel, the FFA and the game with the unions , what could be better? AI will never be good in these games, there will always be exploits and methods easy game against him. [/quote] AoW2 didn't have a singleplayer AI period.</p

I never really bothered with modding GalCiv 2, not because the mods were bad, but because it was kinda clunky to install mods. Hopefully this is not the case with FE. Civ 4, folks could have an .exe install mods and click to run mods, never saw that with GC2- I think that did a lot for modding.

More cities do = more research. It's easier to build many studies than go up the tech tree to higher lvl buildings. I wish min turn times could be adjustable by unit.

No rush, this game has to be gotten right.

Mods require a userbase to enjoy and make them, a great foundation of a game to be the base, and ability to mod the game as much as possible. FFH2 wouldn't have been made without Civ4 being a great game that was popular. The big impediment to FE modding will likely be the userbase, and maybe a lack of a way to .exe mods like you could in Civ 4 (I don't know if FE supports this or not) Good mods need to support lazy users.

One idea/suggestion: make Tower of Dominion upgrade a starting location to a certain minimum, and maybe cut the building time. Or create some game mechanic to guarantee a minimum 4/3/1 start.

AI needs to put higher priority on using its essence, even if it's just Sovereign's Call and dispelling that later on.

Allow them to choose at the start of the game whether to be life mana or death mana, or allow them to build both kinds of shards. That said, this would likely be a nightmare to code.

I think there's a balancing point made here. We think Grain is useless. Partial solution: Level-up buildings for level 3/4/5 need to be boss, and NOT be "while idle", which very few people end up using. Level 4/5 city bonues should be borderline broken.

[quote who="Jafo" reply="50" id="3225865"] Quoting RedneckDude, reply 48Soccer, Nasarog, soccer. No...Aussie Rules, RND/Nasarog, Aussie Rules. Yes, it's the oldest recognised code in the world. And boxing...I don't like boxing..... And I don't need a 'love-you-long-time' bride..... It's all spam....[/quote] I kinda wish Aussie rules got established in the US, it was fu

I like 4/2 over 3/3 for a starting city, but that's mostly for Kraxis who can rush build. For most factions 3/3/2 is better. The optimal options are essence and getting pioneers out fast (there's rarely reason to not pioneer spam)

What's really needed is buffing troops vs heroes in the mid-late game. There needs to be an RPS relationship (with the usual game exceptions) between troops, monsters, and heroes in the mid/end-game.

My suggestions: Piercing weapons get a first strike vs horses. Krax Fortify gives a big bonus as well. Heroes get a Piercing weapon promotion tree that gives bonus vs mounted as part of its bonuses. No Init bonus 50% chance of spell failure while mounted,unless you take Mounted Mage promotion (Path of the Mage) or promotion trait (Expensive) 50% accuracy penalty to archery unless Horse Archery promotion is chosen (Any tree) or trait

I can verify this happens to me as well.

I think it's WAD, and I'd like to keep it that way. There was a discussion about this around the beginning of beta 4.

I've already said no. I prefer normal books to these things. It's funny how much of a Luddite I can be at times.

High accuracy will counter high dodge.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgoVCx3ajYg&feature=plcp Proof ponies are dangerous. (semi-NSFW)

The AI needs to learn how to do this, or regen should be considered the opposite of "clink" damage

My dog is conflicted and chasing around his own tail.