It's a good discussion, but I'm not optimistic they will rewrite a tech tree at this point. In my personal opinion, I'm not sure why bows are their own separate weapon unlock. throw the low level bows into low level weapons, etc. I agree that making mounted warfare more difficult to unlock would be good for game balance. +army size is more useful on the harder difficulties, so I think you have to clarify the CONT
I don't know how many times I've suggested this, but I personally use THIS adventurer's guild: Adventurer's Guild Champions gain 2% of a level per season when stationed in a city with an adventurer's guild. 1 &nbs
Consider the following change which I suggested back in FE which would make administrators feasible, and also help champions level, albeit slowly. At 3% per season, a champion would gain a level every 34 seasons, so 3 levels every 100 turns. Also consider that the tech to build this isn't available immediately and it requires time to build. Adv guild in this application would NOT limited to 1 per faction, but 1 per city. Relatively expensive to build changed from 540 to 840 labor
What I don't understand, is how there can be a 2 page discussion about weapon balance that doesn't discuss weapons with purely elemental damage (e.g. fire/ice staves) being unable to receive ANY +damage bonuses, since these bonuses are added onto their non-existent weapon damage. For balance purposes, elemental damage weapons should do 1 point of physical damage in addition to their elemental damage (which could be lowered by a point) so that +damage bonuses wor
As in the title. My understanding is that berserked units "will not" cast spells. However, in my current .75 game this was not the case.
An issue since EWOM days. If governor/commanders gained xp from building completion in the city in which they were stationed, this issue wouldn't come up for discussion every patch. Within the current game dynamics, if the adv guild was not unique, and gave better than a quarter of a point of xp per season... you could actually level city managers. I was able to mod this in FE via the CoreImprovements.xml, so it can be done. @ Markon...
Rather than muddy the waters, I'm just going to say that Heavenfall and MQPiffle have already struck at the heart of the issues. I honestly don't know how the folks at Stardock work with the tools they do. The map tool is so buggy it would drive me insane to work with on a daily basis. Surely, these intelligent folks understand what a workaround is, and can recognize when they are doing some ridiculous action (exiting and reloading the game every time you save a
While I really do like your suggestions, I don't think the changes you suggest are likely to be implemented in the base game by the developers. Too much recoding required. As for the central issue you are addressing in the game balance for the wildlands, I think the key here is that the time and investment is no where near the rewards. Other than farming xp after you've won the game, why invest troops and energy into clearing a dangerous section of the map for s
Heavenfall has been THE best resource for implementing my own modifications on FE. I literally have an entire bookmark folder of helpful modding advice (most of which written to answer other people's questions) with specific, proven advice authored by Heavenfall. He deserves his own hero in the game, imo.
You saw an enemy AI cast a curse on a city?!!
I agree that there's so much more work to be done on FE that's higher priority for the game (balance and playability) that weather (while it would be great) probably isn't going to ever be implemented in FE. Great to see more Stardock folks browsing the forum though!
My guess is that the beta will be released on 3/12/2013, simultaneously with Heart of the Swarm. This confluence of events will answer the fundamental question "Would you rather see Kerrigan's storyline progression or be a part of the early feedback for a promising turn based strategy game?"
mqpiffle, thanks for mentioning that rise of the magi mod. It will be wonderful not to have to rebalance spells from the ground up, and rather enjoy someone else's work on that aspect of the game!
The fix for this is simple in concept, but not available in the current game. Make only the highest bonus in the army apply. i.e. if you have a sovereign with general (+25%) and a hero with Trainer (+10%), then only the +25% would be applied. Same for obsidian guard, and all other army bonuses. This would fix all this broken stacking nonsense and preserve the usefulness of the various abilities when mixed and matched (as intended, imo).
Valid points. Horrific Wail, Dirge, Howl. All of these can become broken in the right conditions. I think the problem lies in the way scaling doesn't take into account the map sizes, as you discuss. On a tiny or small map, these are non issues, but on a large (or soon to exist super large) map, such abilities scale perhaps too well. I like to provide fixes for problems, otherwise it's just bitching in my opinion. The fix is to make spells scale via a fraction ba
First of all, welcome to modding. Small projects like this are what got me hip deep into making my own version of FE. :) Secondly, I have a few clarifying questions: 1) Did you edit the CoreUnits.xml file in the base game directory or put yours in the mods directory. Try backing up the original file and replacing it with your edited version in the main game directory. The mods folder is poorly implemented and many things do not translate from ther
Hopefully this cap modifier is present in ElementalDefs.xml and can be adjusted. As long as it's not hardcoded, it's fixable. While I support incentives to split heroes apart, and can at least understand the need to taper off xp above a certain point (level 20? something above 13 certainly), I think that the implementation you describe would be perhaps too severe. I haven't had time to play 1.32 far enough to verify your results. Can a
[quote who="carn112004" reply="17" id="3323780"]What should the return of investment be with such investment picks?[/quote] I would have to say that the return on investment should be reasonably on par with an equivalent champion level up pick. Is it? I think the lower tier experience bonus picks probably are not (ever), and the higher tier picks (if taken early enough) probably are equivalent, now that I've looked at it. However, until tonight, I don't think I
Just for clarity... This post isn't a complaint about the vanilla game. It's just meant to facilitate a discussion. If that discussion eventually improves the game, by eliminating duplicate army bonus trait stacking for example, then all the better. I'm quite happy I posted it, since OliverFA_306 and Ulysses_31 provided me with the data I needed to take an accurate look at the impact of various levels of bonus xp gain.</span
All of those bonuses from Trainer, General, etc. DO stack, Carn112004, and with proper stacking can result in incredible (and abusable) bonuses. This is a good point. Should they stack with duplicates of themselves is another discussion entirely, in my opinion. The 85% bonus xp (option 4) requires Potential 1 + Potential 2 + Potential 3 + Knowledge. So at a cost of 4 early picks, you will eventually gain 5 picks and 5 levels, for a net gain of 1 pick and 5 levels.
Using the data provided by OliverFA_306 (thank you) and Ulysses_31's delta formula (again, excellent work)... we can see that total xp at a given level is estimated by the summation of all previous delta xp i.e. the summation from n=0 to n=(level desired to know total xp) of 1.4*x*x+8*x which can be verified to follow the total xp progression (within a small error) using the free online summation calculator on
@poot, First of all, I absolutely agree that requirements aren't as transparent as they could be, and I find your post well stated and well reasoned. However, I really wish you'd started a fresh post, instead of resurrecting that bit of infantile tantrum I had to wade through to get to your reply. I read new posts too. I promise. I think the real question is WHY you can't just build the building on a swam
I was also taking the xp booster traits due to behavior training from Beta. It was only once I took a look at the math did I realize I was probably shooting myself in the foot. I'm a big fan of making decisions exciting, but there are such limited avenues for "new" levelup traits. What if I took those 4 traits and turned them into summons? A level 1 shadow warg, level 4 bear, level 5 demon as substitutes for potential 1, 2 &
So I started doing a balance pass assessment of the heroes on the premise that Legendary won't change this aspect of the base FE game... and once I started formatting out the existing heroes it became clear to me that if you had a level 1 hero which typically starts with 2-3 traits... it was a potentially much stronger hero than the prebuilt upper level heroes. Originally, while playing the game, I just assumed these advanced heroes were sub p
I've taken a look at what you had in the zip file and I would be honored to throw your 68 heroes into my next game. Flick in particular, with his broken nose, and underdog traits made me smile. Don't sweat the small background story. Short and sweet is fine by me. No 68 novellas required! Can I have your permission to include your heroes into my ongoing game modification collection? (with credit of course) And +1 kar