Assuming you are talking about the Fallen Enchantress beta, you should have gotten a dialogue box. I did. If you didn't something is amiss. The password would be for the Stardock account you either purchased WoM for in 2010, or or used to pre-order FE with. https://store.stardock.com/login
[quote who="Lawlesss" reply="66" id="3095170"]I don't know if anyone's mentioned this already, but the problem may be that every unit gets first strike. If it is the attacker, its damage is inflicted and casualties assessed against its target, before the target responds. This should really only happen for some units. [/quote] Yeah, I dont get worked up over the first strike thing like some people. Plenty of good tactical games allow this. T
Answer me this, while we're on the subject. Why do we need an entirely separate multiplicative combat system for army units, anyway? The one for solo units is pretty intuitive, unlike the wackiness you get with the squad units. The game made more sense to me when I was just fighting champions against monsters. Since I'm in the habit of asking dumb questions, why can't the army units function like any other unit, with the appearance of more "guys"
[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="63" id="3095097"] @Bingjack For the second time you misunderstand how combat works. That squad is -not- attacking for 50.[/quote] No, I understood you the first time. What I also understand is that it doesnt matter, the effect is the same. Large squads attack for huge amounts of damage. More damage than I would even want them to do in a single strike against completely unarmored opponents with high HP, unless the damage was the r
This was a problem back in WoM as well.
[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="58" id="3094977"] Realism aside, different functioning weapon types are much more preferably to simpy inflicting more or less damage to various armors. In addition looking for ways that weapon types can effectively bypass armors is against the nature of this thread, as it's intent was to look for ways to increase the survivability of regular units. [/quote] This goes back to my belief tha
@ Tasunke We're well off topic now, but something along those lines sounds reasonable to me. Don't know if we'll see it. We had the same public discussions prior to WoM too. It's all deja vu. I just honestly don't know if the devs are up for that degree of damage modeling. Just don't give too much love to blun
[quote who="Stupidity10" reply="2" id="3094708"] Quoting CdrRogdan, reply 1 This actually isn't true. The champion may be missing traits but they tend to have higher stats. Given that the majority of traits raise stats I don't really see an issue with this. True for warriors maybe, but mage characters are all about the traits. Whats a mage without evoker or spells? Your pretty much never going to get enough levels on a high lv champion to get them even lv4 in a s
My understanding is that diplomacy has not yet been worked on in earnest, and is due for attention in a subsequent update. I have seen the AI defeat a monster, and not raid the lair or pick up a dropped item, though.
[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="4" id="3094720"] The game needs to recognize items gained by the faction (not just champions) and place them in a treasury that can be accessed while within allied territory. There could be a little button beside the item that says: "Teleport" that had a very small mana cost (15 sounds about right), and regular units that defeat enemies have a popup at the end of battle that asks if you want to teleport that item back to the capital or let it be lost in the
[quote who="Tasunke" reply="49" id="3094659"] A knight in full plate, whether with a mount or without ... is going to be hard to kill. (Unless you are using a magical weapon with magical damage/ armor ignore I suppose). Blunt would be the best 'footsoldier' choice to fight plate. A lot of this is my opinion ... but the short answer is that YES Blunt weapons should have an advantage vs Plate when compared to other Weapon types [/quote]
[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="45" id="3094348"]Tasunke has the right of it here. Champions gaining more health per constitution point is fine. With levels rarely breaking 12, the benefits from high constition on heroes needs to be much higher. [/quote] This is the opposite direction I want to see, though. It was the way I initially thought too. "Well, everything is so slow now, those level ups need to be more potent". But then I realize
[quote who="seanw3" reply="170" id="3094554"]Could Longbows penetrate heavy plate? I [/quote] From what I understand, yes, depending on the quality of the plate, but it would be the result of an extreme matchup (superior longbow/arrow tip vs inferior plate/short range) and an exception, not the rule. As you say, they were still very dangerous as not all plate is of the same quality, and there are weak points. Now Crossbows could penetrate Plate at
[quote who="nitey" reply="162" id="3094142"]Bingjack, It was version .86. I pretty much solo my heroes unless I come accross what might be a difficult monster or AI stack and then I would join them together (I did that maybe 3 times). Most of my heroes are 5-7th level and my sovereign is 12th?, perhaps 11th. I usually play with dense monsters which probably offsets the effect of the slower leveling. [/quote] Ah yes, that make
[quote who="Bingjack" reply="46" id="3094168"] Quoting Tasunke, reply 45If you place a series of outposts, it creates a designated road. [/quote] Doesnt that take a specific tech in order to create roads between Outposts? Anyway, pioneer/outpost spam in order to place roads doesn't sound intentional. Even if so, it certainly doesn't sound fun. Anyway, roads are for moving units between your cities, but the game is about adventuring. Your main a
Sorry. Double post.
[quote who="Tasunke" reply="43" id="3094165"]Roads are for faster than 2 move travel. I am fine with 2 move travel in underdeveloped lands. (as I think in FE you can use enemy roads?)[/quote] That would be great if I had any control over placing roads in this game.
[quote who="Tasunke" reply="41" id="3094145"]If its later deemed necessary, I'm fine with separating Strategic movement from Tactical movement. At the moment it doesn't seem necessary though. (I mean a fast army probably should not be more than twice the speed of a slow army, so if tactical movement disparity ever got larger than 1:2 with trained units ... then I could see a reason for separating it)[/quote] I'd just like to see a wider degree of
[quote who="Kantok" reply="39" id="3094112"] I'm curious, what size map do you generally play on?[/quote] Large.
[quote who="nitey" reply="158" id="3094076"]So I tried it. And it works just as he said. I never needed a single unit other than my Sovereign and my couple of heroes that I wandered around with. I didn't even buy them any equipment other than a few heals because I just used what I found, selling off what I didn't need to build my treasury. If I found a hero available, I just hired him and sent him on his way to kill or be killed. The only unit I built were pioneers to build outposts t
[quote who="Manii Names" reply="1" id="3094031"]I usually have a bunch of spare low level champs, and use one of them to courier the item. With a horse you're pretty fast.[/quote] That's not always an option for everyone, in every game.
I know when I'm beaten. Would you guys at least be open to separating the concept of overland speed from tactical map movement? They could be balanced and fine tuned independently of each other. Balancing the game for one would not require screwing up the other. Most of the tactical battle games Ive played do not equate these concepts on a 1 to 1 basis. Doing so is problematic, as we see here.
If there is one, please forgive the post and direct me to it. I have not seen it in the spell directory. I know teleporting armies is a very powerful ability, but with as slow as Champions are for much of the game now, on large maps it would bring the game to a stop to turn back and give the item to another champion in another corner of the map, and you cant courier them with a lesser unit. Some items aren't right for the Champion that discovers them, but would be for anothe
[quote who="Yazari" reply="34" id="3093969"]Disagreeing is different than 'eviscerating'. I do not believe there has been a single personal attack and have not seen a reply that could be read into as a personal attack which I would define as 'eviscerating'.[/quote] No, not at all, I didnt mean it in any sort of defensive way. Im happy for the attention, and I was just speaking tongue in cheek, like in the OP where I invited people to rip me apart.
Frogboy, have you guys ever tossed around the idea of differentiating factions?