I've noticed this issue as well. It's like the sequence of events is reset after loading the game and the computer thinks it's the AI's turn instead of your current one. Maybe a threading or timing problem.
With the changes Derek posted so far, those will really help to make later game play more exciting and interesting. I'm sure the presence of more regular armies and magic generally will give it a different feel, plus faster-researched tech to make game progression less grind-ish. I was also encouraged to hear making the game more approachable. UI improvements will help a lot in that regard, as well as clarifying some game mechanics. Back to the topic at hand, I speculate t
Agreed. Small improvement, but a handy one.
Is .78 still scheduled to be out this week? (That big list makes me think no) Love the direction and info!
Nice thing with these ideas is that it shouldn't require a drastic overhaul, but just changes some of the balancing, which is a primary goal of the beta.
Wow. I wonder if there's a thread that's not being killed after clicking exit. Threading has been an issue with a lot of crashes.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="80" id="3077033"]The weekends I get to do whatever I want which, this weekend, was helping with sound and music.[/quote] "Sounds" like fun! ;) Even without playing through the AI stuff, I hope you got some good ideas from this list and the forums. It will be interesting to hear more about how this plays out in the future.
I find it weird in the game that you can exit to the main menu but then click Continue to go back into your old game. I'm not sure if it has much to do with that or not, but it's just strange to me that you can exit your game back to the main menu and still be playing it. I'll have to check FE and see if it's running next time I quit it.
Some of the crashing was resolved in .77, though I still have it there. It sounds like .78 should be even more stable.
It's weird how some spells are resistible and others aren't. There totally needs to be monsters that are virtually immune to physical attacks and then others who are totally immune to magical ones (and probably a few that have almost both). Right now, do fireballs hit a monster taking up 4 squares 4 times? AoE damage spells are probably the only ones I could think that viably could/should hit multiple times, but other spells like wither, mass curse, etc. are silly effecting in
This is a great game mechanic adjustment. I find it frustrating now that the Dodge attribute isn't particularly powerful in comparison to the Strength, since dodging just doesn't happen often. Someone should be able to gain a significant advantage to high Dexterity, and dodging should be one of those things. I also like how there are suggestions on increasing the penalties for higher encumbrance, including spell casting. Very good balancing.
I have an army with a level 6 trained unit (in this case, a Defender). In that same army I have a level 5 champion. If I attempt to visit a notable location (empty caravan, old battlefield, etc.), it will tell me my army needs a champion to visit it. I have one, though! I believe the issue is that each army is checked against the highest level unit or the one with the highest strength rating. Either way, it's seeing my level 6 troop as higher level/more powerful than my level 5 gu
[quote who="sweatyboatman" reply="17" id="3074437"]I see, you're thinking rock-paper-scissors, kinda like the RTS Age of Mythology. The problem with a rock-paper-scissors approach is that it makes all the units basically equivalent. Which is good for balance, but I really don't think that is a good mechanism for a game like FE. The champions are supposed to be awesome, I personally think they are the heart and soul of the game.[/quote] I was just about to bri
I'd rather avoid the specialist route. Adds unnecessary complexity and micromanagement. I do agree that city building should be more exciting/strategic, but I don't know that this is the answer.
Yep. But I got some other reward instead (I can't remember what off-hand), so for me it was more like the War Boar text didn't match what I actually received. The boar would have been pretty sweet, especially since the golems were decently hard.
I know Stardock appreciates the feedback from everyone, but I think what people are frustrated by is the lack of the same from Stardock (with the exception of some of your posts). As others have said, with ideas all over the place it's hard to know what to stand behind or contribute toward if it's not feasible or wouldn't be considered. It's also difficult to know if filing bugs is a waste of time or duly noted and will be addressed. And then if it's not addressed in the n
[quote who="vieuxchat" reply="9" id="3074328"]Why not give us the choice to add "effects" to a spell : a "greasy" fireball that would slow down the enemy, or a fire dart that summons a creature near the target, or a slow spell that also add a "frightened" effect, and so on ? More power ? More mana and more time to cast. Or *dreams* why not a spell designer ? (like the unit designer ?) You choose the target (area, self, one, chain), the effect, the duration, the power, the penetrati
[quote who="Fuel68" reply="55" id="3073609"]14. Improve UI. : I think streamline the UI look a bit more. It may just be me, but PLEASE MOVE the Quest List away from the left-side and move it to maybe a dropdown-mouseover from the center of the UI or above the minimap or to the right-side or something. The Left-side is already cluttered with
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="33" id="3073611"]There was a second bug we found and that was a repeat in the AI battle resolve code that resulted in an AI city being destroyed every time an AI champion or sovereign was defeated (regardless of where the battle took place or where). Obviously this will have a massvie impact on how "good" the AI seems.[/quote] So it was more like a triple kill? Or maybe a quadruple kill? [e digicons]^_^[/e] This should help a ton, too. Keep i
I wonder what MoM was like 77% complete? I'm still optimistic we'll hear something soon regarding the known issues and really looking forward to that next patch list (hint, hint Stardock!).
I've just generally disabled Auto Turn. I've found it makes it difficult to know when units have gone and when they haven't. I can't prove it, but it seems like when I just let the Auto Turn go, they don't move sometimes. Maybe I'm just getting impatient. I also have a hard time adjusting to when a unit moves and discovers something (item/quest), but then it immediately focuses you to a different unit that still needs to move. Makes knowing who found/got the it
Ouch. The use of possessive versus plural is pretty bad! Thankfully changing the XML should be an easy fix, especially because of the work you've put in identifying problems.
[quote who="Felidae1" reply="2" id="3073045"]@Lord Reliant: Lairs spawn new groups of enemies periodically. A new group might go wander off, or it might stay in the tile. If it stays, you can generally tell by the fact they get a special icon over them. Clicking again on such a unit will show you the unit underneath the top one.[/quote] I don't think two different monster armies should be able to occupy the same tile. Why wouldn't they just become one larger
So, a regular Pioneer can't build roads but a custom-made one can?
I've noticed the same thing. The tile isn't being redrawn/calculated properly. There's also some weirdness where when I attack a unit, another, more powerful version of that unit is "underneath" it. It's almost like one unit spawned but didn't join the rest of the army and then defeating it displayed/showed the others. Certainly a bug there, too.