Austinvn

[quote who="BoogieBac" reply="47" id="2924091"]There are many good things being done for FE, even if the new pipline also requires a bit less back and forth during early development.[/quote] Not to put words in your mouth, but is there an implication that, later on in FE's development, there will be more 'back-and-forth' than there is currently? I'm just curious if FE will ever have WoM's level of community involvement - insights into the development proce

[quote who="RFHolloway" reply="48" id="2915846"]would actually be better if this reduced initiative and defense[/quote] I'd hesitate to include any way of ever reducing an enemy's initiative. Keep in mind he needs initiative to take any action; if you can take away enough of his initiative often enough, there's the possibility of locking an enemy down such that they never get to act, which just isn't fun for anyone involved. Really anything that reduce

[quote who="Sarudak" reply="34" id="2915628"]Blunt should be good against armor not piercing. Although piercing should be better than cutting. Cutting should be best against opponents without armoring like creatures. In truth blunt is the type of damage that plate protects least against, although it protects better than mail. To counter blunt you would need thick padded armor that should probably hinder combat speed especially if worn under plate (although this would provide the best protecti

[quote who="ParadoxJinx" reply="2" id="2904674"]I'm guessing your champion spent alot of time in the field just to avoid going back to the castle LOL Sadly enough there was a bug with the twin though. Couldn't heal her, and When I took the group into combat, after you used the first one (had a bow) the twin could keep firing without loosing any actions. So she could pretty much sit there and wipe everything out.[/quote] With all due respect, I believe you're misinterpreting the

[quote who="kenata" reply="34" id="2905470"] I guess I am alone thinking that this is not necessarily a big deal. Since Units will have a base troop count of 4 instead of 1, the base health for this squad will be 8 instead of 10. This then keeps something similar to the current HP balance will also having units have decreasing effectiveness as they take damage. In general, it might be better to have a base hp of 3, which would result in a squad hp of 12, though this is something that can

[quote quoting="post"] Death of a sovereign will cause the rest of the faction to go over to the faction with the best dynasty connections[/quote] Sweet zombie jesus yes . Best news since release. And, hopefully, the harbinger of more dynasty improvements to come? That change alone will be good, but better if defeated sovereigns have their kingdoms split between factions with claims to the throne, those with stronger claims getting a bigger piece, possibly result

[quote who="Mtn_Man" reply="16" id="2899869"]I hate DLC because I have yet to see any DLC release that has as much content and value as a good ol' fashioned expansion pack. What especially grinds my gears is when the DLC is actually included on the disc but locked until you cough up another few bucks. I'm not convinced that the answer is to lower the entry price followed by nickel and diming the customer until they have everything they would have gotten with a reg

[quote who="citywolfdreams" reply="36" id="2898308"] .. As you can see, just by adding two simple properties, combining them together, and adding a few relatively simple lines of AI code, you get a ferocious unit that will require some serious strategic thought in order to defeat. This is why weapon properties which are always on are a much better design choice than giving weapons special abilities. The example I described above would be extremely difficult to program us

The advantage of hotseat (to me, anyway) is that it's a lot easier to get a friend into the game that way - they don't need to buy the game, they don't need to install it, they can just sit down at your pc and you can start a co-op style game - hopefully getting them interested enough to buy the game for themselves at some point. LAN (or online, or pbem) is something else entirely - it doesn't replace hotseat or vice versa, they're different experiences for different situations. It's

Yes. It's not crucial to me, I'd still stick to single player mostly.. but I'd at least try out multiplayer if it had all the single player features . Multiplayer without tactical combat or quests or anything else that makes Elemental what it is, is not something I'm interested in at all. Hotseat and/or pbem would also make it much easier for me to get into MP and maybe even get some friends to try it, these are mandatory to make MP really shine in a slow-paced TBS I t

Honestly haven't been saying much myself because my biggest wants for FE - things like completely redone tactical combat, or a more fleshed out and dangerous fantasy world to explore - are the areas Stardock has already recognized as needing improvement and promised to work on with FE. Since they acknowledge the game's biggest problems (as I see them, anyway), and intend to do something about them, but we don't know specifically what they intend to do - what is there to be said? I'm

[quote who="TheProgress" reply="54" id="2894188"] I've heard you'll no longer be able to directly construct buildings or command units (other than your own sovereign) but now you'll be free to choose from over 10 different noses while creating your custom sovereign.[/quote] Fair enough, but if they're improving sovereign customization, I hope we get the ability to dye armor. For that I'd be willing to give up the economy and research and.. what the hell, I'd throw in dip

[quote who="kenata" reply="8" id="2894189"] Monasteries are one per city, so you couldn't build 3 of them in one city. Honestly, this building just needs to be made into a percentage improvement instead of a straight resource creator.[/quote] Yeah I suspected as much, but still - you could build something in those extra 5 turns, if not another Monastery. Build time is a meaningful resource when you're generating population/materials/etc faster than you can make buildings

[quote who="kenata" reply="5" id="2894164"] The build time is the only significant advantage, after 30 turns you will be producing 9pts per turn vs 6 with the Arcane labs - however that is more than offset by the pop upkeep, which is likely to be the limiting factor. I am not exactly sure how you came to this conclusion.[/quote] He's right in a way, your earlier comparison didn't consider that the Monastery-builder can continue building other things in the last 5 turns

[quote who="kapeman" reply="52" id="2894137"] Quoting Xadie, reply 51It's a good thing that Fallen Enchantress is concept wise made from scratch. I think Elemental: War of Magic has too many construction sites to ever reach the status of polished and fun. Though I still hope you guys aim to create a full blown 4X game. I could be wrong, and I hope I am, but the way I read the press release and the following info, I get the impression that FE will be more

[quote who="Tridus" reply="32" id="2892818"] ..I don't know. But I do know that doing a couple of things really well is better then doing ten poorly. [/quote] I agree that, to get combat as good as say AoW:SM, they'd have to focus on it to the exclusion of other aspects of gameplay (just like AoW:SM did). Thing is, there's a lot of grey area between the current very simple exploit-the-AI combat and AoW:SM's combat. I think Kenata's point is that, while yes it would tak

[quote who="RFHolloway" reply="25" id="2884889"]I'm finding the reverse early on - 6/6 vs 6/6 gives a damage range of 0 to 5 with a mean of 1 for both which leads to some long battles with 18 HP[/quote] That's only about 3 rounds of combat, though - you attack 3x, enemy attacks 3x, 3x counterattacks each. You should be doing about 6 to each other each round - okay, less a bit for dodging, but still - call it 4 rounds. That isn't what I'd call a long battle, although opinions wi

[quote who="Werewindlefr" reply="23" id="2884878"] If the combat is too long, it breaks the pace of the 4X game. But yes, a large number of factors (extremely high values of attack/defense compared to HPs, 3 attacks or plus per turn...) makes survival beyond the first round unlikely, unless your armor is good enough to block all the incoming damage (which happens way, way too often). As for weapons vs. armor, I think 75-80% would be even more appropriate, to soften the obsolescence

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="21" id="2884795"]Put together a webpage showing all the possible attack/defense combinations. Attack is top row, defense is first column. http://thedyinggrounds.com/Elemental/patch1.2.htm[/quote] Interesting results. Some basic rules of thumb, which could be useful ingame: If attack is twice defense, expect 45% mitigation If attack is equal to defense, expect 80% mitigation If attack is half defense, expect 95% mitigati

Right, I initially did (maximum damage - actual average damage vs. armor)/(maximum damage) to get mitigation percent. If I change it to (actual average damage vs. no armor - actual average damage vs. armor)/(actual average damage vs. no armor) as you did I get 85% (same as your result after rounding changes). Since your original was 87% obviously the rounding is having little effect either way.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="4" id="2884238"]These are the numbers I'm getting. Would be cool if someone could check the calcs. This would be for 1.2 (1.19 beta) Weapon Dmg Armor Defense &nbsp

[Sorry, forums being weird. Double post.]

[quote who="SirKid" reply="2" id="2881923"]Sorry if I repeated a question. I do think this is a must have.[/quote] Oh no, it's good that you ask. Frogboy has implied that Stardock actually pays attention to how often issues get brought up on the forums, more attention means they consider it more important to address. So here's +1 posts for ability to combine units and ability to upgrade individual units. These two features actually go well together - the big problem with combi

[quote who="Mandelik" reply="56" id="2881405"]I am pretty fed up to hear this. There are no "two expansion packs for free", only two "your game has been delayed" packages. Since the game is dull and empty (See last sentence of the quote!), we'll only get in the expansions what should have been already included in August. It's like going to McDonald's, ordering, paying and getting only the cola, while they bring you the burger 30min later and the french fries one hour later telling

[quote who="Werewindlefr" reply="17" id="2880719"] Play Crysis, and send me pictures of the solid-liquid phase transition of your GPU. And I'm just taking an extreme example here, but Dawn of War 2 (a well-optimized game that runs on decent hardware with everything at max) or Batman Arkham Asylum will also send your PC to Silicon hell.[/quote] I'm with Aeon on this one - when I have to upgrade, sure I'll get windows 7 on the new pc, but for the tim