Ephafn

Well, if summoned troops are no longer 1 per summoner, they probably are no longer be going to be considered enchantments on the caster, but normal troops with normal upkeep, so Procipinee crown should not make them upkeep-free. My limited experience playing a summoner, I have to say that I dislike the disconnect between your summons and your magic schools. I would much prefer if the summoning skill tree went something like: - Shrill summon (allow you to summon shrill of any m

[quote]Watchtower gives units trained in the city the Charge trait (instead of bonus init to defending units)[/quote] While giving a free trait to units trained in a fortress with a watchtower is a good idea, I have to question giving the Charge trait. For two reasons: 1- Since it clashes with a trait that can be given to designed units (I assume you can't get it twice), players will have to design a Charge-less copy of any unit to which they gave the Charge trait to avoid

I have to chime in this thread, as getting a city of mine razed is the main reason why I reload the game (or plain stop playing). But I still think that there should be a heavy penalty from failing to defend a town. That made think that different enemy could give different penalties by taking your town. For instance, thieves could take half of your money and resource; intelligent monsters (ogres, darklings, etc...) could occupy the town as a lair and generate more monsters; wild animals would

[quote who="jutetrea" reply="9" id="3286217"]I would like to have something where I can say "I've essentially won, I'm unbeatable. Now lets see my score (which isn't kept!!!) and make it tougher). i.e. I'm at the steamroll stage, I'm set up and about to finish the game - now give me a real challenge to finish things off. [/quote] I strongly agree with your point of view. Part of the fun of a 4x game is to grow a strong power base, and this is weakened when you don&

Tuidjy, the main reason I prefer epic speed is to slow down the research speed. At normal speed, I often find myself researching military techs by bundles of 2 or 3 at a time, then designing new troops. Slowing it down means each tech is meaningful. But that's pretty much a matter of taste. Oh, and I also like the fact that towns are slow to build up, so I can't use kosiam settings without doubling all building costs (although that should be fairly easy to do with some script). <

After postponing it for a while, I decided to try out FE instead of simply lurking on the forum. After a few games, I figured out that for my play-style, setting the game speed to Epic makes it more interesting (no more getting to the end of the tech tree too early). Going through the XML files, Epic speed seems to only do 3 things: - Multiply the research costs by 3 - Multiply the building/training costs by 2 - Multiply the number of turns before the end-game

[quote]The AI not using spells in combat was caused by a rand()% design[/quote] Obviously you should have used (int)((rand() / (MAX_RAND + 1.0)) * max_val)...

I really like the proposed new damage formula: Damage = random(0.5, 1) * Attack / (1 + Defense / Attack) 1- It has limited randomness (a good thing for strategy games) 2- It has good limit behavior: for Att>>Def, Damage ~ Att-Def, for Att 3- It avoid the annoying 0-damage attacks, even against highly armored enemies. What I disagree on is the way combat speed work. Th

[quote who="Prime9" reply="71" id="2881900"] And to the people requesting that C++ is used, do you *really* want to be in a situation where a rogue/malicious mod has the full privileges of the game to do things to your system? It's very hard to properly sandbox native code - possible, but hard, and is it really worth Stardock spending time on that for this game, rather than spending time on the game itself? Whether intentionally or accidentally mods written than way would

[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="37" id="2881663"] Quoting Ephafn, reply 32I would tend toward Lua over Python, even though the class syntax is not very pretty, I believe that most mods will mostly rely on functional programming than object-oriented programming, so a little ugliness in the later can be excused. Boost.Phoenix version 3. A library to allow for functional programming in C++ (functional programming being where everything is a function, you likely meant procedural). Cur

[quote who="Winnihym" reply="33" id="2881644"]One vote for Fortran 77.[/quote] As one who had to deal with Fortran 77: awesome! The more people to share the pain, the better!

I have coded in C++, Lua and Python. First of all, while being able to code a little in C++ would be useful in the long course, when very complicated mod will happens, it should never be the main way to do so, as it is much harder to learn than the alternatives. I would tend toward Lua over Python, even though the class syntax is not very pretty, I believe that most mods will mostly rely on functional programming than object-oriented programming, so a little ugliness in the la

[quote]In theory this is good, but don't forget the game gives us terraforming spells...[/quote] MoM had them too, so that system will simply encourage you to terraform your land to make it better, and terraform your opponent land to be worse (then the desert spell will be useful).

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="26" id="2875762"]I am feeling the same way about city placement. It's elusive indeed. The beauty of say Civilization is that every tile in the game potentially has use. In Elemental, a tile is basically generic unless it has a resource on it. [/quote] Why not take a page from MoM and gives bonuses to cities depending on their surrounding? For example, for every tile of the given terrain in a 5x5 square around the city, yo

[quote]Q: Why do we force min's on weapon damage? A: For predictability, we want larger weapons to have predictably more damage. and we want players to be used to seeing the same damage ranges in attacks. We dont want a unit to hit for 40, then hit for 2 the next round against an unarmored opponent.[/quote] If you want predictability, why not average a bunch of rolls instead of skewing the distribution toward high values (and one-hit-kills)? If you average, say, the result

So, what does SCU actually means here? Scoville Units, Single Compilation Units or Scottish Cyclist's Union?

[quote]Did I just blow your mind or what?[/quote] Nope, you didn't just blow my mind. But it still is a cute idea, as regrouping all magical research into one system could make it more doable to focus on magical research while ignoring mundane research.

[quote who="Cerevox" reply="30" id="2849641"]You don't want to actually be touching the food resource or it is built on the citys time instead of by magical workers who spring from nothing.[/quote] Maybe for other settlements than the capital, but since we now start with enough material to build the farm from the start, my build order is farm + hut, so that I don't lose growth from having the capital population reach 10 before I build the hut. And since you cannot build anything in th

About the very beginning of the game: why didn't you found your capital next to the food resource? The way I see it, the only reason you were able to use it was because you snaked toward it with the beacon of hope. In a few games of the later 1.09? betas, I've seen AI players never expand due to the food resource being just out of reach, so that's something to be considered.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="5" id="2845049"]v1.2 is not the expansion.[/quote] Huh? I thought that v1.2 was the "free for everyone" mini-expansion, and v1.3 was to be the "free for the early customers" mini-expansion. If this is incorrect, was is the time scale for when you plan to do the first mini-expansion?

It's not only a portrait issue. I had the same problem and my Janusk went from a researcher (+1 tech) to a merchant (+1 gold) on reload.

[quote who="Tempestwrath" reply="34" id="2841020"] 3) More spells scale with INT, perhaps if not direct damage for elemental spells, with tertiary effects, to keep things interesting and flavorful for the various elements. (So INT is a more useful stat, especially for the Sovereign who is evidently unaffected by INT requirements, which I find sort of silly in the first place.) [/quote] My suggestion for making more spells INT-dependent would be to increase a lot the re

[quote who="Alstein" reply="48" id="2838775"] Case 2a) Player when they try to build on the tile, discovers the resource Case 2b) Player when they try to build on the tile, destroys the resource unknowingly (they never find out it was there) Case 2c) Player whenn they try to build on the tile, cannot Case 2d) A random selection of the above. [/quote] I actually like the way it is currently done (as it favors small empires over big ones), ther

As for the combat lockup, I had lockups when one of my unit had a set destination. Unsetting the destination of the unit (right-clicking on it) solved the problem.

Then I should try playing without Altar and Magnar, as this bug was pretty annoying (as I still get the occasional CTD, especially later in the game).