Apheirox

Wish you were right about it being a molehill. This is a crippling issue with the game. My current game is on a medium map with four players. This is within the 'recommended' settings. I currently have 22 cities, which don't cover even half the map - so imagine how bad it would get if playing 'Huge'. The game is in the bag, yes, but I should be able to expand my empire when there is still lots of highly valuable land available. I also shouldn't h

I've formerly written and debated at length about this topic on the Steam Forums, but since it still isn't acknowledged by the StarDock team (or, it would seem, the community at large) how broken the current economic model is I'm going to give it another shot here in hopes of this issue getting the needed attention. First, let's clear a few things: 1) I am not inherently opposed to a system the penalizes an empire for grow

Cheers, joeball, you are being most helpful.

My question is two-part: 1) When I trade 23 points in warfare for 17 points in Yithril AI's civilization tech, what exactly do I get? Are those 17 points worth the same amount of research as if I invested 17 points of 'main' research into the tech, or is there some modifier? 2) How am I generating these research points I have available for trade in the first place? Is it some percentage of my main research that gets converted into &#39

Thanks for all the detailed information!

Weird, there was another thread on here where everybody said it lowers target's defense. Now I'm confused as to who is right. May I ask what your source is for this information? With +1 attack and +5 accuracy per friendly, it would seem swarm is very strong early in the game but gets significantly weaker later. Not sure I like that (why would superior numbers stop being useful?)

I understand that 'swarm' works by lowering enemy defense for each adjacent unit, but [i]exactly how much[/i] does it lower it? Thanks!

This is [i]such[/i] a bad bug. Needs to be fixed in 1.4.

Somebody is enjoying the game... Good to see! :) 1) It's expensive to keep dispelling and recasting enchantments, I don't think that's worth it. I think you're better off casting stuff like Courage and Evade and then just resting one more turn instead of regenerating. These spells might mean you don't take as much damage in the first place. 2) Mages are generally not expendable units, but the game does tend to put you in situat

I didn't know the AI was incapable of this. While I realize this is a less-than-satisfying solution, you can choose simply not to use upgrades yourself, if you feel it is worth it in the name of balance. That's essentially the exact same as not being able to, as you request. Obviously, this needs to prioritized for patching, though.

Patience, young Padawan. Yarlen came forth over at Steam forums and revealed that there is indeed something planned, but he of course didn't specify what it is... If you're a bit tired of FE, I suggest you take a look at Warlock: Master of the Arcane. Easily one of the best fantasy turn-based strategy games out there, so another game well worth supporting.

Frogboy, regardless of what there is to be said for the AI in your games being good enough or not, know that a journal like this where you give us, your customers, insight into the problems and decisions you face are extremely appreciated. It makes it so much easier to be forgivable about any grievances one might have with a game and sympathize with you as a developer when you open the door to your minds to us, so to speak, instead of being the nameless, faceless overlord I for one unfortunat

I disagree completely. The world being populated by dangerous magical creatures out of legends such as dragons is precisely one of the great attractions of the game. This isn't Civilization, this is Un-Civilization, and the very ground you walk upon is potentially hostile to you, the world an opponent in itself. Adapt, overcome, survive. It's great! Some things can seem 'unfair', such as the coal stones spell. That's why you should always inspect cre

Not just differently sized wildlands, but truly 'random' wildlands (it's contents still fitting within its theme) would be very interesting.

Navies and the inclusions of features such as separate continents etc as known from Civilization would be a great boon to the game and I'd be very interested in seeing this in DLC or an expansion pack. I do believe, however, that this is asking for a *lot*, I imagine it would be very challenging to reprogram the engine to be able to feature all such things.

In the particular situation you describe, it would, not knowing of other factors, be a tough call. However, essence is generally superior to grain and material. It depends on a number of factors, though, such as what spells you have available to cast on a city, what your overall situation is etc. Also, the later in the game you are, the better essence becomes (due to spells such as Arcane Forge). Essence is generally extremely powerful, probably even too powerful. Beyon

deleted.

To answer the title question: Yes, heroes - and namely Commanders - absolutely, positively should gain XP from managing a city and it's a huge oversight they don't. On that topic, the 0.25 XP/turn from the Adventurers Guild's bonus to stationed heroes is completely ridiculous - 0.25 is such a tiny amount it is utterly meaningless. I don't know what the developers were thinking there, the amount gained should be ten times as much or higher to begin to become even remotely meani