vieuxchat

No unit should get 3 turns when others have only 1. Even at level 15 or 40 or 45000. Only magical means could let you get such an advantage. Closed turn would mean initiative is a let down, still usefull but still a letdown (getting twice the initiative of someone else wouldn't help you much). Maybe a "Taunt" ability that halves the initiative of the target, and the taunted must target the taunting unit for the next 2 actions with amalus to accuracy ? A stat (c

Or a "Finish Him !" spell. You deal damage dependant on the number of "quares" the enemy controls, but the less they have, the more damage the spell does. For instance the spell does 1000 damages points divided by the number of squares : just add a high cost to that spell and you can't cast it early. Or add a spell that summons creatures right inside the defending city. Or a "ninja" spell that let you attack with temporary units before the combat even starts. Or a

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="67" id="3085805"]Btw, fe already has zones of control in tactical battles. I was thinking of suggesting the concept of fatigue. That basically, each turn units lose a % of their imitative until they're all the same speed. It would take several turns but eventuallythey'd equal out.[/quote] Fatigue in dominions 3 works very well, but its a stat that is used for a lot of things. Mabe each kind of action move/cast/at

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="7" id="3085357"]If your champion gets 3 moves for every 1 the monster gets, why shouldn't you be able to outdistance him? Another solution, then: Archer units may not shoot more than 6 times in any tactical combat.[/quote] Ammo. I think that is the solution, and abilities that could neglect arrows. So you have to think before attacking at a distance. The initiative system is showing its limits : A unit should never get 3 turns befo

[quote who="seanw3" reply="38" id="3085122"]I want to make a point about level requirements changing. If it is decided that this has to go there are only a few options. The game currently doesn't allow for a system where a stat check can determine if an item can be equipped. The quickest change would be to balance items so that weapons that are powerful are only awarded from very difficult tasks. The harder, but more desirable option would be to allow for unit stat checks.

One thing FE is missing are the "counter" spells of meta-magic spells that alter the way you get mana/use magic or your opponents get/use mana. It's missing a way to prevent strategic spells to be cast by enemies in your borders (expensive spell), to hamper the mana generation of your enemy ("Soul leeeek"), to add a randomization in the effect of enemy spells (for instance, each spell cast by the nemey wouldn't automatically be targeted at the right spot, but at a random place

Will we get the exact calculation for the attack/defense values in the final build ? I'd like to know the exact impact of one more point of attack/defense to the survival likeliness of my units. What I mean is "One more point will let me do 1 more point of damamge ? or 1/2 more point or 1/3 more point ? (The MoM calculations were like that : each point of attack had a 1/3 chance of doing a wound, and each point of defense had a 1/3 chance of blocking a wound)"

Very good news ! It really is taking shape ! A few things that made me tick while reading : [quote]We have gotten a lot of feedback with regards to the “first impression” elements of Fallen Enchantress. Part of that goal is to make it clear to players what the distinctions are between each faction and each sovereign.[/quote]What I can see here still need me to "read" the descriptions like "fire apprentice". A visual feedback like a number of fire icons woul

[quote who="Murteas" reply="1" id="3084271"]Hooray! Terrain bonuses. [/quote] Sorry, but that isn't "Terrain" bonus but "Territory" bonus (and it's already in) You get it when you fight a battle in your territory (within the borders of your realm).

Yep I'm in the beta (I was in the first first first first beta ever thrown to us : "You head north" in 8 bit graphics.) Hex based grid is really hard to implement. Orthogonal attacks just needs one more "if" well placed, and new capacities for "long weapons" like halberd to attack in diagonal (to bypass the well placed "if"). For stat check, I'm not sure if it would be hard to implement : what would it add ? Lots of new abilities based on stat. Leap and bounds, whirlwi

[quote who="Vallu751" reply="50" id="3083781"] Quoting vieuxchat, reply 49 Quoting Vallu751, reply 42Zone of Control is already in.. You mean that if you enter a zone of control of your enemy your are stopped ? Or that if you start in a Zoc Then you can't enter another ZoC right away ? I'm sorry but Zone of "control" need to get "control" gameplay attached. Units are stopped upon entering a square next to an enemy. So that would be yes to you

[quote who="Vallu751" reply="42" id="3083578"]Zone of Control is already in..[/quote] You mean that if you enter a zone of control of your enemy your are stopped ? Or that if you start in a Zoc Then you can't enter another ZoC right away ? I'm sorry but Zone of "control" need to get "control" gameplay attached. [quote who="seanw3" reply="44" id="3083626"]There is line between what can be changed and what cannot or will not be changed. It's fine to want orth

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="15" id="3082338"] Quoting Tasunke, reply 12From past experiences with WoM ... the general 'feel' of a tactical battle doesn't change. (within a given game) Tactical battles will be MORE BALANCED and LESS BUGGY upon release, but they will use the same philosophies that they have today. Given that WOM was based on turns rather than initiative, I don't see how you can really compare the two. In FE, tactical b

[quote who="Barrynor" reply="3" id="3078515"]Once you are dedicated to kill something, KILL IT! Currently the AI switches targets, especially against superior numbers, and attacks all of em a bit. If its dead, its not doing damage anymore. He who slaps the most wins... dead things dont slap. A unit with 1 HP leftover is still 100% more effective than a unit with 0 HP.[/quote] In fact that's not true in the game. Units that lose HP will also lose soldiers and then lose dice. If you

There's an option that automaticaly garrison your newly created units.

Or add a "retire" option. When a hero retire you can chose what he will be doing now : training new champions in the attached city (+1xp per turn for garrisoned champ), forging weapons, reducing training time, working for a better understanding between nations, etc.

About horses : maybe separate encumbrance in two kind : overall and on-character. A horse would allow more "overall" encumbrance but not more "on-character". So you would still be able to carry lots of stuff for variying situations, but you wouldn't be able to wear a heavy armor thanks to your horse.

Please. A trait "Master of disguise" that would allow you to do that. Please.

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 penetration (how high the magical defense need to be to ca

Do you remember the first visuals of WoM ? There were plenty of men.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="8" id="3074255"]Calling a spell from inside another spell could have all sorts of very cool implementations as well. But I think an "aura" modifier would be easier to implement.[/quote] It reminds me of "contingence" in D&D. Very usefull spell.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="1" id="3071746"] Allow items to demand prerequisites from unitstats[/quote] Please. No. Prerequisite are bad, bad, bad. Even level prerequisite are bad. Just give penalties due to the lack of a specific stat. For instance if you need 12 str and you have 10 then you just apply 80% of the effect of the item. Or something like that.

[quote who="BeardyDan" reply="18" id="3073614"][An Inn on Elemental] Bard: I will sing you the tale of the villainous Brunthus the Tenebrous! Villager1: Boring! Sir Roderick took his 200 men and massacred the poor sod. Bard: Oh, errr, the story of Hatian's staff? Villager2: Stolen by a Fire Elemental? "Bravely" returned by Ailsa the Ironeer, with her archer divisions hel

I just one-shot everything since level 8 or 9 with my berserker's axe.

The way MoM used mana per turn was brilliant. Why didn't they use it ? Here is how it worked : You can spend 10 mana per turn. Each turn you allocate your "power points" to skills, mana or research. "Skills" raised the cap of mana per turn, "mana" gave you more mana per turn and research was to research (:P). And there weren't any cap of cap in skill. So if you wanted to, you could be able to create a mage with a very very high skill that would be able to cast