Brilliant! Hopefully they can do this.
[quote who="cardinaldirection" reply="6" id="3240893"] Quoting sweatyboatman, reply 3 But heroes are not just another unit type. They are the focus of the game. To my understanding this is a strategy game with rpg elements, not the other way around. I could be wrong though?[/quote] You say potato and I say potato (but I pronounce it correctly [e digicons]:grin:[/e] ). It is certainly a strategy game with rpg elements. However, the rpg elements a
No. (Disclaimer: I am not [e digicons]:frogboy:[/e] ) This idea, which rears its ugly head in forum post after forum post, presumes that heroes are just another unit type; along with trained units and monsters the third point of the triangle. And so they should all be balanced against one-another. Heroes kill monsters, monsters kill troops, troops kill heroes. Just like Age of Mythology (and dozens of other games). But heroes are
or a save
The simultaneous turns really does set up a conundrum. The clearest benefit is that the AI can calculate its moves well in advance, which means no waiting when you end turn. It's also pure on a theoretical level. Everyone moves at once so there's no advantage to going first. The game is not "real-time", obviously, and you want to give the user the impression that they are taking discrete turns. So the player gets a special benefit: nothing moves while the pla
The guy is flying over the castle, I'm pretty sure. Though I do sometimes find it hard to tell what buildings are what inside the city. Here you go: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6130973/FE/PreviousAutoSave.EleSav It's the northern-most city. Also, noticed when looking at it again, rotating the camera, the light source doesn't rotate. So when you get to the dark side all the colo
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="13" id="3240337"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 11There's not a lot to it. A couple random rolls and a get closest enemy unit. I think the problem is the lack of monster intelligence and random rolls, if the monsters would like "Always" attack units near them, we would see a considerable amount of attrition on all sides, but also the monsters would not feel as picky about what they attack. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] This. 
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="89" id="3239985"]Great feedback! the biggest bug in beta 5c, IMO, is the lack of player interaction caused by fow uncovering not initiating relations. That has massive negative repricussions on the game. [/quote] Yeah, that's a nasty one. I am glad to hear that these things are being addressed. I rated it Poor because of the AI deficiencies and the schizophrenic monsters, but that's just because those things are my pet
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="1" id="3239885"] I think the problem lies in ranches and they're downgrades (The natural resource that provides horse) does not use space, so you can build cities on top of them. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] Did you mean to reply in this thread? Though that does sound like a problem, I have no ranches and did not build my city on top of one. This is a screenshot of the fortress tile and that guy is flying.
I just got my fortress city to level 3 and I picked the level-up bonus of a Watchtower (+5 initiative and +1 Catapult when defending). Terrific! Though it appears the art for that improvement is not yet in the game: Either that, or my city is home to the Flying Guardsman!
Is the FE engine capable of calculating this tactically (rather than per attack). I would like to see something that takes into account the number of units in the tiles around you. If the numbers are about even, then no penalty. If your unit is facing off alone against say 3x their number then they get a debuff (swarmed) and lose initiative. Similarly,if there are units on three sides of your unit you get the debuff (flanked) which would reduce armor and accuracy. That would b
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="15" id="3238401"] Quoting sweatyboatman, reply 14 Damage scales with strength (8 + strength/2?). Whats this strength your talking about? They phased that out in beta 4 I think it was. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] [e digicons]:moo:[/e] well whatever...
I know it's been a problem forever, but I had thought progress was being made as of the last patch. My heart literally dropped when I saw that pioneer sharing a tile with the mites that should have killed it. I really don't want to concern troll. I hate the posts that say, XXX must be fixed before release or FE will be a disaster. But this is bad. It's really bad. Watching the AI waltz through monster infested territory and spring up outpost after o
What I would do: No mana cost (it's not magic) but it takes two turns. Put a two turn cooldown. Has a chance to stun (or does that come automatically with blunt damage). Damage scales with strength (8 + strength/2?).
Started a new game, love the New Game interface and all the options. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] Takes way too long to build meat shields. There's got to be a better way to balance late game troop building than making the early game a tedious slog as you wait 15 turns for a couple guys to make themselves some spears. Or maybe I just need to learn to play the game better and stop trying to play this like it's 0.95. [e digicons]:ninja:[/e]
[quote who="fenwe" reply="16" id="3237513"]In essence, you are paying the rushing cost + material value + *refit and re-train* costs (i.e. experienced unit gets even deadlier).[/quote] IMHO, you're trying to post-facto justify that the prices are weird. I can see the logic in saying that upgraded units are not experienced in their new upgraded equipment, but it still doesn't follow that it should cost significantly more to upgrade them. It would seem
Upgrade costs should reflect the cost of the stuff being upgraded. Period. Making higher level units pay more for the same equipment is gibberish and leads to completely unintuitive prices. Applying a multiplier to upgrade costs based on unit level only makes sense if there's some advantage to having poorly equipped units (like they leveled faster). But that is not the case, the opposite is true (A more expensive unit with chainmail and a better shield is more su
Great post! I'd like to echo the sentiment that you should move onto the tile after you win a battle (as long as the tile is empty). It's an unnecessary slow down in the early game. Units should be allowed to stack up on a tile. Moving around is painful enough without having your units move off roads to walk around a unit coming the other direction. The game needs to do a MUCH better job of showing that there's a stack of units on a tile. Th
I am pretty sure most abilities that upgrade like that stack (and Vital Strike does as you can see in the first screenshot: 15 = 1 + 1 + 10 + 1 + 2). Either way, the confusion suggests that they should adopt the OP's suggestion. Though, I imagine it would require a new property in the XML to link attributes as stackable.
[quote]So I go looking around some more. Second city expansion. And there's of course some Swamp Drake or whatever they're called sitting on that. This happens ALL the time. ALL the time. Talk about a pacing problem. The game blocks me from taking the second step in any reasonable 4X game. Now whatever plans I had for an opening game are gone. I'm losing. Might as well restart.[/quote] This sentiment shows up a lot on this forum. I think it reflects how homogenous ga
Sounds like interesting territory for a mod.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="8" id="3227694"]That's a small change that would have huge implications. I don't think you'll get anywhere with it, mostly the ai will just break down.. [/quote] fair enough. though hopefully modders will have the tools to teach the ai how to play the mod. otherwise modding will be limited to skinning and tweaking. that would be disappointing.
[quote]They might have won but the AI failed to treat my ranged *spells* intelligently and as a result, they crawled towards me to try to get the first Melee hit.[/quote] After the first few dozen turns of the game, this strategy is going to be almost always wrong. The only case where it matters is if you're attacking a low-defense target with one or two low-defense units. That is, if getting hit before you can attack will reduce (or eliminate) the units ability to att
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="5" id="3227476"]Correct, I can't think of any way to limit army movement to champion movement.[/quote] It's not possible to give a unit 0 movement? So that it's only movement points come when its combined with a champion who has +2 moves or whatever?
I believe there are supposed to be at least 16 question marks in the summon developer incantation. That would explain why it didn't work.