rwemack

rwemack

Joined Member # 2685625
22 Posts 88 Replies 473 Reputation

You guys have some great points. I guess I didn't want to make mages more powerful, it was more to help the developers stop trend of the reducing casting time for spells. The idea occurred to me after noticing that they reduced some casting times in the latest release notes. The jump in power between a 0 casting time and 1 casting time is huge. It effectively 1/2s the dps, and also makes it uncounterable. I would rather see spells default t

6 Replies 13,362 Views

I really like the concept of casting times, mostly because it allows the possibility of counter spells. Also, it gives you a choice of a small effect now, or a larger one later. The downside is that spell casters don't get to move very often, and with the speed of combat its unlikely they get more than a spell or two off. It also means that you can't really have long casting times, since that unit would be a sitting duck. </

6 Replies 13,362 Views

I think the OP is on to something with reducing initiative for mounted units. It takes a little bit to get going, but then they get going really fast. Mounted effect: -initiative (takes time to control the mount) +movement +melee attack +defense against melee -ranged attack (I don't think anyone would argue its as easy to use a bow on a horse, than standing on the ground) Also, for fun, the minus for

39 Replies 131,016 Views

Is anyone else moving their sovereign, and then having it instantly continue moving to a random location, usually far off the bottom of the screen? In my last game, this is happening almost everytime thatI don't use all the movement points for my sov. One thing that is different from last time I played FE is that I have two monitors on my computer. I don't know if that is contributing to this problem at all.

3 Replies 11,347 Views

I've noticed that the spell effect of Storm* has been displaying on one enemy, but doing damage to another. Has anyone else seen this? *(I might be getting the spell name wrong, but this is the air attack that takes 1 turn to cast and does damage to a random enemy)

3 Replies 4,527 Views

Hi, I encountered a bug where one of my heroes was duplicated after a battle, and the rest of my attack group moved to a nearby city. Basically, I took over a city (Arthurson), during which I lost one hero (Janusk). At the end of the battle, only Janusk was in the newly conquered city, and my other forces were nowhere to be seen. I thought they had disappeared completely, but I eventually found them in the nearest city, hanging out with Janusk's

1 Replies 3,232 Views

It looks like if you attack a monster with a mouse click, then after combat you stay in your square. If you set the destination to the monster location, and then hit end turn, then you end up in the square of the vanquished monster. The loot is underneath you, and there is not way to get it other than leaving the square and re-entering. Is anyone else seeing this?

5 Replies 5,034 Views

One thing that has been bothering me has been my feeling that pacing is too slow. I've come around to thinking that it is mostly in my head. I've accepted that each turn is a very small snapshot in time, and the game flows nicely as devs intended in that regard. The problem is that each turn takes too long because I am constantly micro managing my troops. I wouldn't be hard to wait 7 turns, if most of those turns were just a few twe

5 Replies 10,749 Views

This reminds me of this post: https://forums.elementalgame.com/393547 It also started with a semi-sarcastic example. It never went anywhere, just like this thread probably won't. It's too bad, because the fix makes so much sense.

37 Replies 64,475 Views

Hi, Currently I spend too much time reselecting the destination of the unit to make it move. This is especially true if its near its destination, and I don't want to end the turn. Is there a way to make the selected unit move along its predefined path? Also, is there a way to make all units that have a path to move other than ending the turn? I would like to do that near the beginning of a turn, and then cycle through the r

5 Replies 5,052 Views

This would be a great time for a dev to swoop in to say either, "Quit yer yammering about this utter nonsense, it will never happen" or "Hmm, I'm intrigued, please do go on"

218 Replies 398,796 Views

Hi Seanw3, I would love to debate warfare with you, you seem like a bright guy and you have some interesting ideas. It would be fun. Unfortunately, it seems rather pointless in this context. I'll just say I would imagine Patton would have something to say about your concept of what a good general should do, and I'll leave it at that. [quote who="seanw3" reply="149" id="3087611"]. The goal of combat, as stated by the devs, is to be fast and fun. <b

218 Replies 398,796 Views

[quote who="seanw3" reply="145" id="3087556"]No offense, but I don't want the solution to the balance problem to be fixed with a capture the control point gimmick. That has nothing to do with war. [/quote] Well, granted that I have no actually experience in warfare, either real or imaginary, but my understanding is that quite a bit of warfare has to do with protecting your supply train. It also is about not getting surrounded and cut off from retreat. Armies tend

218 Replies 398,796 Views

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="143" id="3087515"] What happens if each team has captured the other control point? Draw? Or does it only work if one team has both points?[/quote] Good question. Whoever captures it first wins. If they both take it on the same turn, then its a little harder. I guess it depends whether its the instant win or taking damage option. For the instant win, the tie breaker is determined by who initiated combat. I

218 Replies 398,796 Views

Ok, the best way to fix this is to change the objective of fight. You can win by killing off all the enemy, or taking away their control point. Each map will have two control points. There is one for each side. They are located on opposite sides of the map, behind where each army starts. If the opposing army sits in your control point uncontested* for 3 turns, then you lose. It could either be an immediate loss, or every unit starts to take dama

218 Replies 398,796 Views

[quote who="Beric01" reply="43" id="3075540"] Seeing as guerrilla warfare IS the counter to a stack of doom in military strategy, if the AI can't do it, it's pretty near worthless.[/quote] Based on the fact that most games don't do it well. It appears to be a non-trivial AI programming challenge. I'm hopeful these guys try it, and pull it off.

102 Replies 311,578 Views

Oh, and from a theme point of view, this could be considered a border skirmish type of affair. A slow build up before the city conquering all out war begins. The AI can contact the player, saying that the harassment will continue until a peace is made. Or, perhaps the AI will demand a tribute based on personality. If three or four AI's were doing this, the player might think twice about going to war with everyone. Even if he is the strongest power

102 Replies 311,578 Views

I would like to see the AI do some hit and run style raiding on the player's resources. Preferably, they would do it on opposite sides of the player's empire, or at least far away from the player's main force. Maybe if the AI opened several fronts, people would stop complaining/bragging about how their super stack is unstoppable.

102 Replies 311,578 Views

[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="2" id="3072695"]I am not a fan of this. Singular units should be unique in that they do not lose power. A dragon does not need to become less powerful as it's hitpoints decrease[/quote] I think most things become less effective when they start to get broken. That should be the default behavior. There are some creatures, such as beserkers and perhaps dragons that are exceptions. They have some sort of blood rage that makes them nasty

6 Replies 4,096 Views