I'm not trying to troll or to criticize the gesture, but I am wondering: what is the ecological footprint of the chemical processes involved in the creation of these panels? Do the ecological benefits of this array clearly outweigh the -ecological- cost?
Frogboy, I have a question about the interaction between AI and modding. Suppose I want to create an ability that, for instance, gives a small armor debuff for a round to the enemy with every weapon strike. Will the AI be able to use it semi-properly? Is there a way for the modders to give the AI rough guidelines concerning the production of units with this ability, and their use in battle? I am interested in expanding on the abilities that Fall Enchantress will feature
If a hero takes an arrow to the knee, can he become a guard?
Frogboy, as far as you know, is there any possibility to implement flanking or zone of control retaliation (age of wonder style: if you pass by an enemy, he can hit you for free) in Fallen Enchantress via modding? Positional advantage gives a lot of meaning to defense-oriented units... Also, can we have more videos (you promised more :D) and an introduction to unit abilities and modding changes? Can I have $100 and a mars bar? (No? Even if I say "
That's the definition of history versus prehistory: the existence of written records. I didn't invent it.
History begins with written records, so no.
[quote]Around Thanksgiving (and it'll be after it because no one wants to be on beta babysit watch during the 4 day weekend) the first phase will go out which will be to people who joined the earliest of the WOM betas.[/quote] I'm not sure what is considered the "earliest of the WOM betas". There was beta 1, opened to all those who had preordered very early, but there was a sort of beta earlier than that opened to only a select few based on forum karma and other factors. Which
Frogboy, I suggest you fix unit HP (they need something of the order of a 10fold increase) - and maybe look into making the tech level progression in Armor and Weapons less... sharp. This might require a change in the way heroes HP/attack works. Unit balance has been an issue for a while now, and the unit HP change in 1.3 wasn't very well received, because it made no sense and killed any potential fun in combat.
Well, we've been complaining about balance and low hit points since last august. There has been improvement (not enough by any mean, but improvement nonetheless) half a year ago. Now they've utterly destroyed any sort of sense the combat system could have by giving 2 HP to each unit (in the history of balance decision, this must be the most nonsensical ever made. I swear). Raising it to 3 HP was almost a joke. Weapons deal 20-40 damage easily, so HP should be around at least 20-25 per
Yes, the tactical combat remains broken without hope of recovery. With the weakest weapons being twice as strong as the base hit points, and the most powerful 10 times as strong, the game has entered a realm of silliness that makes it unplayable. The change to hit points is enough to destroy the game considering the importance the military aspect can have. If WoM is to actually retain any interest once FE is released, the combat system needs rethinking from the ground up. As it is, it
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="6" id="2959150"]Pre-order now to gain free access to a unique skin! Will also be available for 99.99$ after release. [/quote]Is this an EvE Online joke ? :D
[quote] The default of having 4 guys in a unit is good. But needs more balancing. One of the objectives is to make it clear that champions (and your sovereign) are a very big deal so we want those 4 guys to be mowed down. However, the weapons they carry make them glass canons. [/quote] Aha, so that was the objective behind the whole hit point reduction thing. Okay, fair enough, I understand. The issue is that the rest of th
I'm really curious: what was the idea behind the HP/model reduction ? I mean, it was already too low compared to the damage/model (by a factor 2 or 3, considering weapon potency), so how can dividing it by ~4 make the game more strategically interesting ? This is a serious question - I'm not trying to make fun of anyone, I'm just trying to understand the decision process, the reasoning that led to this change. Anyway, please revert the changes. Actually, ple
[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="32" id="2929877"] As for knowing about the availability of random techs from the beginning of the game or not. Both options have their advantages. But the big one in my mind (understanding that random techs are massive game changes) is that players have to be able to plan out their long term strategy. The whole point is that players are given an opportunity where they may be strong in a particular area. Having tha
[quote]One of the most interesting features of traits is that they can be conditional in Fallen Enchantress (unlike abilities). So they can only apply in specific situations. we currently have tags for:[/quote] Okay, this is definitely one of the most interesting features, and I really hope there will be many more conditional and triggers. Here's a list of triggers I'd really like to see, for instance (with an example of what could be done with it): -
[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="15" id="2906675"] Neither extreme. Some traits require prereqs (such as those that enable spells) so sions won't have access to them. But a lot of traits have no prereq so they are open to both Sions and Champions.[/quote]What about pre-reqs in the form of a trait tree ? As in, traits that could unlock the access to other traits in the list at a higher level ?
Fair enough. We are overreacting indeed; if something's wrong with the change, we'll see it in the beta patchlog.
The issue isn't that we were given information before beta. the issue is that the information was partial (I hope it was. I don't see how making a bad situation worse would improve the game). This change to unit HP and base unit size must come with other tactical combat changes, but we don't know which. Throwing us a bone and writing 2 lines about what changes will come with that one goes a long way into calming our fears.
[quote who="bonscott" reply="6" id="2903486"]Then again, don't be an arss on their forums and you won't have a problem. LOL.[/quote]What he said was far from making him an arse. “ Have you sold your souls to the EA devil ?” is pretty reasonable to me when it comes to player feedback. Freedom of expression doesn't exist on a private forum, so EA/Bioware have the right to do whatever they will, but it does contribute to making them complete dicks in my eyes.<
[quote who="Gaston_DAoust" reply="87" id="2902618"]Dragon Age 2 judged on it's own merits is a very good game. I think that most criticism comes from the fact that it is not streamlined enough for the younger CoD crowd, while not challenging enough for us older hard core guys. I believe the majority of the people who play the game will be somewhere in between and will enjoy the game just fine.[/quote]I find that judged on its own, Dragon Age 2 is a terrible game. It fails at what it's trying
What essence should have been is an additional cost for very potent spells or effect. A sacrificial cost. Something that prevent you from casting 10 volcanoes in the same game. And ultimately, something that you only get a limited supply of in the course of the game, a supply that cannot grow (or requires tremendous efforts to make it grow). I do not understand why it was abandoned. Mechanically, it didn't have to play the same role as mana. A larger empire brings more mana from the l
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="69" id="2902287"]I'd give it a solid 6, the repeating maps are a joke and I'm actually not even enjoying playing this game (I loved DA). I'd give it even lower if nightmare wasn't available, combat just feels like a total grind with no danger on lower difficultie. [/quote]Nightmare, with the absurd "repop" of enemies at random places, destroys any sort of positioning and strategy you could try to devise when fighting. It's so irritating that in the
[quote who="Savyg" reply="60" id="2902243"] Quoting Werewindlefr, reply 57The dialog system, with its "good answer, bad answer, funny answer" labels Don't really care whether or not people dislike the game but this isn't the entirety of it. Most conversations its the emotion, not whether its good or bad. From what I can tell its peaceful, sadistic, humorous, greedy, pushy/throwing your strength around, and sometimes trying to give people more options.[/quote]You mi
Saying I'm disappointed by this game wouldn't really sumarize what I really feel about it. No, I'm scared by this game. I'm scared because, to quote a post I've read from someone with a sense for the theatrical, it's a "declaration of war against PC gaming". DAO was a love letter to the old-school PC RPG, with some update. It could be improved, and it should have been in DA2. Instead, Bioware decided to make a game that would have nothing to do with an RPG and take its licence i
At Release: Elemental: War of Magic: D- Civilization V: B- New Vegas: B Starcraft 2: A River of Time: B Distant World: C+ Star Ruler: D- End of 2010: Elemental: War of Magic: C- Civilization V: B- New Vegas: B+ Starcraft 2: A River of Time: B Distant World: B+ Star Ruler: C Now: <ul