So I read somewhere here that the next beta was delayed because QA were busy with Political Machine 2012. Well, behold evidence to the contrary! (Linked for the moment, since I can't get direct display) https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B_wmGOx0ofiBS0Zlc0RFQmNiUlU Apparently they were playing Warcraft. [e digicons]^_^[/e]
I gave it a good, because this was *the first time* the franchise has kept me compelled to play for more than 1/2 an hour at a time. It's only worth a good at the moment because a crap load more bugs and balancing funnies have cropped up. But I see it moving forward, which is a very good sign.
Hey Brad, Are you sure that tests the issue properly? I've seen lots of AI heroes with wounds from lost combats etc. What I noticed when playing 0.86 is when there were player units and AI units both near monsters, that the monsters would never go after the AI units. Also, the defenders of goodie huts would ignore AI units more often. If you play an auto game with all AI players though, you w
Hi guys, .77 is definitely going in the right direction. One place it hasn't improved on compared to its predecessor is damage values (Attack stat). Flat attack values undervalue the stat gains of troops and heroes. Basically if you get no STR, you're gimped in damage. What I propose is a small flat bonus, plus a small bonus multiplier based on the stats of the unit. THIS SHOULD NOT
Hi guys, So I've played with .77 a bit and the initiative system still seems to need some work. What I think is breaking the system comes down to 2 things: 1. All initiative costs are fixed. 2. There is no initiative modifier for moving (or it's too small). For example, the great fireball caster issue. I can (and I'm sure everyone else has) created a caster that