Rishkith

In my last game I saw an AI take a scout unit through a sea of monsters (bears, stalkers, etc) as I was following behind killing them all for xp. The AI collected a couple heroes on the way as well. Then it wandered next to a shrill lord and he stepped out and stomped on them (staying on his lair the for many, many turns). That Shrill Lord never moved one block from his lair at all at any point. So something very weird is going on with monster AI in the way it treats Civ AIs. It is an

69 * .5 * .9 = 17.25 So the math is fine. Now if the AI is choosing path of the warrior after already suffering -50% HP then I have serious questions about the AI.

Yep, this was already happening in .913

Good ideas here. One of the lost Xs of 4X in this game is exploration because we skip straight to expansion. There is no tactical choice of where to settle first because the answer is settle everywhere before the AI spam gets it all. Before I've explored far in the game it already has outposts nearby everywhere. Seems less wild lands and more ... Risk I guess.

Nope, I recently had a new settlement destroyed in the game and the tile it was on and also all tiles within a 2 square radius lost all grain and materials. A big section of the world map in my game has lost all its grain and materials, I may win by attrition with the enemy AIs unable to build more than outposts now.

or make it so it won't move more than one square away from its lair.

[quote quoting="post"] 1. General feedback on if you felt the monsters were a threat (were they too strong, too weak, or about right).[/quote] Yes, they are a threat. I stay away from Death Demons and Drakes for a long time in the game right now. That said I don't feel there is quite a smooth transition of threats in the game. Also, the wild creatures don't seem to pay equal attention to the other civilizations like I feel they should. They ignore other AIs and just

I got one where all the monsters supposedly got +2 levels. Couldn't tell though, my sovereign kept slaughtering without interruption. Now if it multiplied the monsters and created new lairs, that would be more interesting.

You could probably just start with doubling the current bonuses and penalties with Prestige.

Might I suggest that you only put snow at ONE pole so as to not give the impression that the map represents an entire planet. More terrain types is a plus, but do please make sure that they also have a meaning. There should be different resources, monsters, quests and tactical bonuses to different terrain types.

I voted "good". Balance has improved considerably, that isn't to say it doesn't still have a ways to go. It has a considerably shorter ways to go now though. Quests are better. Getting a good bow for my Tarth sovereign was very nice. As was the Shadow world spell I picked up (a bit overpowered for the level I got it at though). On a note, don't go overboard with spells as quest rewards. It could unbalance the game quickly. Cities need more to do and make th

It really isn't much of a "beta test". I think they should rename the "pre-order and get a demo program".

[quote who="Jon Shafer" reply="31" id="3126983"] Yep, the whole point is to make the choices more meaningful, and not less - no argument there. There are indeed many games which put restrictions on the player which don't make the experience any more fun, but that wasn't what I was talking about in the article. My main goal was to address the widely-held belief that "more is always better - period." It is too often overlooked that limitations are what make decisions meaningful. Th

Seconded with Kongdej. I'm not attached to snakes, and would prefer to get rid of them but not to the silly point of reducing the game to CIV with Magic. Artistically I would like it if housing could be snuck back in (aesthetically only, not the mechanic) with some city streets. Cities should be organically shaped and not snaked or boxed. Changing the cities to 1 tile is a major city redesign at this point and you're going to have a whole host of new problems as bad or worse

He misses the mark. It isn't restrictions that matter at all. As Neo says in the second Matrix movie "The problem is Choice". It is meaningful choices that matter and make the game better. To make the choice meaningful, the act of choosing must place restrictions upon the player. This is why Shooters on rails or any type of "railroading" has a negative connotation in gaming. Restricting a player is a bad thing except when it provides the opportunity to make a meaningful ch

[quote who="seanw3" reply="86" id="3120636"] -More Detailed Tiles: You see, currently the number of objects a given tile can have is extremely limited because of the memory requirements of having them on the map. In a one tile system they would only be generated when one views the city view screen. This means we can use tons more objects when making a tile without memory constraints. This is very important for modders and users that want to play on large maps. There are several fea

Sounds great. Look forward to seeing another patch to the game finally.

Sorry, don't feel like taking the time to be politic. This just strikes as one of the gamey compromises that started happening with WoM that just made it not fun. I like the fact that cities grow organically and that I can make a city to be as Snaky as Seattle. I like that not just what buildings to place, but where to place them becomes a strategic choice. If "snaking" really bothers you there are lots of other things I've seen suggested in the past that are far less gimmicky

Honestly, I was burned too hard on E:WoM and I haven't seen enough of FE to hype it at all. There haven't even a half dozen "beta releases" so far. I haven't seen enough patches to judge a solid design concept, or to judge a commitment to squashing bugs, or to judge a commitment to improving the game based on player feedback. The good news is that the opposite is also true.

+3 would be fine for me if it was a relevant attribute. As said before getting + strength on mages or +int on guardians is not so good.

Was thinking today about what I don't like about leveling in FE. Many levels are meaningless with a flood of common traits you don't care about, while some are major when 3 rare traits pop and you have to choose very carefully knowing you might not have that choice again. So I tried thinking of analogies to non-computer games like I often do. Trading card games have common, uncommon and rare cards. When you buy a pack of cards you don't get a pack full of common cards and

[quote who="seanw3" reply="52" id="3106549"] Maybe a special Gladiator Arena could give units the extra Dex and Str in just one city. So you would train all your elite troops there. [/quote] It would be rather neat if your Arena had a chance to generate a Champion if the number of champions in your kingdom was too low.

Well first of all, rather than an unoriginal D&D alignment I'd rather see something more akin to Alpha Centuari's social engineering. You knew where each faction was going anyways for the most part, but it made it more flavorful. You might have choices of the type of government, religion, values, ethics, or attitudes towards implementing a magical society. As for factions I play I alternate. My first game is generally always Tarth with unmodified Lady Irane. Then I

Love the original post for Tarth a ton of great ideas but I have one caveat and a suggestion: First for money, how about disabling the high taxation rate for Tarth? Second, I disagree with any limitations on armor or weaponry for the Gladiator people. Gladiators should pick up any odd assortment of weapons and armor and be comfortable with it. If anything we should see them wielding more exotic weapons and armor. Rather than not letting them use h

Thumbs up for this thread! [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]