JMiddleton

There are still a lot of tough monsters in the early game, that Longbow is a godsend but we should have to earn it.

The joys of random numbers. Load your autosave and try again - it'll spawn somewhere else.

The bug was there in .952 - the knights showed up a few turns later.

Near the beginning of my last game I got an archer unit as a quest reward. They were awesome, deadly accurate and plenty of damage. We cleaned up on trolls, bears etc... I lost them (and the rest of my army) fighting some slaths that were guarding a 5-3-3 tile on a river where I wanted to build my 3rd city. I think my sovereign had 3 hit points left when that was over - couldn't have done it without the archers. Having said that, I've tried equipping a hero with a high value bow and h

Permanent disability instead of death for champions has been debated before. I agree with the developers that there should be lasting consequences for getting killed! I do like the idea of a champions' death spawning a quest where the reward is a relic of the champion that can be resurrected with a suitably expensive spell. Obviously, the quest will be open to all factions - your defeated champion may end up working for someone else! The best part is it gets rid of the need for perma

There are defenitely still balance issues. I suspect the difficulty lies in the interaction between the wildlife and the AI factions. In Beta 3, the monsters were very aggressive to the player but tended to ignore the AI. In Beta 4, they ignore everybody. I would prefer aggressive monsters as long as they are equally aggressive to all factions - it should be a struggle to expand, clearing the wildlife before establishing a city should be a requirement. Defending cities and resources from wand

In the real world, if a leader dies they are replaced by the next in line. "The king is dead, long live the king!" This would work in Elemental. Make the cost to escape high enough that getting killed several times in quick succession will exhaust it and prevent escape. But don't make death of the sovereign a game ender - promote a champion and keep going. You would, of course lose the skills and experience of the dead leader. On the other hand, the player can bypass the consequences

Outposts already have upgrades that enhance the attack, defense and mobility of forces within its zone of control but it would be really nice if there was an upgrade that would let troops inside the ZOC automatically defend the entire ZOC. Optionally, require attacking forces to take out the Outpost and any forces defending it - whether or not officially garrisoned - before they can attack other resources within the ZOC

Another option is to let the monsters loose. If the AI had to clear the wildlife and defend its cities, it would expand much more slowly - that created a problem for human players in Beta 3 when monsters attacked us but not the AI factions. Monsters seem to be a lot more docile in Beta 4. I'd prefer them to be aggressive as long as they treat all factions equally.

It is not reasonable to expect auto-battle to produce the same results as managing tactical combat yourself unless there is a large disparity in strength - even then, the auto resolution will tend to apply any damage to your weakest units while you can choose the order of engagement if managing the battle yourself. Most of the time you'll get much better results yourself but, if forced to fight a stronger opponent, the random number generator will occasionally deal you a wi

I play large maps with 3 opponents. I've completed 3 games with no corruption - 2 spell of making, 1 alliance. Am trying to achieve a quest victory but the game starts to slow down around turn 200 and becomes virtually unplayable before I can build up enough strength to take on the Dragon Quest. No instability - just slow - so I pick an easy way to end it.

I'm at turn 460 on a large map with 3 opponents. I control about half the map and can see another 20% or so because of trade routes. 12 cities - half of them idle at the moment. I could easily end the game with an alliance/diplomatic victory or a spell of making but want to complete the epic quests. No instability and saves load fine but the game has been slowing down since about turn 200 and I'm now spending at least half my time watching the hour glass. If it gets much slower,

If you keep the game going long enough to complete the Epic quests, it relatively easy to research the entire tech tree in FE. You can continue refining your knowledge but, as others have said, it's boring. It would be nice if the game generated a unique tech tree based on faction and the path chosen for the sovereign but, I accept that development may have progressed to the point where that is not practical. At some point the player should be required to make choices that will limit thei

There are lots of differing opinions and lots of different styles of play. What we need is choice - we can already choose frequency of monsters and density of resources. Maybe we should be able to choose the minimum tile quality in the starting location 6, 7 or 8 point. Being able to set the agressiveness of monsters (and AI factions) might also make the game more enjoyable for new players, without reducing the challenge for experienced players. That way you can set the game for your level of

If you succeed you get a pet Ashwake dragon. If you're powerful enough to beat a flock of those things, you probably don't need a pet dragon! Like all the wildlife in the game, they have strengths and weaknesses. Check the stats and make sure you're properly equipped before taking them on.

Sovereign's start with a one level advantage and the ability to lose a fight without permanent damage. Low level champions are so fragile that the permanent damage has always been a frustation for me - I'd much rather see a loss of XP they can gain back over time, but it means the sovereign will tend to widen the gap over the course of the game. I've never been able to build my sovereign to the point where he/she could take on a major opponent alone - they must always be supported

Bear in mind that some of us enjoy the eXplore, eXpand and eXploit elements of the game far more than the eXterminate! I'm hopng that diplomacy and influence play a larger role in the final game and that careful management of diplomatic resources will allow the player to enjoy peaceful relations with the AI factions while pursuing a non-domination victory. My perfect game will have non combat champions who follow diplomatic and administrative paths with specialized quests they c

There are several excellent security products offered free of charge for personal, non-commercial use. The trade press reviews and ranks them periodically - do a search. Ad-Aware, AVG, Avast, even Microsoft Security Essentials does a pretty good job. I'm not opposed to paying for security software but I expect better performance and less obtrusive operation compared to the free products

Upgrading allows you to preserve the units experience which can be worth the cost if they've survived a few battles. There are also improvements you can research & build that reduce the cost of armor & weapons. By mid game, you should be rolling in money - the hard part is finding enough metal and crystal. GalCiv2 lets you upgrade all units of the same type in a single operation - that would be a useful option.

Another vote for some level of control over the Order of Battle. If it's too late in the development cycle, then at least put ranged units in the rear!

GalCiv II has an on screen clock - unobtrusive and very useful - especially if your plans for the next day require being awake and alert!

I've seen lots of maps where the starting location had nowhere to build, and others with one or two poor tiles in an otherwise barren landscape. Experienced players may appreciate the extra challenge but newer players, on levels normal or below, should be presented with a decent starting location. A good starting location is a force multiplier and the developers could easily use this, instead of crippling the AI, to adjust the game for lower levels - with the bonus that a

It's a pity OrionM42 didn't ask for insight on which faction people were playing and their style of play - I suspect that will have considerable influence on the difficulty level chosen. I play Altair on Easy - that was the default and I still find it challenging. My style of play is to expand slowly from a strong base - clearing the wildlife as I go. Probably not the most effective style for this game but, it's the way I like to play and the final game will be a lot more su

I'm not sure it's practical at this stage of development, but it is possible to create challenges - or quests - for administrators that impact income/production/research/unrest in the target city (or globally for the kingdom) depending on choices the governor makes. Good choices are rewarded with XP and a more productive city/kingdom. I'd base it on the old Hammurabi game. This is what happened last year, what changes do you want to make for next year?

New players are going to accept the defaults - whatever they happen to be - and should be rewarded with a challenging but enjoyable game. If the only way to succeed is mimicking the AI strategy, the developers have work to do.