Wizard1200

[quote who="seanw3" reply="45" id="3076981"]Derek's third response to the OP will make things better, but as an archer hero, I will always need a higher strength to do better damage. As I level, why would I not take every strength option I see? The side effect of this is that I am now able to wear heavy plate with no penalty. Add to that a horse for only 100 gildar and even a low level archer becomes very proficient in rare and powerful platemail.[/quote] Huh? I think bo

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="35" id="3076483"]The design is that armor is heavy and increases encumbrance. The higher your encumbrance the slower for initiative (currently the range is from -1 to -3) and can reduce the units movement (by 1). 4. As I mentioned above we need some balancing to make the designed options feel like options. If players dont feel like their is a significant disadvantage to outfitting their archers with plate mail in a normal game then we have

I think mana should be used for heroes to let them cast spells, recruit them (disarm a magical trap) and equip them (summon items). Gildar should be used for cities and armies to build them and upgrade them. This would remove the problem that an item has the same value as the production of many years.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="31" id="3075890"]Harsher encumbrance limits just forces everyone into str. What's the point? Everyone already maxes str for damage and defense. [/quote] Not if dodge would be an alternate path, but currently accuracy scales with the level, but dodge does not and that is a huge problem.

The problem that only some stats scale with the level was already in WOM, but either all stats should scale with the level or none to avoid the problem you described. I think your encumbrance idea is great, but i would change the encumbrance levels: - None (1 - 25 %): no modifications - Light (26 - 50 %): accuracy - 1, dodge - 1, spell mastery - 1 - Medium (51 - 75 %): accuracy - 2, dodge - 2, spell mastery - 2 - Heavy (76 - 100 %): accuracy - 3, dodge

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="7" id="3075166"]Get rid of the "discipline" trait, or any trait that gives a + per level, and give units more defense against damaging spells. Fixed.[/quote] More defense against damage spells would result in all or nothing damage spells = bad game design. Spell resistance should work on all spells and it should always reduce the effect by 50 %.

[quote who="Xadie" reply="12" id="3075768"] In general I'm not so in favor in giving range weapons huge initiative mali. It would be nice to have a line of fire rule: if another enemy unit is in between the shooter and the target it will absorb the majority of the damage. With such a rule and Shields as a range weapon counter player can cover their vulnerable units. As long the Stardock people implement a limit for the number of equipped accessories, it shoul

[quote who="Lord Reliant" reply="20" id="3075040"] I was just about to bring Age of Mythology in as an example. In there, heroes were awesome against mythical units (beasts, special units, etc.), but a large army could defeat a single hero or another, smaller army. Heroes being great against monsters seems good, but being weak versus large armies would seem like a good balance mechanism.[/quote] I think that is a better solution and it would work if a single unit can not kill mul

I think the initiative system is great, because the initiative should be very important, but, as you mentioned, FE has too many snowball effects. Initiative, spell damage, movement and mana per turn can get to extreme levels. Your suggestion to split strategical and tactical movement would help to remove some snowball effects and i think the talents should be more like the feats in D&D or the perks in Fallout. Many of them should give the hero special abilities (whirlwind: melee a

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="2" id="3074752"] EDIT: I guess what I'm talking about is not "node conversion" per se, but mana type conversion. [/quote] There is only one mana type in the game ...

[quote quoting="post"] 1. Provide a smaller damage bonus to keep the base damage and effect of the spell relatively similar and adjusted by less random elements. 1.x Provide no bonus to damage (or effect) 2. Have their bonuses capped to x number of shards. This will prevent larger maps with more nodes or the ability to change the type of node from getting out of control. 3. Reduce the mana cost of spells appropriate to their school. This s

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="4" id="3072547"]Honestly champions were underpowered through much of development. We put more loot in the world, still underpowered, we made that loot better, still underpowered. Then we made them not die. Power![/quote] The problem is not only the loot. The problem is that FE has currently too many luck based mechanics: - get the powerful talents (evoker, affinity, ...) - find the right shards (+ spell damage and + ma

I think that is a great idea and if it is done right this: [quote who="Stupidity10" reply="4" id="3072842"]You do realize that your suggesting an entirely new game right? One where half the games content is thown out?[/quote] should be no problem. The general could be immune to attacks and could only cast spells until the last unit in his army dies. After that the general is no longer immune to attacks and can attack with melee or ranged weapons, but the general has only the s

[quote quoting="post"] - There should be *very* few (maybe none) recruitable heroes on the map. Instead, heroes are spawned from your armies. So each time an army levels up, there's a chance that you'll be given the choice "A hero has emerged" - you're then given the choice of taking a lvl 1 hero and the army either reverts to lvl 1 (or half its level? The idea is the army strength is reduced because the key leader has left) or disbands, or leave the hero i

3, 8, 13

[quote who="StevenAus" reply="2" id="3071720"]Yeah I guess. I would be happy if all spells could be resisted completely if you pass a magic resistance check.[/quote] A partial resist would be much better, because the spell has at least some effect. That is the reason why a resistance check should reduce the effect of all spells by 50 % and items should only increase the spell resistance and not the resistance against spell damage.

double post

[quote quoting="post"] So what do I feel is missing ? Going back to MoM, what are the differences : enchantments are a no-no in FE. Too expensive to maintain tactical spells are a no in FE : Too expensive to cast direct damage spells are a big yes in FE : Too effective spell research is a no-no in FE : Doesn't exist The result is that mages in FE are heavy artillery and nothing more. Not bad, but could be better. b ) Mages M

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="81" id="3070453"]The issue is that if I defeat a tough foe in an epic battle one-on-one with a single hero, a battle which drained every last resource and forced me to use every trick in my arsenal, I want to feel rewarded for this action, not "Oh, why did I waste all that mana when I coulda just grabbed some buds, kicked back, and dispatched these foes with a flick of our magical bottle-openers and ALL GOT THE SAME XP ANYWAY?"[/quote] If the player is for

[quote quoting="post"] Champion Stacking One of the things humans do in the game is they just toss all their champions in one stack. This isn’t surprising, it is a good strategy with the way the game is currently set up. One of the things on Derek’s list has been to split experience up amongst the units in the group (rather than all the units simply getting all of it). It was supposed to be in Beta 1 but just didn’t get done. In hindsight, I wish I had got

I think that is a great idea, because currently there is too much randomness in the hero advancement. A player can have path of the mage, evoker III and affinity at level 5 and that is overpowered. Your idea could be used with my suggestion to replace the professions with the paths: https://forums.elementalgame.com/416771

[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="1" id="3069510"] Totally disagree here! The paths are unique to 'champions' and have little to do with the sovereign. The professions of your soveriegn should adjust the way you play the game (they are currently too minor to do so, but hopefully that will change). In the event you simply mean to adjust the effects of the available paths, that might be okay, but your numbers should really be percentages as +5 attack to a group is worth more

I think the paths (warrior, defender, assassin, mage and governor) should replace the professions (scholar, adventurer, hunter, general, warlord, ...), because the paths ... - should be unique - should define the hero - are more powerful - should improve the army in addition to the other effects: - Warrior: + 5 attack to all units if only one hero is in the army - Defender: + 5 defense to all units if only one hero is in the army</

I think it would help if the sovereign and every champion gets one talent (+ 5 attack to all units if only one hero is in the party, + 5 defense to all units if only one hero is in the party, + 2 initiative to all units if only one hero is in the party or + 2 move to all units if only one hero is in the party) for free to encourage less heroes in an army. Every profession and talent with + x per level should be replaced by + 3. Fireball and blizzard should be split into two di

I have noticed the same problem and in most cases i quit and start a new game, because i know i have won, but that is boring and unsatisfying. Another solution would be that the AI players fight together against the human player, because he is the biggest threat, or that the player with the highest score is attacked by a special monster as in Master of Orion.