coyote303

I'd like to see the arrow keys work in tactical (for scrolling the map) like they do in strategic.

I must say the AI surprised me in my last game. I had a horrible start but was making a comeback. I had all but defeated one faction that had declared war on me, and I was starting to feel confident. However, a second faction hit me where it hurt with a big stack and followed up with its Sovereign’s killer stack. Faction 2’s troops were better than mine, and its offensive was effective. I don’t doubt one of our resident experts could have gotten out of it, but it was

[quote who="Sentinemodo" reply="9" id="3288099"]I wanted to point out the issue about learning curve and that the ingame explanations are not suficient currently.[/quote] I agree it could, even should, be better. However, with the information available today here on the Internet, this isn't the big problem it would have been, say, 20 years ago. Also, at least there was enough in-game help to get me started playing the game, which is more than I can say for some games.

[quote who="Barrynor" reply="35" id="3285867"]I claimed a free copy. I finally had some actual time to play this week. *hands over his soul to Frogboy* A deal is a deal...[/quote] Oh no! I knew there was a catch! At least it was worth it.

[quote who="Alstein" reply="26" id="3285635"]...Another issue is growth is largely irrelevant as you reach the food caps so quickly.[/quote] Based on my first three games, I would have completely agreed. However, in my last game, I have found growth structures to be helpful. This is because game 4 has lasted longer, and I developed better food supplies. I am not making this point to prove the poster wrong but rather to point out how some things might at first seem worthless until you

I love this game. There is so much the designers got right. I was a little lost at first, but the learning curve is reasonable--especially if you're willing to browse the forums. Incidentally, I got the game for free since I purchased EWoM when it first came out. I'm grateful Stardock did this because I didn't like EWoM at all, so I never would have purchased and discovered this great game.

One thing that has made this game interesting is there are big bad-- unpredictable --monsters out there you need to avoid. If you accidentally end up close to one, they might attack but they might not. Some are advocating the monster make a bee-line toward any unit, stack, or city it knows it can defeat. The "cure" would be much worse than the way it is now. There have been many times I see a monster wander close to one of my cities, or a unit or stack of

I dunno. You put a lot of thought into this, and perhaps it's the way to go. However, I can't help but feeling it's a case of "be careful what you ask for,..." Perhaps "smart monsters" could be an option. EDIT: fixed minor typo.

I agree that the AI doesn't get preferential treatment, but wouldn't it be cool if monsters destroyed cities one improvement at a time? The city would only be razed when the last improvement was destroyed.

I love this game. And it would seem there are many who share my view. So, the OP’s dissertation that this game is terrible is flawed. He is welcome to dislike it or hate it for any reason, but that doesn’t necessarily mean there is anything bad about the game. So, I don’t understand all of the time he put in defending his position of how awful he thinks the game is. I love this game; you hate it. I get it. Why are yo

I have yet to have a monster take/raze one of my cities. Granted I'm only on my fourth game and I am playing on modest settings. I am also sure it is going to happen eventually. What I am not going to do is start a post that says "Players getting preferential treatment from AI Monsters." Just because I flipped "heads" four times in a row doesn't mean the coin doesn't have a "tails."

Scenario 1. I want to put a unit in the city queue and then cast call to arms to get the unit immediately. No chance to do so--turn ends. Scenario 2. I put something in the build queue, think better of it and want to change it. No chance to do so--turn ends. Scenario 3. I want to queue up a few improvements for a city. No chance to do so--turn ends. And the worst of all... Scenario 4. Move my main stack close to a city so I can check its defenses

3. I don't want to be bothered with trying to figure out the best placement for an improvement. Obviously there are advantages to snaking, but I don't like the mechanic or the idea of ridiculously shaped cities. I like that snaking is an option, so if someone else wants to snake, it certainly doesn't affect my game. However, the poll answer reads "I don't like snaking..." so that is my selection.

[quote who="Tuidjy" reply="1" id="3279147"]...Were the melee troops the only ones affected? [/quote] Yes, just the melee troops. Great advice on checking the detail results; it didn't occur to me.

I'm fighting Verga for about the sixth time when something weird happens. I have three melee and three archers (including my sovereign). Something happens to my melee troops. Two of them had their hit points drop to 0/30 and when I hit the space bar they keeled over dead. The third unit had all their hit points until I hit space, and then they keeled over dead, too. It was either a glitch or one hell of a(n unbalanced) spell! I reloaded and the battl

I like the frequent, incremental updates. In fact, the thing I hate most is to hear a developer say "yes we are aware of game-breaking bug xyz, and it will be fixed in our next update sometime next month or the month after."

Thank you for this guide! Not only will it help, it will increase my enjoyment of the game.

Because I'm a recovering alcoholic, I never "consume" alcohol in any game I play. This includes EverQuest, Word of Warcraft, and now of course, Fallen Enchantress. It seems silly, I know. However, I would never, ever suggest to a game designer not to put alcohol into a game (or to call it something else). It's my choice not to "consume," and I have no desire to inflict that choice on any other player.