[quote who="moi-meme" reply="205" id="3354840"] What is it to you ? What makes army of doom so much better than stack of doom ?[/quote] Good question. Plus, stack of doom, when well done and well balanced (meaning something that you achieve through good strategy and playing well) is one of the most enjoyable things of strategy games, is like a well deserved reward for your superior strategy.
Is a bit strange to move from 0.87 to release. Isn't it?
Yes, I just got temporally confused anf wrote about the "shared" thing. The only difference between your resource and mine is the . Based on my experiences I don't think that what you see in cities is the resource contributed by that city. It is the whole quantity, because that's the way A_ADDITIVE works. It's a minor nuissance, but I think it's worth it.
I see. Thanks for the clarification! :)
[quote who="moi-meme" reply="179" id="3354748"] I've read in detail the changes between 0.85 which I played and the lastest version. Doesn't feel so overwhelming as to invalidate my opinon. My complaints stay valid. Until you show me the major issues which I missed that change the game so drastically in the latest version. I believe that you're trying to make me irrelevant because I raise real issues about the game; you like the game as it is. I do
[quote who="abob101" reply="20" id="3354740"] Nice one, that works a treat! Only minor bummer being that when you hover over the resource at the top of screen it shows the bonus to the Summons Capacity is coming from the city name rather than "units".... presumably because of the way the way the A_Additive thing works. Not a huge drama though... that's pretty cool and will run with that for now, as I think it seems best to have the limi
Use this Player AbilityBonus <StrVal
[quote who="moi-meme" reply="173" id="3354711"] The problem is not there. The problem is that heroes don't have the feel of heroes nowadays. They are more like interesting but not capital addition to an existing trained army.[/quote] That's the best definition of the issue I've seen in all those days. Simple and short yet it manages to capture all the essence of the problem. [e digicons]k1[/e]
Great concept! All the best with your work!
[quote quoting="post"] For example, If a unit has "Mercenary" (-10 gold when quene, -2 gold per turn, -50 production), I don't want the unit to be able to have "Fast" or "Ironskin". I will be thankful for any input for this particular issue. [/quote] I am curious. Would you be so kind to explain how you achieve that structure of costs? That sounds very smart and impressive!
[quote who="Lord Reliant" reply="169" id="3354683"] Quoting OliverFA_306, reply 168Perhaps you will be interested to know that you can remove the heroes split very easily. That's what I've done as I am against some units splitting XP and some units not splitting XP. I thougt about making all troops split XP but that would require a balancing work so I went the easy way. Could you post how you did it, in this thread or another? It would be interesting to experiment and
What about Summon Power? An Earth Shrill consumes 1 Summon Power as upkeep, and a Sand Golem consumes 2 Summon Power as upkeep. That would be in line with the current air/water/earth/fire/life/death power that already exists and you could even have Summon Shards, making your total Summon Power the sum provided by your champions and your shards. By the way, it's a great concept the one you are working on. Instead of just reshuffling what the game already has, you are creating a com
[quote who="moi-meme" reply="166" id="3354641"] There may have been late modifications. My last game dates back more than three weeks ago (I won't play again with xp split active ; and if the game is released with it, it will go to my virtual shelf).[/quote] Perhaps you will be interested to know that you can remove the heroes split very easily. That's what I've done as I am against some units splitting XP and some units not splitting XP. I thougt about making a
[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="145" id="3354343"] Quoting jwallstone, reply 144This way, the game can prevent the player from potentially acquiring a "stack of doom" until well into the late game. This is already in effect. Why change core game mechanics at this point? Removing this strategic element (XP split) from the game would make stacking heroes and not training units a no-brainer and you will soon find a thread where people are complaining about the sill
In my opinon it's great from the story-telling point of view that our sovereign starts so weak. What is not so great is that he/she stays mostly weak even at the end of the game. It would be great to take your sovereign from a normal being with a lot of potential at the start of the game to a demigod by the end of the same game.
I really like your approach of raising the number of soldiers. It makes a lot more sense, and champions will feel much more legendary. Best wishes with your work! [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
In fact I think that most of the complainers are not in the "non-split" group but in the "use the same coherent mechanic for everybody" group.
[quote who="halmal242" reply="139" id="3354278"] I almost wonder whether or not it would make more sense to implement the XP split for troops as well, ducks for cover. This would mean you then can't game the system no matter if you are running heroes or henchmen.[/quote] That makes a lot of sense. Either everybody splits or everybody doesn't.
[quote who="fenwe" reply="132" id="3354056"] Quoting OliverFA_306, reply 131 Not eating is easy. Not playing LH... that's a much more significant thing. I find it fairly easy, considering that currently Legendary Heroes is actually legendary Hero that is actually your sovereign. For those of you who like it, are you playing above Challenging? Is it possible that your not finding an issue because of higher available XP?[/quote]
Not eating is easy. Not playing LH... that's a much more significant thing.
You are realy confusted, davrovana! [e digicons];)[/e]
That's great news. Best of luck and lots of support for it [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
That's confusting... [e digicons]X([/e]
Congratulations on your good work parrottmath [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
[quote who="parrottmath" reply="112" id="3353374"] Most of what OliverFA is wanting to try out may not be done directly, but there are systems in place that will produce basically the same effect.[/quote] With all due respect, there is a difference between "can be done" and "can be EASILY done". That's why I felt the need to make that little comment. Other than that, I'd be extremely happy to be proven wrong when I say that something can't be done, beca