Heavenfall

The first issue should be fixed in 1.1a. The second issue is something I can't fix. I told the devs about it because it applies in inverse when riding Wargs (the hero becomes tiny on cloth map). But they haven't fixed it.

Thanks, will tweak in next version.

I can't even imagine how much easier it would be to properly equip champions for the AI if this was available. Sounds like a win-win.

I think warriors should have less attack from the Lethal traits, and instead get an overpower type trait later in the tree somewhere. Would make them worse in early game, better in late game.

Uploaded 1.1a, changelog http://childrenofstorm.wikidot.com/versions If you regularly play this mod and its new factions, please send me your unit designs so that I can include them into the mod! They can be found in Documents\My Games\LegendaryHeroes\Units\ and you can e-mail them to [email protected]

Current version compatible with 1.1

v.C = 1.1, no other changes than the expected changes after vanilla updates

I'm also not seeing this as released on Steam. I mean, is ANYONE playing 1.1 that didn't opt into beta?

Just need a final step for compatability with CoS, if you want to add it. For your sovereign Neikvaed, add these 1 1 1 1&lt

Yes, that does not work.

The Tame spell has this Beast meaning it can only be used on unittypes with Beast However, you cannot create new "classes" of monsters like this. You cannot just switch out "Beast" in those two lines with "Beast_Bear" or something.

I don't really do anything with Schools so I don't think it's this mod causing the issue.

Be aware that you cannot strictly speaking create new types of monsters using . What you can do is give all the appropriate unittypes a new unitstat, and then have the spell use that unitstat to work. HOWEVER, this would not prevent someone from casting a spell on a target if it doesn't have the unitstat. Checking target unitstats can only be done after the spell has been cast.

I use this XML when I am testing heroes, It allows me to summon a hero right from the start using the DEBUG spell. DEBUG If this spell shows up in your game, don't bother playing. S_SummonEarthElemental_Painting.png S_SummonEarthElemental_Icon.png&

Something else you could try is to have a prereq unitstat X on both the item and mounts. Then, add -1 unitstat X to both mounts and the item. That way, you should be able to make them mutually exclusive. But I am not sure if the unit design window supports unitstat prereqs - I recall that they didn't in FE but they have improved some parts of the prereq/trait system since.

[quote who="parrottmath" reply="3" id="3367013"]I think that would force the item to take up two slots, both the mounted and the cloak. Similar to adding these types in my Armored Militia mod[/quote] Yeah, that's the point. Type Cloak was just an example. Anyway what's the purpose of limiting them from equipping mounts? That doesn't make sense to me. The goal appears to be to have a way to dynamically add road-building to any unit designed. A pikeman, a crossbowman

I haven't tried this at all, but if their code is sloppy in the .exe it might work. Try putting two types, so first Cloak then Mount . This may allow you to take up the mount slot without including an actual mount in the artdef.

You need a proper gameitemtypeartdef like they have in coremounts.xml. Using the mount equipment type without including an actual mount is not an option.

Pretty much yes. The tooltip you see in-game is what you have in the modifier in the tag.

The game does not first looks in /mods/ folder, if there's a CoreSpells.xml there and in install directory it will read both (the installation file before the mod file). Depending on what you want to do, it may be easier to overwrite the installation file, or it may be easier to create a new file with spell info in the mods folder. If you do decide to copy a spell into the /mods/ folder you need to keep in mind that both tags and ar

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="4" id="3366590"] It's the fastest selling Elemental related game yet. It's doing substantially better than FE which itself did pretty decently.[/quote] Great news! More sequels plix?

Uh... that's a GLOWING review by RPS standards. The only thing they complain about is the lore not being pushed enough. I'm actually really surprised, because RPS usually glorify simplicity and emergent game design, instead of "wealth of content" games like FE:LH (for which they usually just go with "mish-mash of mechanics not tied together = bad"). But obviously FE:LH dodged that bullet - or should I say pulled it off perfectly?

Nope, it's just dragging things around and editing a few four-line scripts like this [quote]Sub Object_OnScriptEnter Object.Left = (Object.Parent.Object.Width / 2) - (Object.Width /2) - 25 Object.Top = (Object.Parent.Object.Height / 2) - (Object.Height /2) - 10 End Sub[/code]

Game funded! Really glad this is getting made, the gameplay sounds rather unique if you ask me (not that there's much info about gameplay heh). With no well-defined stretch goals other than "maybe multiplayer maybe physical copies if we go over the goal" it will be interesting if they try to nail any extra goals down before the end of the time period.

Yeah, just desktopx.