[quote who="b0rsuk" reply="9" id="2794692"]How about just making full plate expensive, so it's not a good idea to dress scouts or archers in it ? They're not for taking damage. [/quote] Frankly, the mechanics of tactical battles are broken in this game with very minor improvements in some patches. I'll hold out for the 1.1 patch before giving my opinion but right now it's weak in a number of ways.
[quote who="Goldmos" reply="19" id="2794632"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 12 Ive been thinking of requiring food to construct an outpost. Thoughts? Well, my opinion is you should check WHY people city spam. I'm not sure myself because I only play at normal difficulty rigth now and on large map I only have about 10 city by the 600 th turn(don't know if it's city spam but it's not close to 50 that I red on other thread).So, first know why people city spam
[quote who="b0rsuk" reply="70" id="2794448"]Black Knight: It would help your case if you used more argumentation in your posts. Anyone can make a statement "X is not good for Y" or similar. Try to explain why. ------------------ I think most of it boils down to killer stacks and how you feel about them. A single very powerful force, not even an army, which is used to defeat 95% of enemies. It really gets tiresome after a while. [/quote] </p
[quote who="Stromko" reply="69" id="2794416"] The only reason it is broken now is that you can channel essence to a bunch of different heroes, and once they level up a few times you've got enough mana to teleport willy-nilly over your empire, crossing vast distances in the blink of an eye and reducing the need for multiple armies. [/quote] The reason it's broken is that the AI never uses it. If you have a squad with rifles but the
[quote who="Jandurin" reply="13" id="2794603"]not sure it matters... I started a game yesterday and now have a surplus of like 30 food. Probably the caravans need to be nerfed before food restrictions really matter. [/quote] Turn 350 I have a surplus of 98 food, that's 98 outposts. Thus, food has no effect on spam in the game-as-is.
[quote who="ElanaAhova" reply="5" id="2794550"]I agree wholeheartedly. I really enjoy EWoM. I see it going in a very good direction under SD's development. However, I imagined a world that was an "after the holocaust" type of place: A vast wasteland. It is too easy to generate food. I know many players ask SD to add more food. Irrigation was added. Mods add food (fisheries, for example). BTW, I use fisheries, and i am happy players make mod
[quote quoting="post"] The point of this post is to point out what I feel is the number one thing that will cause me to lose interest quickly and that is the ease in which cities can be build by both the player and the NPC. Cities should be difficult to build, cities should have a reason for being build not just because there is ONE resourse to be had. [/quote] To me the #1 reason is weak AI, city spam is not a problem to me in-and-of-itself un
[quote who="Darvin3" reply="4" id="2794164"]The attribute system needs to be fleshed out a bit; right now it's not doing very much, and we may as well just rename strength and dexterity to attack and defense. [/quote] Bards have an effect on costs, I've noticed that my hero recruiting costs dropped drastically after getting 3 bards towad endgame. I think all the hero benefits are global, as I've noticed the reduced cost even when other guys did the recruiting, in fact, at some po
[quote who="Gene1966" reply="5" id="2793912"]And finally airships...but lets not get teh cart in front of the horse... there's still a lot of bug fixin' that needs to be done and game balance including the AI to be better. [/quote] Flying monsters would be better, or even recruitable flying monsters ... but this would probably break the AI.
[quote who="Kalin" reply="5" id="2793792"] Sued for manual errata? Hahaha, where have you been the last 20 years of PC gaming... Then again, barely anyone bother to read them anyways. [/quote] That's because manuals are such crap these days that they're not worth reading, because you won't find what you're looking for in them. If a game company is not going to make a manual that has good player-utility, then don't bother wasting
[quote who="Robert Hentschke" reply="5" id="2793812"] Quoting Furinax_GdL, reply 3 Oh, that reminds me - can we please get an option to make the grid overlay a bit more prominent ? ...as I'm having a hard time sometimes figuring out how many tiles wide a passable mountain pass is or where the accessible mountain terrain actually ends Like this? [/quote] That's nice. I like it & I'm definitely old school. The light green
[quote quoting="post"]So I've been playing a while - games into turn 5-600, usually up to the teens in research. Can't generate elementium. Is there something other than quest 'finds' that give it? thanks [/quote] I think one game I played I've found 4 elementium in a goodie hut. Armor that uses this stuff is useless because you can never find enough of it. It would be nice if at some point in the game (say with some research) it was
I've never seen the AI use mounts, I have seen them use monsters, typically late game.
[quote who="Zaisha" reply="1" id="2793796"]+1 for (optionally) turning off automatic designs. I hate it when the AI clutters up my unit selection every time I research a new piece of equipment. [/quote] Somebody in another post said there is a "retire" option in the unit design menu. It would be nice if the manual included things like this as it should.
[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="51" id="2793565"]I would prefer to play the most 'intelligent' setting for the AI with small boosts, others like to play the hard AI with big buffs. Therefore the options should be separate so each player can pick the setting they find to be the most fun. [/quote] It would be nice if the AI could be "intelligent" (an "intelligent" setting) and play the game "intelligently" and provide a challenge in a 1:1 way (i.e. no buff
[quote who="falconne2" reply="49" id="2793553"] The aim is always to create a "fun" AI first. Besides, the human can cheat too - reloading autosaves, regenerating the map, etc. The AI needs some help to get around bad starts the way humans do. [/quote] True, some players probably do cheat. I have my own personal "game-code-of-chivalry," so to speak. I never cheat (restart & save), I never use hacks or cheat codes. If I were to ever cheat, I wouldn't want t
[quote who="UmbralAngel" reply="45" id="2793414"] I don't buy this "design the game to be accessible to the AI" philosophy. The AI should be very adaptable, very explorative, very humanlike in its approach to the game world. Good AI should be applicable to any game, not just the particular game you are making. Good AI takes calculations that if you brute force them will be impractical to run in real time, but simplifies the equations to get the same results with much less math invo
[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="46" id="2793422"] Quoting cpl_rk, reply 44 Isn't this pretty much the same as choosing a difficulty level, where difficulty ranges from easy (5% buff) to impossible (150% buff) ? I suppose a slider would give slightly more results: say you can choose 6%, but 6% is not that much different from 5% (easy). Not for me, regardless of how challenging the game is, if the game is balantly cheating th
[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="43" id="2793260"] Quoting cpl_rk, reply 42 ..... The point is not to have no buffing for the AI, rather to give it its own slider. [/quote] Isn't this pretty much the same as choosing a difficulty level, where difficulty ranges from easy (5% buff) to impossible (150% buff) ? I suppose a slider would give slightly more results: say you can choose 6%, but 6% is not that much different from 5% (easy).&n
[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="35" id="2793093"]It would be nice if AI cheating and bonuses / handicaps should be separated from the difficulty setting when setting up the AI. That way people who want an interesting opponent but are not yet up to facing a tough AI that is cheating can do so. I hope there will be ways for map maker's to interact with the AI via events in order to 'train' it in how to play that particular map. [/quote] The problem is, it
[quote who="Robert Hentschke" reply="28" id="2793112"]But if a unit had a good chance to flee, you can be chasing a single scout forever. And while that happens, it's running around, destroying your resources... [/quote] Then you need to use an archer or spellcaster as the attacker. Scouts can't outrun arrows, horses, or spells.
[quote who="Gene1966" reply="26" id="2792836"] Quoting BoogieBac, reply 20 *AI pioneers in tactical combat move to engage when they should run like hell and escape.Brought this up to the team, and trained units can't actually escape from T.Battles, so, unfortunatly, they're screwed regardless...but very nice of you to worry about the AI like that Trained units should be allowed to escape and the AI should use the run for the hill
I've noticed that sometimes panicked guys can attack and other times they just sit there immobilized. Unfortunately, there's no explanation of this feature in the manual at all, so I have no idea how it works.
[quote who="Partylurker" reply="29" id="2792963"]This looks like a very interesting game, and hopefully the 1.1 version will provide a challenging AI. I will then eagerly purchase this game. I understand that its next to impossible to create an AI that can match a top human player without cheating. I would therefore request that you will have a difficulty level where the AI cheats liberally and is very aggressive so that even the top 1% of players will not be guar
[quote who="falconne2" reply="55" id="2793027"] Quoting Black-Knight, reply 8 Magic is NOT teleporting - Teleporting is a SCI-FI device not a fantasy one! People disappearing from one place and appearing in another is very much magic. All you need is the puff of smoke and calling it something arcane instead of what everyone seems to associate with Star Trek now. [/quote] Functionally they're equivalent acros