Norhg

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2" id="2762389"]Two letters: AI [/quote]*head explode*

[quote who="Sythion" reply="3" id="2752802"]My question is why would you pick any spellbook or research magic at all when it's all going to be worthless by turn 100 anyway?[/quote]You can't have seen Earthquake yet, or have you?

[quote who="BLoads" reply="18" id="2752117"]Oh, he also regens 2 mana per round[/quote]That's not the scary part - the scary part is how he bugs out if he gets confused, sending his attack into the thousands. That, and him receiving 8 attack per attack book you use on him.

I managed to replicate the bug by going back to an earlier save and retracing my earlier moves. If there is an interest I'll upload the save file.

Situation: Sarog the Dragon, who I had earlier used a +8 attack book on (giving him a natural attack of 160) encountered a darkling shaman who confused him, dropping his attack to -480. When the confusion wore off he instead had 2080 attack, not the 160 he had before. The new attack score persisted onto the strategic map and hasn't worn off yet after multiple turns and a game restart.

[quote who="Gungulun" reply="2" id="2750360"] At game creation, set the pacing to Epic What? That actually slows down speed? Eeeeeeh... you learn something new every day. Thanks.[/quote]What did you think it did?

My biggest gripe is with the lost library resource, it's the game's most unbalancing resource - a nation which doesn't get one is a crippled beast. I like the empire tree more than the civic tree, as it's tree-shaped and not a bunch of separate, parallel systems. Similarly, I think conquest is better than warfare. On the other hand, I think both trees need to be streamlined so that it isn't possible to cherry-pick technologies - going for squads and training improvements is a bit t

[quote who="Tridus" reply="10" id="2749033"]Option 3 is my preference, and similar to suggestions we had in beta. But they really didn't want the overland speed to affect tactical speed.[/quote]I think that makes sense, many monstrous creatures (dragons) should have a high overland map speed, but I wouldn't want to see them with high tactical speed.

Defense scores go far higher than attack at the high end, 60% higher or so if the unit is in a defensible position like a hill. If you reduce attack power the defense of plate armor needs to be reduced too. I completely agree that combat needs to be less lethal, ideally I would want to see the experience/training techs reworked so hit points become more uniform across the game - I don't think you can balance the game as long as some units have 3 times the hit point

[quote who="Archonsod" reply="37" id="2748269"]To be honest I think it's a failing of the AI rather than the combat system. The glass cannons only work because the AI invests far too heavily in melee units and targets archers and spells somewhat bizarrely. Against another player or a sensible AI those glass cannons would never get to swing their hammers; they'd either be shot full or arrows or blasted by eldritch energies long before that happened.[/quote]Well then, consider two equally stron

[quote who="MumbaCraft" reply="31" id="2748079"]But I like the first approach more, since second one complicates the combat. Not only you have additional stat (which is strictly speaking a bit artificial) but this will complicate interface and combat itself a bit more. You have to know the order in which units move, add wait mechanics etc. Still both solutions are much better then current state [/quote]Well, I actually think that tactical combat should be more co

[quote who="searro" reply="3" id="2747980"]Phazon it doesnt really answer my question there.[/quote]Phazonfreak's answer is the entire story. You can send two caravan from directions between A and B but it doesn't give a bigger benefit than having just one caravan going between the two cities.

I would rather see forest tiles made useful, as is they're only good for spawning monsters (which is a goldmine but...) and that doesn't work inside your influence anyway.

I would love if there was initiative on a per unit basis. Remove the idea of separate turns entirely, and allow all units to act at their respective speeds. Exceptionally quick units might even get to move multiple times before the enemy gets it chance to move.

[quote who="surlybob" reply="5" id="2747831"]This wouldn't be an issue if the whole dynasty system had any point. The sovereign would go kamikaze and his eldest kid would take over. Hopefully, they'll implement this soon.[/quote]Hey, the dynasty is extremely important from the viewpoint of eugenics - how else are you going to create the Kwisatz Haderach?

[quote who="AndonSage" reply="38" id="2746621"]For my Empire of Magnar, Mapping opened up a Gold Mine that was next to my capitol, and Destiny's Scrolls opened up a Gold Mine next to my second city.[/quote]Same results here. We really should try map out what resources appear from specific techs as all evidence points toward revealed resources being predetermined.

[quote who="alborrelli" reply="9" id="2747761"] Quoting surlybob, reply 2Have you SEEN how much damage a warhammer can do in real life!? Nope. And neither have you seeing as "in real life" would imply seeing warhammers used in combat with killing intent. If I'm wrong, tell me where, so I can watch.[/quote]War-hammers aren't a "real" weapon, polearms sometimes had hammerheads but they were mostly used against cavalry. One-handed hammers are extremely prolific tho

[quote who="AndonSage" reply="7" id="2747606"]Well, they could always just give each weapon it's own speed, no need to have everything grouped into categories.[/quote]Do you mean a weapon speed separate from the current combat speed? I think that might be a good idea, doesn't make much sense if a spear-fighter move quicker and strike more often than someone wielding a sword even if the spear-fighter ought to get the first strike.

Switch to the action bar (from vital) when you have the Champion targeted. You can hire it as long as (1) you have enough gold and (2) the Champion is located inside your influence or adjacent to one of your units (3) and I believe, not inside enemy territory.

[quote who="surlybob" reply="2" id="2747462"]In all seriousness, I also wish there was more incentive to use swords. My favored approach would be giving swords a chance to attack first when defending.[/quote]Higher weapon combat speed - attacks first? Would be a bit weird with short swords and the like having an advantage over the spears, they system might need some rebalancing.

[quote who="Stmorpheus" reply="5" id="2746777"]i wonder if the ultra rare grey techs are still in?[/quote] Care to give an example? I haven't seen any gray techs...

[quote who="TarlSS" reply="30" id="2746697"]Why not tie it to level?[/quote]From a game design viewpoint - it doesn't tie into any of the (scarce) resources already present in the game. Going warfare or adventure techs is a choice, as is choosing between hiring a champion or building a unit (Gildar is the limiting resource). Leveling isn't a choice. It has no opportunity cost. It's always a positive thing. That, and that there's no way to control the rate at which a Sovereign levels.

[quote who="TheBirthdayParty" reply="2" id="2746432"]Not even close. I do that, but am only getting like at most 20gp per turn. And I've played a few games, same problem. One gold mine doesn't equal a lot of gold. Or seemingly even 2 or 3. And of course I build a workshop. This isn't about early game, we're talking later game. As well a workshop/labor pit is only one per turn.[/quote]If you have your armies hunting for monsters that can easily be a larger source of Gildar than your regu

Whenever I had this problem it went away when if I restarted the game.

[quote who="greggbert" reply="106" id="2746295"]Do the fungi storage and other food enhancing buildings increase your overall food production or just the city they are in?[/quote] Just the city they are in, as with all production enhancing improvements.