[quote quoting="post"] The idea I’m playing with tonight involves magic. If you can’t take the city by force, make it miserable to live there through magic until the city finally destroys itself if not countered (which I wouldn’t be able to since I have no mana). [/quote] yeah go with magic it seems ok also there could be spells to dmg slightly units even in cities so they could first weaken those units an
this could be fixed easily reducing initiative when using bows so that on avarage 1 archer attack 1/n times a melee with equal stats then on start archer has advantage starting far but in few turns the melee get close and archer is in danger if its not enough there could be a penalty to movement with bows for the same reason last but not least ill add a small modifier to dmg with distance so that shooting at 3 4 tiles is 100
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="1" id="3081787"]I see two main reasons not to do this for a beta to the detail you enquire about. First, I just plain rather have them working on the game than writing long lists. Second, when people read the changes they will try to predict how it will impact the game without actually playing the game. That is, in my book, particularly useless "feedback". (edit: The point is, if you see one change you can predict how it w
[quote who="Barrynor" reply="39" id="3082091"] In essence, this would turn tactical combat into a game we cannot win. [/quote] this what? playing well? its ridicolous AND FALSE what are the odds of having 2 high dmg, low defense, non ranged, non magica, with same move and initiative units ? seriously? i just want WHEN it happens (and wont be
[quote who="Lonemessiah" reply="29" id="3081949"]Also we run the risk of a stalemate if both armies have no range access, equal movement and initiative. It will lead to both armies stopping at the one square beyond their opponents movement and passing forever. Not a problem in a human battle because in the end the human would blink first just to get the game moving again, but in a auto resolve, or AI vs AI battle it could lead to a potential infinite loop.[/quote]
[quote who="Murteas" reply="28" id="3081935"]I think without the ability to flee. Staying out of range of the strongest opponent is just delaying the inevitable.[/quote] so? thats the smartest move anyway since its *inevitable* like you say in the time you are there you have to make the most dmg possible... b4 you die that is achieved stay out of the first combat range of the strongest melee, at least
[quote who="Spitz" reply="11" id="3081432"]I think the wolves made the right call. They had no chance of killing your stronger character and no chance of winning the battle overall. Concentrating on the weakest foe to inflict max damage before losing is the right move. [/quote] not true ai should calculate if it can deal dmg in the turn or not when its not possible to reach the weakest target (or the t
yes agree mostly cause it happens for the bug you are about to picka research and you get attacked and so cant complete it btw also to notice i dont like many things to happen simoultaneously, so when i open research window NOTHING else should happen until i close it, same with picking up items, choosing lvl up traits etc dunno why so many windows pop all at once, hope it get changed
yeah there is some good idea here but dont push too far, even if rare they shouldnt be too strong, otherwise would be too much rng again into champs development and also frustrating if you never get the best traits on your beloved ones :)
no i dont like, the difference between multi units and a single big unit is just that, dmg on first reduce the outcome while on second it doesnt its also a way to make dragons and big things much more dangerous and fearable cause some aoe or few dmg on them wont change much i like it this way tbh only reason i could consider something just for champions is cause they are actually op but that coul
[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="4" id="3072547"]Personally I appreciate the threads, even if they are redundant. People are in the beta to give feedback, so I'm glad to receive it. [/quote] yeah sure like its easy to browse 20 threads on the same argument, there were thread i was following that fell into page 3 or 4 after few days just ppl is eager to make his own thread instead of just comming on one of the dozen on same argument
i dont agree mom was balanced create artifact was too much op yeah cave monsters and rewards were sort of balanced i agree (just cause of randmness tbh but ok) but after a bit you could just create from nothing items that was much more op than FE is
yeah also stop with these complicate argues about champions, the problem has been addressed in like 234343242 threads its totally useless to keep proposing things over and over again, lets wait the next balance pass on champions and from that point we can judge until we know what ideas the developers have in mind i dont see much point into spamming thread on the same topic of hundreds already there
whats the point of putting multi if they stated clearly multi wont be in the game? anyway my choices are 3,4,13 atm
[quote quoting="post"] Personally, I think this is OP, but I know some members of the community really prefer stronger champs. So I'm interested to see "how strong" everyone thinks champs should be in the end. [/quote] well the problem is most ppl refer to mom as balanced mom was not even remotely balanced, in fact champs in mom were so much op to hurt much more than ACTUAL FE not champions per se, but champions with the create
try hard difficulty, in some game i got really surrounded its a bit too random, depends how strong you are and how good is the start tbh, since im trying some single school of magic caster i usually have a hard start and so the system works pretty well, probably if id play to stomp around maybe this wouldnt work, dunno
lol 11 nodes is more than i saw in ALL my games combined :D
yeah well both ways sux imo i like the idea of SOME heroes being killed by SOME strong beast not that every lvl 1 being stomped by spiders or bandits... its just unfun the real cool thing would be having heroes "sieged" by numerous half weak enemies and you can rescue them if you free them in time :D but i think its too hard to do or maybe heroes joining after quests, that would be cool a
[quote who="ydejin" reply="8" id="3068783"]I agree that chaos and pandemonium suck and should be swapped for something better. But I'm not in favor of adding in a water low-level direct strike spell. One of the problems with the original Elemental design was that the magic all ended up being the same. IIRC each type of magic had a direct attack spell, these were essentially the same with a different color animation. This lead to a boring magic system where the magi
[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="2" id="3068729"]I think blizzard is as overpowered as fireball.[/quote] only against weak multi targets, also it consumes 2 turns and can be interrupted once enemies and some powerful monster get the necessary ai to do so
well i tried again after this patch and so i started the thread since it seems quite unchanged the water tree need nearly a total remake imo - things ok: water elemental is fine, its good to have a servant and its strenght is balanced, end game is not so strong but can still tank a bit and slow is useful blizzard is ok -things bad chaos and pandemonium are very bad designed, stop this randomness this
did you change any settings? this happened to me too but only when i change all game settings, i restarted the game 2 3 times all stuck after few turns, but i thik i was using large map strong magic and other non default thing in general it works well, i think its some of the setting maybe requiring more ram than xp can handle dunno
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="6" id="3067508"]I like my random traits, honestly. It keeps things interesting and different from game to game. I can't plan on getting that Fire5 because I might never get there. I think the pool with generic traits that aren't from specific paths should be reduced in number, though. They are often quite boring, and end up rarely getting picked.[/quote] yeah i agree random traits are fine, and in
1) cities not really funny to develop and too few strategy involved 2) research too long for so few advantages it gives and lacking a bit of flavor 3) troops are too much sided and also require a lot of research and time and stuff , really would love more army involvement
[quote quoting="post"] city specialisation Does it make much difference if you only build selected buildings to have specialist cities - or do you just build basically everything regardless of grain, materials or resources? I just basically build everything and I feel this aspect should be much more than it is. [/quote] yeah this is not working that good, i feel too much spam and randomness in here 3/10 [quote]<b