CdrRogdan

While I appreciate that research is required to open more difficult quests, I often have no idea what lairs were just made accessible by doing so, meaning I could enter a lair of epic difficulty without being aware. Don't get me wrong, I already know that you can hover over quest related combat areas and see how difficult they might be, but other quests, such as searching through caves, provide no indication. Something as simple as listing "This quest was opened by 'Bret

[quote who="Toraa" reply="12" id="3067733"] Given the randomness that now involves magic, the “might” side of the game is favored. If you build a spellcaster sov you are risked with uselessness for lack of appropriate shards. [/quote] While I disagree that magic isn't powerful, I agree that the randomness of shards is a big problem. Spellcasters should have the option to choose new spell schools on level

There are a few ways I can think of doing this: First: And the most unlikely - make champion skills revolve around boosting the stats of regular units Second: Create a 'path' that focuses on doing the above Third: Split xp, make champions consume the xp of 4 regular units. Mind you this won't make the stack o doom any l

There is one possible problem I see resulting from this - One player can scoop up all the heroes on the map, not to mention with the number of heroes present of either faction you would quickly bloat your army. I'm okay with quests opening champions rather than a simple gold cost, but the quest should indicate if you are hunting a hero to assassinate or recruit, to keep the faction specific heroes relevant. It would also solve the issue of opposing heroes being far too easy to

My custom soveriegn uses that bow as well. but it's different when you can choose might at creation and funnel all the +damaging items to one character. It's considerably less viable with regular champions. Even so.. way of the warrior is considerably better as you can obtain finesse, brute and double attack. Way of assassin just boosts critical hit, which is unreliable.

Well thought out (and organized) post! Let's address each of these in turn: City Specialization : Strategy currently is nonexistant. The increased build times make it a little harder to construct all buildings while producing an army but I basically just spam everything (or snake to resources) until I can't anymore. Gallows and Bakery are -always- constructed. One vs Many Cities: I

I'm okay with professions providing this sort of option, they should really be more game-changing than they are.. but that is an aside. The ability to kill enemy heroes should stay, but actually killing them shouldn't be so incredibly easy. They probably also shouldn't drop epic weaponry/equipment. Someone mentioned giving them bodyguards, and I completely agree with this. After all, how have they managed to survive for so long, and why would they be hesitant to join

Well that is a different cake alltogether, and I agree. Fighting a monstrous pack of wolves gives less xp than fighting a single shrill. It seems like the experience system is simply based on unit type x number of units, which isn't a very accurate representation of danger. Fighting one bandit with a bandit archer poses next to zero threat, but 2 bandit groups and 4 bandit archer groups could cause some serious injuries or casualties. There needs to be a modifier i

Even a percentage cut would be silly. You are pretty much always guarenteed 2 hits, which is better than double attack without having to expend any level up points on it. The weapon damage can be tweaked around all over the place but it still runs the risk of being abused by super strength champions. The 'maul' effect is the problem, not the weapon that it is attached too. Fix maul to be balanced with other specials and feel free to add it to any weapon you can think of.</p

@ Sir_Linque I agree with your concerns (except for the city building notification, you actually already get one!). But remember that this is beta. The issues you are listing have to do with polishing, and while I agree they are matters that should be attended to, I don't think they should be the number 1 priority of the developers right now. Just imagine if they had released it in alpha state! I shudder at the thought.

Mantle of Oceans may be a bit broken right now, though I haven't had time to test it out yet. I'll report back on it when I do. Perhaps only one mantle can be maintained at a time by each caster (with rank 4 water). Xp wise, you listed killing a singular hero. Those don't typically give out xp relative to their actual level since their gear determines their difficulty and can vary widely. Perhaps you should test killing something like bears or air shrills instead.</p

Obscuring fog isn't an air spell...

@sanati My custom sovereign also uses brilliance (high int) and I did not encounter the same issue. It took about 3 easy rating fights to level my characters. This was on normal. @Alstien Initial regular unit strength does seem a little low considering their high upkeep costs at the beginning of the game.

Hahahaha! These forums are rife with entertainment. In any case I support this. In fact I wholeheartedly recommend this option as it will help brad playtest the AI much MUCH more efficiently. Mabye I will use it, maybe I won't, but the option to reload already exists, letting people do it faster will probably encourage more 'reloading', and if that's what they want to do, who cares? I would only see this as being an issue if there was mutliplay, and I i

@Wintersong being required to develop tactics such as 'sacrificing troops' and 'don't get into melee combat' scream that the ability is out of balance with the rest of the game. Maul is rediculous because it trumps special abilities. Maul would be fine if it functioned once at half damage. I would even be okay with letting special abilities proc maul if it worked this way. Indeed all special abilites should proc crits, poisons, slows or whathaveyou that

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="13" id="3067000"]Quoting Dreadcough, reply 8 also remove Derek as lead designer, with this he's shown that he doesn't have the creativity to create new game designs that are revolutionary. O M G[/quote] I couldn't help but laugh at this too. The whole reason Derek was hired because he DID create a game that a massive following of people loved. I sincerly doubt flaws in the gam

Fall from heaven had some of these in it too, and it was (in my opinion) a very poor design choice. It made it so that elitist long time players had a significant edge over new comers because they knew that certain options were better than others. The best example I can give is one where you get a black stone. You have three options available to you, two of which give gold or xp (or something) and the third which costs you money but doesn't say it does

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="13" id="3066572"]Unlike with WOM, where I freely said "I'm not a game designer", FE has a game designer -- Kael. And while I can assure you he's very open to feedback and suggestions, the game design is not up for a vote. At the end of the game, we're making a very specific game and we hope people will like it but acknowledge that some people won't.[/quote] Err... you want money though right? I mean if you find the forums

Perhaps you should only be able to upgrade units when in cities, and rather than the unit possessing an upgrade tab, the city does. That city then selects any of the present units and pays the difference in time and materials to upgrade the old unit with new equipment. The upgrade screen would only include weapons/armor/equipment not traits. Optionally you could choose to reset the xp of the unit (or reduce it - whatever) to alter the size of the troop. So that you don'

Hopefully it's just a temporary fix to see if reducing the # of caravans helps put the economy back into a less exploitive zone.

I think you might need to specify what you are asking for here. The opponents are already supposed to be random (that portion just isn't programmed in yet). I presume what you are asking for is the option to 'add new players' using a 'random' selection button, which is slightly different than just having random opponents. In order to clarify: Do you want random opponents using the suggested # of players (already planned)</p

What needs to be taken into consideration is that stardock is attempting to widen their audience to turn a profit on this game. Appealing to the 'average' gamer will require marketing a game that is not frustrating. If the player feels the need to reload the game every time one of their heroes fall in battle they will have a less positive impression, and also be less likely to recommend it to friends. I really like the idea of army benefits at perso

Ignore

This seems to be more of an issue with the prices of gear, which I agree are much too high. I shouldn't cost several hundred gold to equip a hero with leather armor, as all this does is remove the decision to hunt items with heroes as apposed to acquiring them through economic means. Not that I don't enjoy the explorative aspect of the game.. but I don't end up buying gear until my economy reaches 'broken' status because there isn't any other reasonable wa

Accuracy vs dodge determines if your characters hit and is calculated each time you 'attack' a target. Does 'attack' not properly explain what your character is doing? Does 'damage' somehow explain this better? .... Are you drunk? Edit: I completly misunderstood what you wanted to change, haha. Maybe i'm drunk >.> In any case it's mostly an issue with semantics.