CdrRogdan

So the way auto resolve seems to be calculated is that each unit automatically inflicts damage to the unit most vulnerable to it's attacks, based on the order that unit acts. However, the result of this is that units in the back row are just as easily targeted as units in the front, and units that have a movement speed of 2 get just as many strikes as units with ranged attacks or charge, despite their likelyhood of being dead before reaching their target. The calculations sh

This isn't new or anything, it's been happening for a while, but it seems more rampant than previously. I'm finding weapons that inflict upwards of 20 damage in the early game. Even a bow that was 33 damage ignore 66% armor showed up.. Now I understand that levels are meant to be the barrier to equpping these items, but by the time I found and could equip them I had just finished researching the 2nd tier of weaponry (bows/swords). The odd part about this is that late

So my level 10 soveriegn with 'scarred' is supposed to regenerate max 1 hp per turn, but regenerated 10 after being hit. I'm not really sure if this was working in the beginning and stopped working once I got so many perks it fell off the first page, since scarred champions tend to cower in the back. It might simply not have ever worked properly. Anway worth looking into.

Notably on top of the 'fence' around the wildlands areas

Other mite types attack normally, these specifically do not attack in either tactical or auto-resolve.

There is a summon spell you can obtain from the start of the game if you pick the appropriate background for that character. The decision to do this would be made fairly moot if you could summon units from every spell level.

So haste still grants the effected unit another turn immediately after being cast, in addition to granted the opposing side a completely new set of turns. Impulsive still grants 2 turns at the start of combat. Just making sure this issue is still being addressed..

The display is wrong, not the effect. They should have their damage listed as 5 or more appropriately 1x5 (avg 5). This is the way unit combat has worked for a while.. You could have 1 billion defense and still take 5 damage. Looking at it another way, this unit type would have no threat rating, as they would nearly always inflict zero to even lightly armored units. Whether or not this is a balanced mechanic is up for debate, but the design was purposeful.

This is intentional. You can never reduce damage to zero without a dodge. There should probably be a better display of the inflicted damage of opponents as well as a better description of how defense actually works, but that's pretty minor. Unfortunately without the information it's difficult to say if it is working as intended. As it stands defense seems a little too random.

It's the pathing. Tell a unit to travel from one end of the map to the next and your computer will lock up for 30 seconds or so. For each unit pathing around, (computer too?) the computer will need to run additional less time consuming checks. It will have to recalculate if something gets in the way (I think), but even if not the effects accumulate pretty quickly.

@Sean3w: I do like the new tactical combat maps. Some interesting obstructions out in the open terrain, as well as some forests and whatnot in several city fights. I'm curious what difficulty you are playing on as well. I started my first game on normal since Mr Frog was ranting about how hard it was, and uhhh they just got steamrolled. @Bingjack: given that experience is split between champions there really isn't a rush to claim all of them around the map. Personally I

So playing a game with the 'wraith' trait and casting corruption first makes the shard dissapear and the next turn when it reappears (and shows on the resource popup) the shrine cannot be constructed, effectively eliminating a shard. This happens when a shrine is already in place or is being built.

Increasing the ammount earned per citizen would be a good idea for the middle->late game too. Could replace the set bonuses from cities (I'll add that). The empire still needs some start up gold per turn though. Otherwise you'll have tech and no way to use it.

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="57" id="3089291"] The reason xp is split is to balance champion heavy vs champion light armies. In my experience (though I'm interested to hear the play test results from the community) both methods work well. I don't like your proposal because it allows people to twink their trained units (throw them in an army with a bunch of champions and let them level up fast). We did exclude armies from the xp division (it is only divi

I'll have to test this out a little more but when I conquered a city that was in the midst of builing a life shrine, the city flipped and the shrine continued building. The shard type did not switch to death and now I have a life shrine in my empire territory with no way to change it other than losing the city, attacking the shrine, and retaking it. I'm pretty sure this isn't intended.

DP

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="5" id="3089298"]Fair enough. I put a really awesome item at the end of that quest so that if you have the victory off you can still do it and get something cool for it. It's definitly OP.[/quote] If the victory condition is disabled.. why does the player get an item that can end the game?

Gold income is rediculous in the early game (and not in a positive sense). Seriously there needs to be a base ammount of gold earned by each city/empire/square of land owned/something! in order to support the infastructure and defenses of cities in the early game. It feels like gold is restricted purposely to slow down the early game. Unforunately that doesn't mesh well with champions trouncing around the map and selling loot for rediculous gold. In the event anyone did&

@mqpiffle and others that are cheering the way the split xp mechanic is implemented: How in the hell can you commend this? It was obviously a blanket change based on the ease of programming! Adding another line to modify how experience is calculated units would have required a new tag for unit xp versus champion xp. Not doing this just comes across as lazy. They already have tags for units and champions, this is just.. ugh. Jumping up to defend a change because it

[quote quoting="post"] + XP is divided by the amount of champions in your army. If you get 500 xp with an army with 1 champion all untis in that army get 500 xp. If you had 2 champions in that army all the units in that army get 250 xp). [/quote] Seriously? Am I reading this correctly? If I have more than one champion in the army it reduces the xp the regular units in that stack get too? The change to split xp with only champions (and not regular

Restore land doesn't actually work. In fact I'm pretty sure they come in a set of 'make this land empire type' and 'make this land kingdom type' rather than have any effect on yeilds. Mind you this is pretty rediculous for a master spell and perhaps the function is supposed to allow players to settle these regions later game, but perhaps it's intention is to make current lands more fertile. The actual function of this spell is unclear. Even if it was

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="19" id="3088661"]Kind of funny to think Derek is making "troll" post. [/quote] I was being facetious. Mostly because frogboy got me with his (about AI) a few days ago >.>

How was this post made on January 30th? And why does this list include repeat mentions of changes? This actually feels like a troll post >.> Buut.. assuming that it is not: Making the land barren after razing is super silly. Razing cities is already a viable strategy to pin your opponent down, but now after doing so he/she will have no hope of re-establishing a city in that location. I mean in the event the opponent manages to fight back the invasion they should ha

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="3" id="3087671"] A human being wouldn't be able to coordinate 4 different armies arriving at a target city in the same turn. [/quote] I think... you have been working too hard. You and Tsunke need to share your ritalin prescriptions. Anyway... If the problem is that the human can't co-ordinate it.. why not put timers above the marching army that indicates the number of turns the unit will take to reach it's destination, or even more si

This just seems to be overly complicating things. The problem is initiative and movement. There is no reason that initiative should allow multiple moves. Initiative should determine order of action for each unit. In the event balancing out the strength of champions is a concern you could use some other function to grant multiple attacks or use some calculation of level & initiative to do so. Movement needs to be restricted to max of 4. Movement enhancing items should be