davrovana

Build more cities. Everything is a function of city count. As a side note: Don't play on small map, "ravaged" terrain, there are few city spots.

Was playing a hard game, the Ongr the Unbound random event occurred. He was wandering around far from my territory, so I didn't pay much attention. Imagine my surprise when I checked on a Garrote lair near my capitol: https://www.dropbox.com/s/vtwp5b1hhoumifl/Ongr1.jpg What's this!? The Garrote made a friend! No, it couldn't be... <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/u4f4rr2s9m5opze/Ong

Removing the xp split is not the fix, but there is a problem. Heroes got too powerful in the late game of FE. Now, it's hard to justify paying the gold wage for a second hero after the first, as getting them to level 10 takes a long time. There needs to be more of an influx of xp opportunities. INTERESTINGLY: Enemy armies seem to give more xp in LH than they did in FE, making war more viable as a leveling opportunity. If they don't modify the leveli

Maybe this is intentional [if so, why?] but I have seen multiple AI champions getting multiple paths. This occasionally happened in vanilla FE, but I never saw more than 2 (heck, MY sovereign even got a 2nd path one time in FE!). But I regularly see AI champs and sovs with FOUR honkin' paths. Proof: https://www.dropbox.com/s/6z9erdevvki8pyv/Ceresa_shot.jpg Is it in

[quote who="Morikar" reply="40" id="3339393"] I believe the simplest solution is to apply the same cost/upgrade system for horses/wargs as is used for metal/crystal. That means providing an upgrade path for each type of mount with each mount costing a certain amount of horses or wargs. Something along the following lines: Horse: +2 move, +20 weight capacity, cost 8 horses Warhorse: +2 move, +40 weight capacity, cost 12 horses Charger: +2 move, +40 w

[quote who="paladinjb" reply="19" id="3339253"] Let the sovereign always get max xp but keep the xp split for other champions. [/quote] Not a bad idea.

If there are more reliable ways to get xp while in town, the xp split can stay as is. Or, give non-altar factions a less effective version of quest map (cheaper, spawns weak and medium quests). That way, you don't rely on monster availability to level heroes. (Since enemy armies give so little xp, and enemy archers pick off weak champions, war is not a reliable way to level) I also suggest being able to add "chapters" of the adventurer's guild to an

Remember in FE, the tech tree had different items, at random? Why not implement that? There are 3 assassin specific traits, 1 of which shows up each game, shown at random. That way, getting to the end of any part of the tree can have different perks each game, and you'll never be the same every time...

Enough bears, and you can kill anything. IN REAL LIFE, BRAH.

Being able to adjust monster aggressiveness independently might be nice. I'd assume that's baked into the difficulty level, but we just can't be sure without more info. Maybe what we want is to have a better idea of what's deeper in the code. Too bad I'm not much of a modder.

If the heroes, in the current system, were more useful, we wouldn't have a problem. Right? There needs to be more ability to gain XP inside a city. That way, cycling your champs between city time and "tours of duty" makes sense- they level faster out in the field, but some strategies really benefit from having them in cities. This problem was already present- play on low monsters, and pretty soon you're fighting wars with champions that die every battle, be

Tavra- I've seen similar dances around my undefended cities. Obsidian golems are in my territory, then not, then 5 turns later they are back. Nontheless, Daynarr could still have a point. In my experience, undefended cities seem more likely to be attacked. If we want to take our experiences in the game and consider them THE MOST ACCURATE PERSPECTIVE PERIOD, there will be no constructive discussion on this topic. I have between 300 and 400 in the game. Sometimes it REALLY see

In Civ2, if you had a large empire and your capital was taken, there was a chance half your empire would rebel and break off. Something that spirit, random events meant to punish a vastly dominant player, would be fun both ways: as the dominant player (the game isn't boringly easy anymore!) or against them (now it's not completely hopeless). If there was a way to 'scale' events more, so that bad ones are skewed towards stronger player or larger empi

The skeleton event wiped me out of the game. I think it happened around turn 50 (way too soon). I ended up having my capital surrounded by companies of skeletons. Since I was trying to get an early research edge, my army sucked. I brought my best stack to attack the temple or whatever that spawns - wish I had known what I'd be facing. hopelessly outnumbered, lost. Was being invaded by another empire at the same time, so I was rendered defenseless against an invasio

Sanati is on to something. When "Monsters and Ruffains," wipe out a civ (kill their last city), there is a pop-up notification. I've seen it! Not as often as Sanati, but multiple times. I've seen civs get wiped out before turn 50. That "settling near dragons" tactic can backfire. Let's not forget the availability cognitive bias folks. When the monsters attack you, you notice. When they don't, you assume it never happened. 25Atan- how much o

What if turning away both champion choices gave you a boost to fame? As in, you veto the current choices and thus accelerate the arrival of the next set of more powerful choices.

Agree, designing units with upgradable equipment is now useless, you have to design units specifically for each tech level now. Annoying.

schatten- I did the same thing on Anthys, on the land bridge between continents. An opponent on the other continent was spamming pioneers to come in and take my unclaimed resources, but a mass of cheap troops shut that shit down.

What if Warg Dens were guarded by 3 timber wargs (the pack leaders), and Horses were guarded by Troll Warrior armies (the trolls eat 'em!)? Then it'd be harder to just snag them, you'd have tyo fight for 'em, a la darkling villages and ogre dens. Probably still easier to spawn less, but making more of an opportunity cost to snagging the resource could prevent mount saturation.

Stupidity: Companies are late game. As for your point, I think you dismiss them too easily. If the elemental takes away the enemy's attention, then YOUR company of chainmail boarspear dudes get the first attack as the result, how is that not valuable? With the reduced casting time trait, you can pop in an elemental every turn. Considering the stinking mud of crag spawn and other summon effects, there is value there. Are there better strategies? At least one comes to mind.

Wizard 1200 gets it. Thunderstrike is not a damage spell. It is a teleport spell. If you have high mana income, one well-equipped champion can solo any stack with that spell. Summon spells are hardly made obsolete by troops. Fill your army with troops, then add summons in tactical to outnumber any foe!

Concur, would make sense to add some kind of "no retreat" script to AI controlled units that have "berserk" status.

Sanati- horses/wargs add to wages? Are you sure? Could've sworn they had no wage cost, but I could be wrong.

Crashed after returning to main menu from loading first save file, attempting to load different save file https://www.dropbox.com/s/dellc8rr0tzucjj/LegendaryHeroes0_51-2013-04-01T12-45-16_734.zip https://www.dropbox.com/s/xnlw4cr5tjdahz8/debug.err

Hey, what if mounted units just required an extra wage - .25 horse per turn. This represents the stable having to send in new, fresh horses and/or support the horses that are out there. Thus you need the initial horses to get started, plus some of the stable's resources to maintain horses in the field. This way, a standing mounted army would require a LOT of extra stables. If making the resource rarer is easier in engineering hours for Stardock, however, then that