[quote who="Frogboy" reply="22" id="3055902"]Right now, tactical battle maps are chosen from a library of maps based on where you are. So they aren't generated on the fly but rather pick the one that closest matches your current circumstances.[/quote] Oh well, that's somewhat disappointing, but I guess we were just getting our hopes up. Here's hoping the next expansion has maps built directly from the surrounding terrain.
So recently we've seen two images with what look like walls on the strategic map, and walls not surrounding cities. My question is how are these generated, and do they have any effect in game other than looking bad***. I'm guessing that they're part of some sort of wildlands, but they do raise the very interesting possibility in some future expansion of being able to construct defenses on the strategic map ala the great wall of china, or Hadrian's wall. Prob
Yep. It pretty tough to speculate at this point in time about the relative strengths/weaknesses of various factions and various abilities. Without really knowing the details of the mechanics its almost impossible to know what will be over/under powered. Maybe Pariden sounds overpowered, but then again maybe mana upkeep on single units enchantments ends up working out to be 2% of a mature empires mana income - not so over powered in that case. Or maybe all the unit enchantments are
[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="7" id="3055992"] Quoting Werewindlefr, reply 6I like the concept of unique pre-designed units, but is there an incentive to build them instead of custom designed one? Is there a thing making them the "faction's favorite", aside from the fact that they're already there? Or are they just identical to custom-built units with the same build choices? A player could build exactly the same unit if they wanted. I must admit as a designer
So based on the recent screenshots released in this post and a couple of the FE sneak peaks, it seems that tactical battle maps will be related to the terrain being contested. If this is the case, then this is awesome and a huge improvement. It would be even better if this had real effects on the battle field. For instance: Sieges (hint, hint): know this wont be in FE, but next expansion maybe? Rivers: Already in FE, it would be great if these provided choke
One small suggestion on the character display screen. Some sort of logical grouping for the traits would be very helpful. Right now it looks like there displayed to the side of the picture in a somewhat random order (I'm guessing its either the order they were acquired in or alphabetical). It would be great if they were organized in a more structured way. For instance, since magical skills are probably most important always display them at the top in the order air,
I guess I'm just giving brad the benefit of the doubt here. If it really was just a simple shortest path problem then the solution is pretty easy even with threats, and is also not incredibly computationally intensive. Thus there must be some complicating factor that makes it more than just a shortest path problem. I've thrown out one possibility, the fact that the threats are variable and not static. I'm curios to know what the complicating factor actually is. I also don't think just lookin
[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="6" id="3023658"]I don't get why pioneer pathfinding is that CPU extensive either. Shouldn't it be quite simple to mark tiles that have a threat as no-go and then do a simple adjacency matrix power calculation weighted with movement costs for the shortest path without threats? In general you shouldn't move settlers by themselves that many tiles into the wild, so the matrices shouldn't grow that big before you need to have an escort and thus solvin
Flavor text will be a huge improvement. I'm really looking forward to FE, can't wait for the beta. [quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="6" id="3014308"]Do the rivers always need to flow from N, S, E, W or can they also flow NW, NE, SE, & SW? I think they would look better by mixing up the directions a bit. This makes sense to me because unit movement from a tile is a choice of 8 directions - why rivers only 4? I'm not sure if it's possible but coding riv
[quote quoting="post"] I can’t go into much detail regarding it other than to say it that it is much more similar to a Civilization/Master of Magic style strategy game versus a Galactic Civilizations/HOMM style strategy game (i.e. every tile of terrain matters i.e. building near rivers or forests or hills and that kind of thing will matter and there are things like unrest and tax rates and that kind of thing). [/quote] This sentence makes me happy. Bring on the beta,
[quote who="seanw3" reply="4" id="2981051"]The new combat system will likely allow for tactical positioning. That is a good assumption given the depth of this redo of WoM. The combat values I have seen in the dev journals also seem to indicate a shift to meaningful tactics, just not LOS. That was my major point. As to Terrain, I would really think that meaningful terrain is going to be added. Bonuses for placement are already in the game, just not useful or relevant as they only ev
True, all of this depends on the AI being able to handle it. But in all honesty, if you just keep tactical combat as basic as it is now in WoM whats the point of having it anyway? Two armies in random configurations march at each other, wail away for a few turns, outcome is primarily determined by armor and attach ratings. Why not just autocalc? @Goontrooper Completely agree on all those things, LoS, Better terrain, Siege warfare, but the developers have already said that none
Agree 100%. I wrote a similar post a few months back as well https://forums.elementalgame.com/401931 I'm just worried that since we haven't heard anything about this yet that the system is essentially going to stay the same.
Another post and a reply from Sethai got me thinking about tactical combat. https://forums.elementalgame.com/410986/page/1/#2980002 We haven't heard much about it from the dev team recently on this topic, and I wanted the throw out some ideas to get a discussion started. Hopefully someone on the dev team is listening and we can get some info on the direction they're taking So we know we have
Another bonus. If elemental had some sort of system like this you would have another interesting trait that could be included: ambusher. It would allow a Champion and his army to ambush an enemy army if they hadn't been detected yet (would also require some sort of stealth system, one can dream). The ambusher would get to set up their army formation while the ambushee would just have a clump of units.
Wow. Lionheart, blast from the past. I've always thought the elemental tactical combat could steal a few things from that game. The tactical combat maps are essentially identical to the lionheart board. A system like that would definitely be a huge improvement.
[quote who="Sethai" reply="9" id="2978779"]Personally I find it odd that the game has so much counter-attacking in the first place. The amount of times you can swing your sword in a minute doesn't depend on how many people swing their swords at you. I get it that they can't have a system where enemy units all attack you in one turn at the same time before you strike back but at the moment it seems almost the other way around: positioning and numbers are irrelevant and it makes little
I think its pretty harmless. I don't think GP really gains anything by us using his sever vs. llamaserver (not like were paying them). And actually, he is sort of correct. It can be a little bit easier to use the direct connect (but definitely not easier to set up), however, the difference seems kind of minor. After all the only thing you have to figure out with llama server are email attachments.
[quote who="Kamamura_CZ" reply="34" id="2975939"]Yes, because of me. However, I would be interested in playing 1.84 CBM game, so I would sign up. This would be my sixth game, so I can't be considered a newbie anymore (I guess). I would sign up only if ElenaAhova does not mind. If she does, I withdraw my application - and we are even. If she does agree, and she still hates me for what happened in the Elementalists game. she can have her revenge in this game, and that would
Seems like there's not much interest. Guess everyone must be on vacation.
Too bad.
Then we're total newbs together. This will be my first MP game as well. Come on in, the water's warm.
[quote who="ElanaAhova" reply="22" id="2975080"]I am in my second MP game. I would consider this game, but I have concerns about how different it is with the CBT 1.84... and also, how difficult is it to switch back and forth between this and vanilla?[/quote] I've mainly played CBM 1.84, so I'm fairly ignorant of vanilla, but the big differences (at least the ones most people on the forums highlight) are lack of gem generators (clam, bloodstones, etc.), lack of dwarv
[quote who="DsRaider" reply="9" id="2974242"] You frankly aren't grasping the strategic consequences that yes exist in 1.3 as well. It doesn't matter that you can only teleport to your territory because you can just attack normally with all your troops in one huge bunch and if one of your cities gets under attack you just teleport back. Teleport means you never have to split your army. That's a huge advantage over other players who can't move troops around instantly
Lets hope we get a few more people.