My two cubits and keep in mind a lot of this changes depending on which Python implementation you're working with (I'll assume CPython in this case): Pros for Lua: + Smaller memory footprint than Python. Source: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=python3&
I think the League of Legends crew had a good idea when they decided that they were never going to sell power. They sell new heroes for cash (also unlockable with F2P ingame currency) and they sell skins (not purchasable with F2P ingame currency). Some of the things they refuse to sell for money include runes (which provide in game stat boosts) and summoner levels/experience points (which let you use more runes/get more mastery points/use different summoner abilities). I thi
Posting in an epic thread.
My name is Bruno Sommer and I approve of this message...even if I don't know what it's about. Glad you had fun though!
This is something we're looking into improving. I agree with you that it's too easy to game at the moment and we'll definitely be devoting some developer hours into improving the tactical AI. Thanks again for the feedback.
Murteas is correct. Only sovereigns and champions can flee in the current system. I agree that this isn't communicated effectively (or at all). This is something we'll be looking into addressing om future updates.
The genre is probably mildly saturated, especially since it is already a niche genre. League of Legends, Demigod, Heroes of Newerth, Bloodline Champions and more recently, Storm of the Imperial Sanctum, are all competing for the same niche player base. I think Dota2 will probably succeed because it's going to grab the players that were attracted to HoN and SOTIS; people that really liked the old DotA formula and pacing and items and heroes. HoN and SOTIS have copied, at so
If this is happening to units other than mounted units, let us know and post a save. The horse bug is known and we're working on a fix.
1), 2) and 3) will all be changing when tactical battles move over to an initiative based system (think ATB where combat speed determines your initiative and how often you take a turn). Along with this change, your turn will consist of one move, and one action (attack, cast spell, use item, use ability, etc). I personally agree with you that auto move, and being able to set a destination beyond your immediate move radius is very unintuitive. But it was an internally requested featu
This will be hotfixed soon. Thanks for reporting this.
[quote who="Phazon88" reply="13" id="2770786"]I'll just rattle off a few things I'd like to see added to the general combat system over time, whether through patches or expansions. Chance to hit and estimated damage to be done visibly shown to the player in a small UI element before launching an attack. This would probably require players to target a unit first before launching an attack but this is how great tactical combat games such as Final Fantasy Tactics A2 and Advanced
Open up TerrainTypes.xml in the English folder. Look for things tagged . If you specifically want to make new City tactical maps make sure you look for the City environment type. Keep in mind when making tactical maps that you need at least 10 defender and attacker starting tiles.
[quote who="Werewindlefr" reply="20" id="2759829"] Quoting LikeTheWhirlwind, reply 7Each member of the attacking squad rolls (0-ATK/NumTroops) vs. a unique defender roll of (0-DEF/NumTroops). All positive results of the attacker rolls are totaled and damage is dealt. Is it by design that dead soldiers still have attack rolls though? This make diminishing the HP value of the group useless until you actually kill them altogether.[/quote] Dead soldiers
[quote who="Vallu751" reply="1" id="2760267"]Oh, and by the way. As Tanafres pointed out in the above thread, hopefully the engine is using (0-ATK)/MaxSquadSize instead of (0-ATK/NumTroops) like the dev suggested.[/quote] ATK goes down as squads lose troops. So 0 - ATK/NumTroops is still correct. I agree with you though that the currently displayed ATK and DEF for squads is misleading and unintuitive.
Each member of the attacking squad rolls (0-ATK/NumTroops) vs. a unique defender roll of (0-DEF/NumTroops). All positive results of the attacker rolls are totaled and damage is dealt. EDIT: It's the same in autoresolve. There's no difference as far as damage calculations go.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="1" id="2758875"]I believe James009D tried for some time and came up with nothing.[/quote] There are some technical issues holding us back, but like Brad said, they're coming. If you add the appropriate summon modifier to a tactical spell right now it's most likely going to summon it on the main map, after the battle is over.
I'm not affiliated with our art department in any way, but I really like what you've done with these paint overs. I think what really makes them more attractive than the in game render is the small details like facial expressions. The only sort of facial animation we have at the moment is blinking, and I think it shows if you ever get a zoomed in look at a character, like in the unit cards. Thanks again for the feedback.
[quote who="hairrorist" reply="11" id="2757348"]Not to derail the thread into another VM discussion, but the arcane doom ability literally allows you to destroy any practical army in the game on the first turn. For more, see the "Summon Spy" and "Vigilant Minion too powerful" threads. [/quote] This is something we're looking into. I agree with you that Arcane Doom is probably overpowered at the moment, but we've held back on nerfing it at this point because w
We'll be looking into this very closely. Like Kyro said, a save and your debug.rr would help tremendously. Your Filesavr link doesn't seem to be valid.
This is some really impressive stuff. The Freeze Enemy effect is amazing. Almost looks like there's real geometry there. -LTW
[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="80" id="2738333"] Quoting LikeTheWhirlwind, reply 76I'm starting to think that squads having DEF equal to (individual unit DEF * NumberOfTroops) is a mistake. What do you guys think about this? I think this is a mistake, too, but that squads having an ATT equal to (individual unit ATT * NumberOfTroops) is a mistake, too, in my opinion. As many have already suggested it would be perhaps better to roll with the ATT of every unit in the s
I'm starting to think that squads having DEF equal to (individual unit DEF * NumberOfTroops) is a mistake. What do you guys think about this?
Thanks for all the feedback guys. I'll be sure to do a lot of testing vs. high DEF mobs. If the miss rates are unacceptable, then maybe your damage roll vs. DEF would be a better option. I agree with you that without a magic resistance stat of some sort, it's a little odd to be rolling against defense for magic damage, but it's all we have at the moment without a major stats overhaul. I'd also like to see more magic items with +INT or +WISDOM or Clarity1-5 on them to help out you
I'm personally reviewing all the spell XML and I want to let you guys know that changes are coming. We're looking into separating the hit and damage rolls for offensive spells. The hit roll will be caster INT vs. defender DEF. The damage rolls will be between a min and a max value, not just from 0 - max. Here's the fireball description in my current build: "Target enemy unit is hit with a fireball and is dealt (5-9) damage. Damage is increased b
This sounds like a bug with how debuffs get removed from units. We'll definitely be looking into this. Thanks for the post Alibaster.