Malsqueek

[quote who="DragonRider862" reply="53" id="3138985"] EDIT: I forgot the most obvious thing: spells that deal their damage to each individual figure are stupidly powerful, and spells that do this while also being AoE are even more stupidly powerful. If you have any shards at all, it's basically impossible for a base-level stack not to be wiped out by effects like these in a single cast no matter how high-tech they are. That 70-health squad with plate armor and magica

[quote who="Kongdej" reply="3" id="3138506"]Also, if such resurrection magic of any kind existed, you are basically forcing players into the spheres of which they exist, unless they again want to be completely unable to regain they're source of high powered units. No matter how you balance it unless everyone gets the resurrection spell, and then its all quite pointless to me to change the mechanic. I am not a fan of "You MUST have this spell to compete in the game" S

[quote who="DarkSide73" reply="10" id="3138288"]This goes without saying, the concept is pretty cool but the execution is lacking. I requested some changes on another thread, but here is what I think we need. 1. Debuffs require line of sight to to cast 1A. Debuffs cannot remain active for more than 4 turns after line of sight is lost. 2. AI must actually have enough mana to maintain Debuff spells. 3. There needs to be an

I agree with this for several reasons. It helps offset how powerful champions are. It gives us an excuse to have more spells (more magic, YAY!) to bring them back. Life for resurrection and Death for UNDEAD CHAMPIONS! Plus all above listed reasons.

Yay yay yay! These all sound awesome!

It's pretty awesome, but yes it is overpowered. Easy fix is to reduce the damage. As you said, ~125% normal damage for a crit. Tie improving frequency to level up skills so we can get near a 33% crit occurrence (11%/22%/33%, for example), and have a single rare level benefit with the 22% level up trait as a prereq which ups the crit damage to ~150% of a normal hit. You also need to figure that between gear and assassin p

I agree with Sean that pretty much all of the steps made from Beta 2 to Beta 3 were significant and in the right direction. The game feels overall more cohesive. The tactical combat is really very close to being perfect. You wouldn't know it by looking at my posts critiquing the game, but I do think you guys are doing a fantastic job getting FE tightened up. I voted Fair because, despite the beautiful and significant changes to Tactical combat balancing and faction

[quote quoting="post"] Apparently line of sight isn't required to cast a debuff on a city, nor is being an enemy. Dispelling city debuffs every 1-3 turns is not fun, especially when you don't even know who is casting them. [/quote] I agree. Recently had a game where I was not even aware of any other factions (really hostile Wildlands separated me from all other factions), and one city in particular was getting that firestorm debuff every third turn.

[quote who="NagaPrince" reply="7" id="3135455"]All you need is an extra menu where you simply gloss and choose from over a dozen abilities you reach as you advance along the technology tree. I feel such a venture would better flesh out your Kingdom and Empire, and make it the morality atmosphere of the game more than Black & White. As an Empire that is against Slavery and Sacrifice might find much backlash from internal and external forces, they'll mold themselves to afford great Infl

Overall, this version of the game is a massive leap from Beta 2. Though I'm still playing largely with Tarth because I like their feel, I am compelled to try out the other factions as I get comfortable with the new focus of the game. [b]General Stuff[/b] Graphically much smoother. Easy to see where you are likely and unlikely to be able to build. Edges softer, animations smoother. Quests are back in and have good rewards. Aside from a teeny

[quote who="Alstein" reply="3" id="3135199"]I think even if it changes, the reward is still too small because others can build there also. The effort I spend on killing a boss monster, I usually could steamroll the rest of the AIs combined instead, it's a diversion/challenge mode instead of a part of the regular game. [/quote] I agree with this. Not all of the wildlands are ridiculous, but most of them I simply avo

I got these for my very first quest. Lost my first two spearmen finishing the quest out and was pleased, but a little bit let down by "only archers"? Then I got into my next combat and vaporised a bear and a wolf pack before they got to act. Amazing! Admittedly, as you get to fighting tougher things they become more balanced, but I do think they should either be reduced to 3 models in the unit or saved for the second tier of adventure rewards.

I agree with the OP on most accounts. The game is 800,000% better than WoM ever was (meaning "interesting at all"), and is at least twice as interesting as Beta 2 in its current state. I agree that the city mechanic, while FAR better because of the array of buildings we have to actually use without crushing our economy, is still really difficult to care about. My queues are still empty most of the time (wasted production BAD), and my build decisions look something like "Enough Troops?" ->

[quote who="enoeraew37" reply="6" id="3135104"]Type Cntl-N to load a new map. Problem solved. But ya I've found there to be too many long mountain ranges. [/quote] Yeah, yeah, I know we can keep reloading until we get "the right" map. My issue is that frequently, you don't know for sure until you have spent a half hour or more playing it out. Wasted time, and no amount of Ctrl+N Fixes that. [quote]Yeah seriously, plus something needs

[quote who="Glowing_Ember" reply="1" id="3134551"] In your situation i would have beelined for magic wands and logistics nad pumped out big group of mages to tear through magnar - taking a few of his cities would make things easier for you - soften him up with militias while you prepare your mages. you also have the opportunity to take out the shrills and the ogre with a group of leather armoured militias and a hero to kill it[/quote] That's 100 or s

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v301/Rubberchrist/Frustrating.jpg[/IMG] IT is still WAY too common that we are randomly handed essentially losing starting points. Especially when it takes you 20-30 minutes of play time to determine that your start is a losing start. In the above, The absolute only place I could have expanded to without entering open hostilities with another faction was within the aggro of TWO creatures that would kill my entire military dead inst

Looks to me like we just got an entirely video game. Good Bye sorta getting fun Fallen Enchantress, hello much closer to perfectly awesome Fallen Enchantress!

[quote who="LightofAbraxas" reply="1" id="3126534"]I agree completely that the animations are waaay too fast. It almost makes you think that the designers don't really like tactical combat, assume you won't either, and want to 'help' you get through it as fast as possible. [/quote] Which is quite counter-intuitive considering the number of people for which that feature was one of the sole reasons for pre-purchasing.

[quote who="Stupidity10" reply="14" id="3122308"] Per item initiative penalties are just a lazy and less comprehensive version of encumbrance and it makes no sense to have both except to limit how many items a unit can carry, which is not how it is implemented anyway. [/quote] Absolutely. I sincerely hope that they switch to a system where Dex and Magic determine base Initiative and then equipment all has a weight value which eats into encumbrance limits, and Stren

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="16" id="3121912"] Quoting Malsqueek, reply 15 Howsabout Dexterity sets base initiative What does dexterity have to do with how quickly you wield a 30 pound hammer?[/quote] Dexterity has to do with how fast you are as an individual (base initiative). The 30 pound hammer has a lot to do with how much slower a fast person is when wielding it (encumbrance).

[quote who="Kongdej" reply="14" id="3120677"]Talking about willy nilly initiative systems.. I think this would make me feel empty about the initiative system, again strength becomes the attribute to deal more damage, AND act faster... for some reason...[/quote] Good point. Howsabout Dexterity sets base initiative and Encumberance modifies Initiative down? Example:[(-)Dex+10] + [Encumberance modifier] = Initiative interval (assuming that a higher i

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="28" id="3120532"] I didn't like that mechanic, I don't like it in Civ either. I think sneaking across borders should be part of the game but there needs to be a stiff penalty for getting caught so that players aren't constantly having to enforce it.[/quote] Would it make sense to have a 2-3 turn grace period for both players and AI before the AI starts getting gritchy? I can see a "Just Passing Through" grace period for any faction th

[quote who="seanw3" reply="10" id="3120376"]I have mine set up to do -4 Init from 51-75% and -8 from 76-100%, with -12, -1 Moves at 101%. This works well considering that my armor gives no penalty and you can choose strength bonuses to stay at 0 penalties. It works great for how I am balancing things, but I think your way could work too. The only problem I see is that it is a little too incremental in penalties. Whatever the final system we get is, it just needs to have speci

[quote who="Cauldyth" reply="37" id="3119331"]Screw balance, make the game fun and diverse. MoM had virtually zero balance, yet people worship the silicon it was coded on. Imbalance also provides a nice way for players to make the game more challenging without having to let the AI cheat. Pick the underdog race and stack your opponents with the overpowered ones. [/quote] Exactly. Unbalanced stuff is the FUN stuff. You balance it with cost, not agai

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="52" id="3116044"]as well as traits that give 2 techs (1 now, 1 much later) would be an interesting way to introduce "random" techs of a sort into the game.[/quote] Oh my... That sounds fantastic!