Malsqueek

I would also like a 1.5. FE is "not as fun as MoM", but that is not to say that it isn't "fun" generally. Where FE Succeeds: 1. Faction Differentiation. MoM has various races, but because you can get any race by conquering one city, any differentiation you start with is really watered down over the course of a game. 2. Some semblance of a reason not to just vomit cities everywhere. In MoM, there was no strategy to compete with expand. Alway

[quote who="joasoze" reply="6" id="3180765"] Made me smile with that one, would really make my day if it happened. I have moved on to Warlock: Master of the Arcane. Will be back to FE later of course. [/quote] I figured you might get a kick out of it. :D You are about as hell-bent on getting Umber back as I am about getting a Magic System that isn't monotonous.

[quote who="Slicksyster" reply="12" id="3180963"] Don't limit champions to a single elemental school. I like playing magic users and buy books to introduce new schools to my champions.[/quote] Yes, but those books are a faction ability that you use to modify existing Champions. We have no truck with them. Just saying that all champions start with one or rarely two schools.

I would also like for casting this spell to be viewed as the most prominent threat to all nations not allied with you. They should all pretty much want to come kick in your door for what you are trying to do, stealing their sovereignty.

I would prefer a popup on any turn in which there are one or more cities whose queues have become empty at the start of your turn, with a particular fanfare sound as an acceptable compromise. Certainly create an opt-out for people who prefer it, but I already kinda dislike how turns can slide into one another without warning, as it has made me miss the opportunity to use literally thousands of production over the course of FE's Beta. As a player, my prefer

I've set E:FE aside until Beta 4. It's a pretty fun game as is, but all that can be said prior to Beta 4 has been said and we need new changes to get all up in arms about. [e digicons]^_^[/e] All joking aside. I can't wait for the next Patch. It is going to come with desperately needed changes to one of the last major overhauls needed. Hopefully, it will include some refinements to the Champion Trait System, and the Ma

I have experienced this numerous times. Most recently in 0.914 in a game where wildlands had me cut off from all other factions, and my city started getting hexed. I never use mods, and have reported this a couple times.

I do hope they don't outright remove the functionality, though. I really like that once you have well and truly broken their backs, you can finish and turn your attention to more important matters.

[quote who="Kalin" reply="18" id="3177520"]I've always thought that initiative penalties and bonuses directly on weapons are badly done, that's why I wrote up a comprehensive suggestion regarding weapon balancing a while back (here), one part of which would essentially move all the initiative bonus/penalties into the weight of the weapon and have it be handled via the encumbrance system. Although I never expected to get the whole thing implemented, I thought that part of it had a dece

I play on Normal because I am focusing largely on how the game plays with its standard "balance". I'll play the game for my own enjoyment when it is done. Once it is all in line on normal, then the other levels can be scaled appropriately, but you can't really balance the game on high difficulties and expect it to trickle down properly.

It is also entirely possible to get a second path any level after level 4. One of my more recent games I got the option of another path at level... 6 or 7 I think? Of course, it was also one of those crappy playthroughs where all I was getting for level up choices were the really weak generic traits and spell levels, so I think the game assumed I wanted to become a Mage after "regretting my choice" as a warrior.

They really ought to die for reals when killed. Otherwise, they kinda water down the value of champions, and therefore Altar's free champions ability. Of course, if they die for real, they should probably be just a bit cheaper in terms of influence.

I agree totally, except that I would put the bow trait with the Path of the Assassin because of all the +cirt +damage stuff they have.

See... I see that and I read "Mark". I suspect an inside Devs joke involving a person named Mark.

[quote who="Tibor2000" reply="2" id="3173208"]On the other hand GFireflyE, having roads automatically created between towns and outposts (with the proper tech), is an amazing time saver.[/quote] With the advent of "enemies can't use my roads" recent changes, it matters less, but the auto-roads are still pretty inefficient in their route as well as messy. My preference would be to at LEAST indicate where I prefer the trade route to go, if not s

I'm pretty bummed we have to wait several more weeks for Beta 4. I am positively thrilled that we are seeing this degree of thorough development and willingness to totally re-envision clunky aspects of the game.

[quote who="NetNomad" reply="5" id="3173403"]What does essence represent? What is does it "Buy"? Just Curious. [/quote] Just a guess, but I'm betting that it will be generated or earned at a slow rate and spent on particularly great buildings OR on cities.

I want to see a pair of buttons on those popups. One that says "Show Me!" and takes you there. One that says "That really sucks... Oh well" and closes the window.

[quote who="Kongdej" reply="11" id="3171879"] Quoting StevenAus - "Or high level traits negating Maul." I honestly dont like all the "negating" going on, id rather have traits that defend against maul, and defend against overpower. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] My thoughts exactly. I despise true Rock-Paper-Scissor systems, as they artificially enhance instability in strategies.

It seems to have something to do with multiple units firing things, and seems to not happen until it does, at which point it is consistent. It may be related to the really strange graphical slowdown bug. More testing is needed to isolate.

I agree that the Sovereigns need to be better indicated as "more" than their champion counterparts. Otherwise, why don't we have 35 factions? These sovereigns are world-benders for a reason. I agree that a large portion of the solution lies in how they handle magic, but would be very against the "all sovereigns have all schools" method of doing so. First and foremost because of how it would dilute both the ability to gain higher level in magic without focusing on it

I had a similar occurrence with Tarth having Path of the Warrior and Merchant 1 from the start. It was hilariously broken. Discipline + Lethal + Vital Strike + Merchant 3. Lots of fun, totally not fair.

[quote who="Leo in WI" reply="14" id="3170758"] Quoting Malsqueek, reply 9Psssh. I always hold developers to their word on release dates. It's why MY Diablo 3 came out in June of 2004. Nice! When did your Duke Nukem Forever release to you?[/quote] The original release date in the mid-late 90's. It was pretty awesome then! Too bad it didn't hold up with age. :D

[quote who="Gorde" reply="18" id="3170704"] Could we look at it from this angle: That there are not enough research branches--they pretty much all tie together within the 3 main categories, with the exception of the heroes/quests branch, which is a good example of how other areas of the game research could be handled. Personally, I think it's more satisfying to have many more research options, with each research option taking less time to learn (so there isn't this fe

[quote who="Gorde" reply="16" id="3170620"]In theory, I think if you ever stop researching and think, "I don't need to research this further because I get no added benefit," then the game progression is broken at that spot. Because progress of a civilization is always about finding ways to build bigger and better. Am I missing some important reason why bigger groups should be made less good/important by small groups?[/quote] It is more that each step of