Malsqueek

They should, but it should be based on type of monster and the reason they are there. Spiders, Wolves, and Bears should never break resources, they should just attack weak units nearby or stay in their homes. Bandits should break undefended resources over a broad area around their lair, and should respawn lairs in uncontrolled areas of the map. Higher-call intelligent creates should attack undefended resources near their lairs, and go after lightly defen

The maps themselves I think don't have enough open spaces. They are too cluttered with mountains and (bizarre-looking) crevasses in the first place. I would rather they be cluttered with monsters and resources. The thing that bugs me the most though is the elevation thing. There are plains, low hills which look like plains, tall hills which look like hills, short mountains which look like hills, and mountains which look like hills that got into the Miracle-Gro. They

[quote who="seanw3" reply="5" id="3165841"]We need each path to branch off into new paths. A Healer or Priest path would seem to be the biggest omission. [/quote] Absolutely. At least two distinct identities per path (which is what my posts have been suggesting), with little to no overlap between paths. Additionally, it is important that legitimate Lead-In traits exist for all five paths. Right now, Warrior and Assassin are the only ones well represented. The rest are just Magic Level

It is possible with the massive rewrite to the city building system coming in Beta 4 that they are holding on to the idea until then. At least, I sure hope so.

I see this a handful of times every time I sit down to play for more than forty minutes. I haven't seen any uniformity to suggest any one cause.

This post is a continuation of the Assessment found here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/425698 The current Champion setup is a great on in concept. We have five strong archetypes that we get to use to craft our heroes as we see fit; the strong Warrior, the skilled Assassin, the noble Defender, the wise Governor, and the powerful Mage. The issue I see is not with the framing of the system, but the implementation of

[quote who="Kalin" reply="29" id="3165276"]Also don't forget about the prestige boost. More often than not, the whole reason I picked path of governor for any hero is to get the extra prestige. That helps the entire empire grows, no matter where you are. The criticism of PoG is more because of administration than it is due to the path itself. So maybe administration is the thing that needs a look at, and not the path?[/quote] I think I addressed the fact t

[quote who="visagedarkskin" reply="25" id="3165010"]One possible gameplay mechanics I see would be that players would choose the hero that has received bad illnesses from loosing battles and is therefore not as effective to combat anymore and then decide to turn him into a governor (granted he can earn Xp w/o fighting). Being able to do something positive with the heroes that get bad afflictions could reduce the temptation to reload when loosing battles, after all you loose a hero but you get

[quote who="StillSingle" reply="14" id="3164032"]My Sov has been 1 hit KO from splash damage. Had higher def and health than the unit attacked...... guess which one was still around..... [/quote] Yup. Saw this last night as well. Level 9 Path of Defender Sovereign with over 50 armor took 84 from a Skath Lord and died instantly. The Spearmen next to him was just fine, thanks. I really hope we get a patch for this sooner than Beta 4. It's

[quote who="Zygwen" reply="6" id="3164660"]Isn't Crushing Blow unique to Path of The Warrior too?[/quote] May well be. That was a lot of XML to sift through and things got missed. Will update when I get home.

[quote who="Bellack" reply="19" id="3164543"] They should have two ques. One for buildings and one for units. This would speed things up a bit[/quote] They tried that. It sucked. Ferociously. With the fire of a thousand suns. Removed nearly all opportunity cost from producing buildings or units, allowed players to nearly instantly outstrip their economy's ability to support an army, and created a perception of wasted production because of

This has been in the game since E:WoM was in Beta. I hope it gets addressed before release because, while small, it is obnoxious.

[quote who="Emperorjarin" reply="5" id="3164202"]I haven't taken a peek at the XML, but based on my in-game observations auto-defense is basically what you get when you tell your unit to pass its turn. Thus, a unit with no defense and Defender 3 will have 35 armor when it passes its turn (auto-defends), instead of the standard 5. This fits perfectly well with the idea of a Defender basically blocking paths to more vulnerable units and tanking everything that tries to cross its

[quote who="StevenAus" reply="3" id="3164197"]So it doesn't have any impact on tactical combat? I would have thought those defense bonuses would at least apply until the unit attacks. Otherwise Defender1/2/3 is even more useless.[/quote] There is no indication that it does in the XML. For Defender 1 the exact text is: <span c

[quote who="Droghar" reply="3" id="3164133"] I don't really see how else it can work, you can't give major xp for a hero sitting home, there has to be risk . Those buildings should be improved, but only so much.[/quote] I disagree entirely about requiring risk. The whole city building aspect of 4x games is about competing opportunities. Not about Risk. Does the opportunity cost of producing a research improving buildin

[quote who="Droghar" reply="1" id="3164137"] Can you please clarify how the auto-defence works?[/quote] Based upon the XML, units stacked with the Defender get + to their Defense when the player selects Auto-Resolve. +30 Defense is amazing, but requires you to skip an entire aspect of the game to benefit.

[quote who="OrionM42" reply="7" id="3163986"] But looked at another way, I view all of these units as "expendables" -- not really permanent units. They are not champions or armed men; and I would not expect them to take the place of such units. I'd think of them as useful "accessories" (mostly for the sovereign) in the very early game -- not as units that would level up, and stick around, for a whole game. [/quote] I agree wit

This post is a continuation of the Assessment found here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/425698 The current Champion setup is a great on in concept. We have five strong archetypes that we get to use to craft our heroes as we see fit; the strong Warrior, the skilled Assassin, the noble Defender, the wise Governor, and the powerful Mage. The issue I see is not with the framing of the system, but the implementation of

This post is a continuation of the Assessment found here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/425698 The current Champion setup is a great on in concept. We have five strong archetypes that we get to use to craft our heroes as we see fit; the strong Warrior, the skilled Assassin, the noble Defender, the wise Governor, and the powerful Mage. The issue I see is not with the framing of the system, but the implementation of

That is more a naming convention issue than anything else. The "Light" color is actually color #1 from the faction clothing color selection, and the "Dark" is #2.

I agree. Last game I played I started right next to Gilden, and about the time I found the first area that was capable of being settled there were three (no exaggeration) pioneers in a loose group exploring and settling the instant they could. This couldn't have been more than about 30 turns into the game. AI seems to adopt a vomit out pioneers, settle every damn place, and see what sticks strategy.

[quote who="Sythion" reply="7" id="3164051"]Unfortunately, mages are tanks and tanks are mages, so there isn't much for assassins to counter at the moment.[/quote] I'll be doing a "What a level 10 Looks Like" addendum to each of these after I get all 5 of them done. I suspect we will see some pretty startling things then.

[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="4" id="3163912"]Remember Jon Shafer's prose on limiting choices... Good game design dictates that we don't get an endless supply of choices; instead, we get fewer, really good choices. [/quote] That is the very reason that I am proposing we narrow the scope of each of the Champions so that all may have an identity.

[quote who="Sethai" reply="22" id="3163652"]I'd agree about the early game techs Honestly, my typical games break down into three roughly equal stages 1/3 Unlocking things, building a basic couple of towns capable of supporting a couple of units and training champions up to survivability 1/3 Actually playing the meat of the game, improving my troops, fighting my first war and pursuing the things i want to, with some pressure still on me 1/3 m

This post is a continuation of the Assessment found here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/425698 The current Champion setup is a great on in concept. We have five strong archetypes that we get to use to craft our heroes as we see fit; the strong Warrior, the skilled Assassin, the noble Defender, the wise Governor, and the powerful Mage. The issue I see is not with the framing of the system, but the implementation of