It irks me that you cannot use/target a creature's subtype. Example; Spell can target "beast", but currently could not be refined down to "Spider", "Wolf", or "Bear". I wanted to do a mod that would play upon the subtypes as I find targeting the broad definition of "Beast" a bit heavy handed.
I also think reviewers are being more critical now than in past years. For a long stretch certain magazines were giving AAA titles super high scores that were entirely undeserving of those scores. At the time I could only guess the scores were inflated because the magazine is under pressure to keep advertising dollars.
Another good use of the FE engine could be a TBS a re-envisioning/mash-up of Alpha Centauri, Outpost, & Space Colony. Different Factions/Races vying for control over a planetary body.
Was mulling this over, but my answer was reworking the whole road building system that we have now into something similar, but different. In my version, Road Building is a Point to Point option queued up in a city. You would select "Build" as you normally would, then pick the subject "Road". Starting point would be the city itself, or Outpost that is under the city's control. Next you would pick a destination point from that city/outpost, valid points being anoth
I've seen this in 1.20 as well. Faction armies and monsters occupying the same tiles
This [quote who="Kongdej" reply="21" id="3314937"] quoting post A lot of people would like to see crafting in some future expansion, update, sequel, whatever. The question is, HOW do you imagine this working? I must be part of the more grumpy people when I personally feel crafting would be redundant in FE. I think it would be much better if you focused on the other parts of FE right now, like UI. Etc... Sincerely<br /
Another evolution of FE would be great. With all the ideas that get kicked around in the forum it's obvious that there's still a lot of room for FE to grow. Would like to see a game similar to Final Fantasy: Tactics as well. The FE Engine looks like it could be used for that type of genre. It would also be a way for you to put out a TBS RPG that actually gives players more of a connection to the world you created with Elemental/FE. Not having read the n
[quote who="Savyg" reply="9" id="3314235"]I liked the preview but I don't really need it enough to pay for it. Hell, I don't need Office 2010 either, might as well just use Google Docs. Hopefully GDocs cutting support for .doc means people will get off their dumb asses and use .docx instead. But I doubt it.[/quote] Another reason I don't like Office 365, installed it on an SBS Server to check it out, couldn't get it cleanly removed from the
Not that I'm against MS Office, it's great for the enterprise, just don't see much need for it as a home user or small business professional. I use Kingsoft Office most of the time. Less clunky than Open Office, more stable than Lotus Symphony, smooth GUI, and is available in Free and Paid versions. http://www.kingsoftstore.com/
The only issue I have with the 30 population cost is that when building a new Pioneer the cost is deducted from your overall population, not the city population where you're wanting to build it in. There's no way a newly founded city should be able to immediately queue up a new Pioneer until that city has at least 31 citizens in play. The new costing hasn't affected any of the 1.2 games played so far, though it does appear to have slowed down the AI expansion a little
[quote who="Jafo" reply="90" id="3313984"]Revived by spam[/quote] I was gonna say, holy necro thread batman
I like your ideas about changing Quest Victory . Rather than having to work down three doors, that whole thing could be scaled down to a huge Temple icon freeing up more available land to players. What's also interesting is the idea of needing a number of parts to create a tablet or somesuch. In multi-player it would give some leverage in negotiating for Alliances. You have 2/5 keys, I have 2/5 keys, let's make an Alliance, kill off the player t
I'd be willing you bet you'd be able to code it. Unfortunately it wouldn't be as simple as saying "mounted" units, would think you'd have to specify Horse, Warg, etc.. as their own specific subset. Also, I had no idea that Tireless March was stackable. That's really crazy IMO.
Hit the Enter key and your turn will end normally
Tireless March seems fine at +1. In the unit design traits having some perks available that cannot be used with Mounts is where I was thinking. Give Footsoldiers with Spear weapons a one time counterstrike to Mounted units that does double damage (for instance). Design a Pike so that it has a range of 2 for Footsoldiers, cannot be used by mounted units. Create a spell that only affects mounted units that causes the mount a % chance to move in a random direction instead
It would be nice if there were separate stickies listing [eWIP] , [ eMOD] , etc.. that just link back to the developers threads. I find myself having to dig back through the forum pages trying to reference one person's mod work which could be a dozen pages deep. Downside would be that your forum moderator would have a little work to do listing new entries into the stickied reference post. Might be alleviated by asking the person listin
Thanks TBS. You could probably include a cooldown on the spell if you think it would be appropriate to do so. Or are you proposing that the caster is locked down for a turn while casting the spell?
I'd be happy if Heroes went into a limbo upon defeat instead of pushing cities beyond their stacking limits. After their 5 turns have passed, let them reappear in a city somewhere. If this were to happen I'd be more inclined to sacrifice weaker stacks of units to try and take out a champ or two before sending in the big stack to sack a city.
[quote who="coyote303" reply="6" id="3313201"] An interesting and thought provoking post. I do disagree with you on the following balance points, however: 2. I don't like any change that makes snaking more powerful than it already is. 8. I think Tireless March is plenty powerful at +1, especially with the modifier affecting tactical combat. 9. I like the Governor specialization choice a lot. I think eliminating it as a choice would be a mistake.[/quote]<br
Again, this just leads to; Step 1: Cast Bloom of Twilight Step 2: Swear Step 3: Load Save Point Step 4: Go back to Step 1 A simpler, more realistic option would probably be to expand its field of effect by 1 such that the area of impact actually has value
I play using random maps and do have a save file if the devs really want it.
[quote who="sjaminei" reply="2" id="3312637"]Use it near magic shards, rivers, prestigious locations and dragon lairs (3 essence baby!). Also count squares depending on your map size. I think it's 4-7 or something. It's easy to find good spots if you know what to look for [/quote] "I" know all that, but the spell shouldn't be counter-intuitive to the game play. New players will be like; I just dropped 300 mana on a spell that doesn't do jack. Tha
I just started a new game and am literally 3 turns in and a road appears deadending just before my city. I am playing with Mods installed (Stormworld and such) and cannot conceive of any starting faction having road tech by turn 3. Edit: Enabled cheat codes and hopped my sovereign down the road to see where it goes. Winds around the continent a bit and deadends into a field. Weird.
I think they wanted 50k to help get better leverage at the auction. The owner of TeamPixel has publicly stated that if they can't win the IP at the auction that he will personally refund the money raised from crowdsourcing back to the donors.
The biggest issue I have with this spell is that with such a large mana investment you have no idea if the area you're targeting actually has any actual potential resources for city placement/development. I would LOVE some kind of visual indicator, even if it's just basic colors (Red, Yellow, Green) and not the actual tile yields so that if I'm going to cast the spell there's some actual ROI. Casting the spell, finding nothing, then reloading a save point to try