luketan

[quote who="Mtrixis" reply="10" id="3066226"] Quoting Sarudak, reply 9I think what you don't like about it is the very thing that makes it an interesting mechanic that forces difficult decisions... It is very much not this. Once you get into the midgame, you have functionally infinite mana for tactical spells unless you're wasting mana on the (useless) overpriced strategic level spells. [/quote] That's a problem with useless spells no

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="38" id="3069345"]Big fan of mana cap per tactical battle based off some stat like int or something. It worked quite well in MoM as other posters indicated.[/quote] THIS! I don't mind adding cool downs etc.. but to totally remove mana system? Come on!!! As others have said, the fun thing about MOM was that you could do stuff like win battles by burning through mana, but you would run the risk of winning the battle but losing the

I have no clue about modding, but I am thinking how close FE can be made into MOM. Let's leave aside the actual spells & talk systems. MOM is of course totally magic focused so there is no researching of technology, all improvements are set by the race you play etc. You only research spells.. The closest I can figure is 1. Alter fractions to have city improvements already researched at start of game (keyed to factions so some factions would have

[quote who="BeardyDan" reply="26" id="3068844"]Anyone else had Morigan's(sp?) Spellbook Quest yet. [spoiler][/spoiler] Got 2 spells as the reward, i think its hard to tell: Mana Shield; Enchantment, Cost 30, Upkeep 3, ALL damage is taken to Mana pool instead of HP. Mana Blast; Single target direct damage, not sure on base cost, Deals damage equal to your mana pool resist for half. seems to be unaffected by damage bonus traits,

[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="16" id="3065553"]There are lots of spells... just check the HyperGameNuts or whatever is it called. You just have to recruit the right heroes and play the game many times. Some of the magic spells you get will be different every time. [/quote] I did check the online help. There were about 100+, dont get me wrong much better showing then the WOM, with some good variety. But MOM still better in terms of number and variety,

[quote who="scyldSCHEFING" reply="20" id="3065772"]So are beta players just not bothering to read anything the developers have posted before they speak, or what? Why has no one posted the following link yet? https://forums.elementalgame.com/410595 This is not a DEMO, as the OP called it. THIS IS A BETA. BETA MEANS NOT ALL FEATURES, SPELLS, ETC. ARE IMPLEMENTED. MORE M

[quote who="Sanati" reply="15" id="3065543"]ell with a large variety of tactical spells on one hero, so in order to get more spells overall we'd need less per character. Alternatively they could totally redesign the tactical spell interface and for example give each character 12 or so slots they can fill with t[/quote] I hope they redesign then. It's a bit stupid to be restricted by something like UI if it makes the game less fun.

Played FE demo for 4 hours just to get a feel. It seems some people feel magic isn't strong enough, others feel the combo of high Initiative + pillar of fire/fireball etc are killers. Personally I feel, the variety of spells is still lacking. There is counterspell yes. But there isn't a global version of this? We need more global spells. More "meta-magic" type spells that interact with each other (see MoM for ideas). The spells books are st

Congrats. I just tried the beta for 4 hours. This should be the product you have shipped for WoM. Not saying it is better than MOM or AOW2 SM, but it is not a disgrace to the name of StarDock. It's definitely fun now, but still needs work to replace MoM and other classics..

Galciv2 is a much simpler game. TC is going to make it tough for a good AI. Customizable units, ability to change the situation with spells etc.. All this makes things much more complicated in FE.

Looks good. How many spells are there total? In a typical game, how many spells are we likely to have access to?

Yes, when i saw the video, my first thought was, the teleport to capital if defeated seems to be a nice trick. I dont know if FE champions are plentiful/cheap enough to abuse this trick on one throwaway champion just to abuse this loophole. So far I see 2 other mentions already of the same problem.

No opinion either way, though I am surprised people were against killing of champions Again comparing with classic games (you know which ones I talking about, in particularly the one this one claims to take inspiraion from), the champions/heroes are usually "killable", in some games there are even rarer. Yet it still works. That said, if it helps the AI, i guess why not?

Aeon has some good points e.g Active vs passive, (I don't agree with some points e.g no need dodge if there is accuracy), but honestly, I think the number of stats are okay. The first few posters had it right though, can we group the main ones/more critical ones together? Like hitpoints vs the "basic" stats like constitution? Maybe group with combat related stats in another box..

Looks good. Nothing really new but good blend of what has gone before.. basically heavily using A classic "pick one cool option out of x" everytime you level (champion/city) mechanic. Oldie but goodie AND initative based TC is also nice. But as many have said that alone wont unseat MOM if the magic and spells are tame, and all indications for this expansion at least FE might not yet have what it takes to be a classic even if the spells shown so far are but the base...

Unless stated in the spell description it seems no. Another thing I noticed, there aren't any "destruction" type effects that kill units regardless of HPs unlike in MOM. I notice spells that make a unit practically unkillable by damage, one soaks up damage via mana so you can eventually wear it down but could take ages late game.

I wonder if people really use the customization option of armies so much. I know they did for Galciv2 ship models/moo2 ship design but that's pretty cool... Honestly I rather spend more time on champions/sovereigns/spells... which are cooler than armies.. but i suppose it doesnt hurt to have them. I rather tho resources be channelled into making magic system more complicated and flexible then on this though.

[quote who="Souls-Stream" reply="87" id="2971852"]I don't remember who but someone said that we remember MoM better that it was ! I have to totally disagree here ! MoM has great spells in every school there's powerful spells ! The chaos school was really impressive with damage and mass target spells. Death had everything you want + some really cool summoning and buff that could make you quickly win a game if you would start with them (not that I want to see someo

[quote who="Winnihym" reply="7" id="2970779"] There is a good array of spells, but I was struck, again, by the similarity between them; direct damage, stats manipulation, and a smattering of situational spells. There aren't a good array standard buffs (enchant weapon, shield, etc) that would be nice to see if magic was to be pervasive. As it is, it looks to be that games will be about saving up magic all through the game, and using it only sparingly if at all t

[quote who="LightofAbraxas" reply="4" id="2942034"]hat it was a decent fantasy wargame, but just doesn't have the heft in game mechanics to be a great 4x TBS. Only my opinion, of course, but the way that culture, religion, civics, and diplomacy interacted in Civ4, and thus FfH2, was exquisite, and I haven't seen anything that leads me to believe that FE will have nearly the same amount of strategic depth.[/quote] MoM didnt have much of this , yet it had as much

[quote who="Rishkith" reply="10" id="2948067"]Heard this a lot before E:WOM and during early beta. But it ended up so, so far from that. It is a great idea to stick to MoM, but it needs less mentioning and more doing. Hopefully with Derek on board we can see that.[/quote] This x1000. The OP makes it sound like before Derek , SD was shy about mentioning MoM as the gold standard or inspiration they were working towards. They weren't. Fat lot good all that mention

Hmm thoughts 1. Random techs have worked fine.. As far back as Moo, so dont quite understand those who are arguing random techs will be a disaster. 2. That said I agree random can be in degrees.. from super random where every game you can mostly diff techs , or where most games you have the same majority of techs with some minor changes.. again if tech, chances of appearing can be modded, feel free to set it from 0-100% for it.

[quote who="AlLanMandragoran" reply="87" id="2917519"] Quoting Derek Paxton, reply 82In my mind its like call Magic the Gathering a RPS design. Sure there are cards and strategies that are better against some and worst against others. And Im sure there are examples of card (or creature) A is better than B which is better than C which is better than A. But thats just a small part of a much larger picture, where the cards have strategic strengths and combinations.<b

To add on about magic, diverse paths.. I just read the interview.... [quote] Derek Paxton: and number 3. Magic we want cool spells, big spells that change the world and reward players that focus on the magical side of the game. It is a game where a power spellcaster with lots of sotred mana should be able to assault empires almost on his own. FE will let you do it [/quote] I'll believ

[quote who="Tim4fun" reply="27" id="2915450"]Kudos. Having the spell-effect linkage is a good win for a request that's been on the site since very early beta. I'm privately questioning the prioritization of this as one of the areas to get high attention. I would have prioritized: massively improved magic book genre diversity; improved magic book interface; many more spells with reasons to choose them; adding meaningful race distinctions; ensuring the start of the gam