bpalczewski

I am not sure whether it works as intended or not :) But the wording should be better, if it is intended, and also - I have so much mana I have no clue what to do with it :) And spearman don't even show up on the list of the available units. Again, I do not know whether, like in a previous version, they are somehow missing as paladins were, or if other can train them it would means that summoning the building (instead of building) is the reason for the bug.

So I just turned the game on today to see how the new patch is faring, here are couple of bugs: - coercion as a spell does not work - warrior's aura works - but not when the unit is summoned - I cannot train spearmen, though i have required building - siphon - sov's ability "every time doom counter goes up you get 5 mana" actually gives you a lot mana: if counter goes by 25 you get 125 mana! - cleave used by hunters causes like

there is another problem: you can transfer items back and forth many times / turn - why have so many items if I can fight a battle, then move my best equipment to the second army?

There is couple more: - auto-save problem, when the position and remained movement points are not saved properly - on the global map you your army can still occupy the same tile as enemy, or enter the treasure chest/quest/lair without triggering an event - archer's shots still sometimes come from the other side during tactical battle - unit placement sometimes is bad in tactical battles (pioneers to the front!) To OP

I think you should play on higher difficulty level. AI gets really unfair advantage only on insane, where you have to choose and optimize your strategy a lot in order to be able to win. I played game on ridiculous using default nations (so no op combinations of perks) and I think that's where game really shines: you have to build armies, thus you have to carefully choose what you build in the cities and you have to specialize them, and you have to know how to run tactical ba

Amazing game. Simply amazing. Agree - best RPG I have ever played on PC.

For me the most important answer is whether there will be tactical battles. The only reason I do not supported Gal Civ is that it is still not clear (I can perhaps buy it without tactical battles when it is released, but I am not paying a fortune for a game without them).

I am in. The very first day.

Regarding GalCiv - any news on how the battles will be solved in future? Is there any plan to have tactical battles?

[quote who="parrottmath" reply="64" id="3464335"] These are global enchantments? How much does it change, how you play the game? Do you change any of your strategy or tactics? Blind everyone seems like a huge buff to undead. I really don't know how the mechanics in the game work, so I can't say if those spells are powerful in the sense that they drastically change your approach to the game vs. they sound really powerful.[/quote] All those serious spells change game

First DLC I am not buying. Stardock, don't test your fans.

In the first mission you see your enemies, then when you play for "real", you do not. Whole fun is to predict and outsmart your opponent.

Excellent game. Period. If someone loves tactics - must try that one.

Ups, sorry - my bad. I got confused, i thought link points toward post in which Frog plans new game for 2015. Anyway, this post again shows "polishing" and not revolution. As far as I remember one person works now on LH 2, whereas whole team moved to a new game in LH world (no tech trees, sov casting everyone, sov that does not move from capital etc.) In Lh 2.0 those are proposed changes: Other things on our “want” list for Legendary Hero

[quote who="Primal_Savage" reply="9" id="3459599"]Maybe, maybe not. https://forums.elementalgame.com/452256/page/7/#162[/quote] Exactly. LH 2.0 is not an update, it is a new game, second in the series. You will have to pay for it.

I think the undead being basically a faction to be played by a player only is not going to change. Stardock will not put that much money just to optimize AI for one faction. They should however be clear that AI can't play undead, otherwise, people can and will feel cheated. The game now is in a completed stated, there will be no more revolutions, just polishing and adding a new content - all the money goes to the next version of a g

I am not sure that OP makes a good argument. Actually, he makes one argument - summoners are up. The second argument, it is boring to have just one type of summon per summoner is not really an argument, but rather a preference. Regarding summoner being underpower - first of all, it is hard to speak about anything being underpower in a single player game. All default races are winnable - i beat game on ridiculous iron man mode with each of them, so it is doable. Some are harder t

[quote who="ten9" reply="123" id="3458484"]ave you actually played the game? Most reviews indicate it has a lot of depth. Could be you are missing some element that you find very important in games. But reviewer consensus seem to indicate that your general remarks are just wrong.[/quote] As Aristotle already pointed out in his discourse on logic - the argument from authority is of the weakest kind (and here I use him as my authority :) If the game has so much depth why c

I love tactical battles and I find empire building actually in both games quite boring ... For me battles and preparation for them is why I play both games. Building cities is like this: I am building +15 mana, b/c I need, and in this city +100% gold, b/c I need more troops. Sometimes I even do not know the names of buildings :) I am also surprised that magic is such meh in AOW - global spells are immediately dispelled, and you are limited to like spell per battle till your hero

[quote who="ddd888" reply="102" id="3456669"] etc etc, basically ai never try to really go all in, they just keep moving like a horse chasing a carrot... very stupid[/quote] More stupid: when AI arrives with a powerful army (like 6 t4s) just surround them with small armies each one having just one T1 troop ... It takes AI like 10 turns to break this "siege", and at times they never attack you units and break encirclement ....

"Dont write AoW 3 off though because its NOT FE. Variety is a good thing." Personally i wrote it off, at least till they patched it. The reasons being: - terrible AI on strategy map - one type units armies in late game (only t-4, and they are available in like 40 turns) - not working economy - tons of gold/mana Thus, fir

Sound great. If I can ask, why this waiting with the announcement? Can't we have it today? :) Is it for marketing reasons? Or the works have to be truly advanced - so the chance of abandoning project are minimal?

I agree, great game. Could not stand King's Bounty though, like a lot conquistadors (though in second part in mexico i got bored, it was way too easy)

I am not sure about the challenge mentioned here. Recently I came back to play FE:LH just to try undead. I played on ridiculous and my feeling was that the race is rather overpower. You can just produce an army of free upkeep soldiers that with wraith-form and terror are very good. No problems winning, Tarth is way harder to play then this race.

After years of failure i have found one that I can keep: no more resolutions !