StevenRLynchAbundanceThatIAM

5 wounds = death could be planned around. Percentage chance of dying from a wound would mean some games could be decided by whose champion is lucky or unlucky.

I mean, AI champs can easily die 5 times. I don't think something should be introduced where 5 deaths = final if the AI still loses its heroes so frequently. Note: I think even with 5 deaths = final, the sovereign would be immune. PS: What would happen if a champion with 4 wounds or less drinks a rare restoration potion and gets all its wounds healed?

I agree with a lot of your analysis and you have some good ideas here!

I strongly support the idea of at least a slipstream build being released, even if a full other version is not. We really need to be able to test the game without the heroes multiplying experience.

Hmm, I like this idea.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="25" id="3072991"] Quoting Derek Paxton, reply 4 We have some balancing to do, I really liked Heavenfalls post about making injuries more meaningful and I've checked in most of his suggestions (i should have posted in his thread, i hope he sees this). It makes it much less rinse and repeat from battles. But there is definitly more to it than just that change. . Good to see you're still very much open to suggesti

To be able to pump out a unit with max armor, max weapon, all accessories and mounts and the most expensive traits, for a flat fee of 40 mana once a day, is very OP. I think it would be much better if you had to pay 20% of the remaining production cost in mana (rounded up), so you could still get out those mega expensive units, but it just would be a lot further away from "virtually free". What do people think of something like this? With the Rush ability, which allows new

See the attached save (which is an autosave) and debug.err .

Good! Some faction specific names! =) I think using faction specific names where possible, even though requiring more names, will help a little bit in differentiating the factions a bit more.

I agree with these.

[quote who="CHiZZoPs" reply="112" id="3072559"] Quoting DsRaider, reply 75 Instead of splitting hp between every unit in a squad so even a scratch reduces their dmg, squads should have to lose %35-50 of their health before they start to lose members. +1 That would be an easy and effective fix.[/quote] I strongly agree. [e digicons]k1[/e]

But did children ever get old in WoM?

If they don't desert if gildar goes negative, then it doesn't matter how much their upkeep is, if you've already hired four or five of them. They could still wipe the map.

Also, with such a change there would need to be a higher number of champions available, like hiring from a city tavern or inn, or rescuing a champion from a dungeon or other quest.

Army units are useless when you find high level loot when slaying a weak opposing faction hero. And really, getting the same equipment over and over from the same champion is a big exploit that needs to be fixed, plain and simple.

What do other people think of this OPost?

What about different names for each faction or race type?

Post deleted.

You mean currently in 0.77? Okay, I guess that's fine, but I think it should still reduce damage of damage spells, as all or nothing is a "Gambler's Strike". =) Even though a poor pun, I think that not being able to have any resistance to damage spells just because they are "damage spells" and not another type is a bad thing.

Yes, even if the Escape scroll brings you back to your capital (and doesn't cost mana) and the Escape spell exits battle and moves you an adjacent square, it does need to be fixed.

Brad, I would be interested in this too.

Good point. To make Int competitive, having it increase magic resistance would be a good idea. Maybe it would be better if the only things that increased spell effects (including damage and non-binary buffs/debuffs) was a champion/sov using spells, or shards of the right type?

Yes, and rescuing/hiring heroes would be a good way of linking the city, hero and quest elements.

I like these ideas.

Do people think there should be a mana cap per season? If so what should it be based on? Number of shards (possibly of a certain type)? And I would tend to agree that Int increasing spell damage *and* size of spell effects (for those that have more than binary yes/no) and ditching Evoker would be good.