StevenRLynchAbundanceThatIAM

Heavenfall, looks like you inspired the devs! Derek, are you close to fixing the bug when you don't get any loot when a monster attacks you and you defeat them?

You can get darklings and other Empire bonuses if you capture a city with them or you have a city or outpost with one starting to be built. The Empire/Kingdom restrictions seem to only prevent STARTING a structure that your side doesn't have access to.

There would have to be some more requirements than just Shard Harvesting and 10 gold though, I would think.

You mean ones that you pay to convert them to a certain type? That might work.

There are other 4x games that have more expensive building units, not just WoM you know. What about Civ, esp. 4? City creating units require a non-negligible investment, and they can't be replaced easily, and it means you can't just spam all over the map.

Yes, I think there are lot of good points expressed in this thread. Hopefully the devs can fix some or most of them to make the game better. =)

I apologise for jumping the gun with regards to the suitability of the game. I made it on too little information and I got carried away with emotional preconceptions.

Just wanting to see what the FE beta forumers think.

EDIT: If the game sells, it will be despite the handcuffs of an early release.

I reported a similar thing to this a while back. If you raze a city of your own, while there is still an enemy outpost nearby, you can then raze the outpost after the city and it will "refresh" the land. At least that was the case a couple or so of patch versions ago.

[quote who="Ragmash" reply="25" id="3147716"]Quoting FrenziedFan, reply 12 Yes, there are TONS of decisions in FE, but my problem is that they all seem very similar and the consequences of any single decision seem very very hard to pin down And, from Keithburgun's thread: "There are simply too many "tiny" choices that players get to make in Elemental. Once a decision gets beyond a certain threshold of impact, a better game design would simply streamline (remove) it. Don't

I think UmbralAngel meant a waste of the "developers" resources, not in-game resources. =)

How about, factions start far enough apart, monsters and ruffians don't get a turn in the first season, but AI factions do. This should also cut down on the times an AI faction gets killed on Season 1 - if the monsters and ruffians always go before the AI, they might not be able to found their first city. I think each faction should always at least be able to found their first city before being attacked by monsters. =) ;-)

Design is slightly or majorly different in all different areas of human endeavour. So no-one can be an expert on the subject. =)

Maybe the AI's first turn (both factions and monsters) should start on Season 2, so the human player always has a chance to have their first turn first. Although I'm not sure what should happen in future multiplayer games if MP is implemented.

The funny thing about design, especially of games of a particular type, is that what works for one thing, doesn't necessarily work for another. That's why there is not a lot of design literature, simply because the process itself is so multifaceted - and again, what works for one thing or category, doesn't work for another. And iteration is a pretty big part of a good game design too. I think a big part of why FE is doing so well and improving so much, is because

America - is the state that espouses it supposed credentials far and wide - but when it comes to the truth, and freedoms, well they kinda got lost along the way. It amazing how many people will swallow anything as long as you shout far and wide how great, how true, how free you are, when the case in anything but.

I've had that too, after much reloading from within the game.

I would agree with temporarily making razing not cause loss of fertility. Then the AI can be attacked and if it has enough pioneers it just might survive... for a few turns at least. ;-)

I think there must be code in that reduces the odds of the AI being attacked. Either that or some strange bug. But it just seems so prevalent that it seems likely that it is deliberate. But for the AI players to be playing the same game as the human players, they need to be targeted in roughly the same way too. And I think it's been suggested, said, or strongly implied that the AI should play the same game as the players. It's not currently doin

I agree. The easy difficulties should be, well easy.

Why can't the AI just be attacked as much as the human? There must be code in there that checks for an AI before attacking, so the advantage needs to be reduced or eliminated altogether.

Not everyone has the time to read all the forums. =) And I know you didn't intend to insult anyone. Just that Brad (Frogboy) is feeling a bit under fire at the moment, for his own reasons, and you kind of stepped in without full knowledge. Don't worry, I've done it too (stepped in a situation without full knowledge). ;-)

Yeah, sometimes you intend the right thing but don't get the best reception. =) Life is like that sometimes. ;-) And you might not know that Brad is mostly taking a break from the FE forums until Beta 4, well for his own reasons, but there was some critical stuff he didn't like. If that hadn't happened maybe people wouldn't have worried so much about what you put in the OP. But I realise you were talking about time availability rather than technical exp

If I were you I would delete that bit from your OP. Just because you made an error in judgement, doesn't mean you can't fix it. You might not need to apologise like I did when I went a bit too far in a thread, but I think it would show good character to take into account what sweatyboatman said, and remove the calling out bit. =)