Spyndel

[quote who="Akka" reply="20" id="2746727"] Quoting Spyndel, reply 17 Addressed above. Few other tactical games do this, for good reason, IMO. Damn, sorry. I parsed through the thread to see if the point had been already made, but obviously missed it. Doh, and I hate when others do it :-/ That being said, after reading your reply, I really don't agree with your point. I don't see how not using the "attack and retaliation at the same time" has any link with

[quote who="Sethai" reply="19" id="2746705"]i'm not sure if i even agree with the principle that a unit should be able to strike back as many times in a turn as it gets attacked tbh.[/quote] I considered whether it might be good to limit the counter attacks based on combat speed, or perhaps simply force the unit to burn their AP for the next turn to counter attack. It makes sense that a fast character would be able to nimbly defend against multiple attacks o

[quote who="Akka" reply="16" id="2746659"]Err... There is a very simple way to fix the "glass canon" problem. Just make it so that the attack and the retaliation are done at the same time. So even if the unit is destroyed, it still inflict damages on the attacker. I don't see the need to add another layer of complicated mechanisms when a very basic solution exists. It's actually the system already used by MoM a long time ago, by the way.[/quote] Ad

Do not want.

I made a rather substantial (sorry) post on a related issue , and how I think making better use of combat speed is key to a lot of issues, including this one. Special abilities are important, and i expect they will be added in time. But that is down the road. The game needs more tactical polish on a basic level, not just waiting around for special abilities to become available. It should work with basic units, as well as ones w

Apologies for the wall of text. God bless ya if you actually read it. It is my understanding that the default combat speed in E:WoM was changed to 2 in order to help "speed up combat". While an option to speed up combat animations (please) would be better for this, it probably does help...unfortunately it also un

[quote who="Friezo" reply="11" id="2739630"]Meh, just make it so both units attack at the same time so even if you kill it you still take a full counter attack. Then you can even have first strike abilites for heroes or something![/quote] I'm not sold on this. First of all, what I *wasn't* after with this post was to make all units the same. I don't think every unit you make should have to be homogeneous highest armor/ highest damage possible, like G

[quote who="Yarlen" reply="38" id="2739766"] The game is already good and is getting better with each update. One thing that frustrates me though, is the ultra slow and unchangeable mana regeneration rate, sigh. Fear not, this is on the tweak list. [/quote] Mana regeneration: Tweak option: Make mana regenerate as a small % of total essence, rather than a fixed rate. This regulates itself. Large mana pools regenerate 2 or possibly 3 points

SD, thank you for making open ended games that have more than one strategy, and more than one way to win, other than one certain way with a specific time to build harbors, and the choice to pursue conquest or diplomacy or technology, with complete control over your empire and units. Please continue to add more options for diversification and continue to refine the viability of multiple strategies and abilities, allowing for effective open endedness

Thank you for keeping us up to date! Get some sleep. Look forward to seeing what next week brings.

[quote who="TheProgress" reply="2" id="2739049"]Sandbox? I can't even begin to imagine a TBS game that wouldn't be classified as "sandbox".[/quote] I wouldn't classify TBS games focused mostly on tactical combat, like HOMM/Disciples 3/King's Bounty "sandbox" games. They are fairly linear and campaign-driven, and have little in terms of worldmap strategy by comparison. On the plus side, they have much better tactical combat. But yes, 4X grand strategy games like Ci

I'm sure this has been discussed elsewhere, so please forgive me. But the forums are a little crazy right now, and I wanted to discuss something productive. I used to be dismayed when I saw the AI with some high hitpoint uber-unit that did like 5 million damage a shot. Until I realized that unit is only dangerous if it actually gets to *hit* you. The combat system gives the clear advantage to the attacker, and its movements are very predictable. Building a squad of vete

[quote who="Archonsod" reply="6" id="2738706"] Quoting Spyndel, reply 5 The familiar is fine. Like you said, it's useful against most early game critters, but since it's level 2 most players aren't going to have it until turn 60 or so, so it's got a fairly limited window of usability before you start seeing things that will eat it for breakfast. The bear on the other hand was like finding two sand golem tokens in your first couple of turns; you took around eight or nine turns

[quote who="Ahrimahn2" reply="23" id="2738627"]!! I haven't even researched the mounted tech because I haven't found any resources. I will when I play next so my Sov can be on a horse.[/quote] Its still worth researching even without, because you can equip your sov and heroes with mounts in city stores, giving them extra speed and extra attacks.

[quote who="tillachan2k9" reply="2" id="2738587"]People are allowed to criticize a game they like but think needs work Jharii, frankly Stardock does not need wild unquestioning fanboys as much as they need people willign to be honest.[/quote] Honesty? yes. Working with them as they improve the game that has some legitimate issues? Yes. Hyperbole, and general ill-manners? No. These are human beings working long hours to improve the game, and help players with legitimate i

[quote who="AM_Shark" reply="2" id="2738544"]That was quick, ty kind sir. Also, could we add this to the "things to look at in the future list" [/quote] Well, I don't think you *should* be able to place loose units into a squad, that weren't built as such. Squads are very potent units, that have to be researched, and paid for in resources and training time. *However*, it does seem to be an issue that there is no good way to retrain or heal squa

[quote who="Sothron" reply="37" id="2738505"] Your personal insults and commentary are out of place.[/quote] Except when we're insulting the work of the devs, or calling people who don't agree with the tone of your hyperbolic statements "fanboys", eh? Grow up.

[quote who="kryo" reply="6" id="2738523"]The game does not have a defined time-to-turn ratio, we instead chose to leave that to the player to decide just how much time passes in their own stories.[/quote] I prefer to think of it as all happening in limbo time, during the time it takes for a wagon to plunge off the side of a bridge. But that's just me.

You have to build them as a squad, by researching squad tech. You can't combine loose units into single unit squads, unfortunately.

[quote who="pmaura" reply="15" id="2736357"]mounts are uselss anyway its easier to use magic to boost your speed and its not like they give your a charge or attack bonus. tactic battles in this game is stupidly simple. not even sure why they added it.[/quote] They increase your move speed, as well as give you extra attacks in combat. Also, they look sweet. It's important for my units to travel in style.

[quote who="Sothron" reply="32" id="2738295"] The solution to faulty programming is what wait a year and hope they finally fixed the game to where it is reliable enough to save a game and expect it to work the next day? I can not fathom how anyone can defend this. [/quote] Because people that are used to playing grand strategy 4x games of this nature know from experience that a patch always runs the risk of being incompatible or messing up previous game saves. Y

I too have started with ridiculously lush starting positions in 1.06. The game I started last night gave me two libraries, a gold mine, an iron pit, a wood resource, and a few shards. all relatively closely packed. It was ideal. And the maps have been just lousy with shards too. More of a nuisance at this point, since they dont do much of anything.

[quote who="Archonsod" reply="4" id="2738269"]Summon gave you decent creatures from level one. None of the other books get any decent summons before level 4. You could theoretically rush for it and have them in the early game, but you'd be ignoring the more useful spells to do so.[/quote] I disagree with the degree of your statement. You can get "decent" summons at level 2 or 3. Summon familiar isn't an overpowerful unit, but it will let you deal with mos

It doesn't make much sense to me that they left in the rest of the summoning spells which you can still get really quickly, and are just as overpowered. Permanent, unlimited, nigh- unhittable rock giants at spell level 4 with no resource costs, are just as overpowered. Even cheap summon familiar at level 2 or whatever is powerful enough to make it to mid-game without having to field troops.

Nice guide, I agree with most of this. No need to take every spellbook...most of the elemental spellbooks are fairly interchangeable. Earth is far and away the best, because of the raise/lower land and the economical rock giant summons at level 4 which is pretty much an "I win" button. I usually take Earth, Water (for the control), and enchantment because Im not completely sure what it adds to my spellbook, but I've been too afraid to lose something important.