Been reported many, many times. I wouldn't expect any change until beta 4 comes along.
It's just a joke, guys. It's completely OOC to the game's pseudo-medieval fantasy theme. Just enjoy it for a while, until beta 4 appears and (probably) knocks it out. ;)
[quote who="pkaski" reply="21" id="3176114"]Well, for something that has no use (you can't use/equip/beat someone to death with it) and all you can do is sell it, the value & price should match. [/quote] But consider: everything else in the game has a value, reflecting how much it is worth, and a price, reflecting how much merchants will pay for it. To price some objects with value as equal to price, and many others as not, would cause issues of cons
[quote who="pkaski" reply="19" id="3175900"]Well, I got one in a goodie cache, I was going to mention it in a bug report, it says it's worth 3,000, but when you actually sell it, you only get 300, was wondering about the disparity in values. Doesn't seem to do anything other than give you something to sell. I do have the save game.[/quote] Why is that a bug? Haven't you checked the resale value of anything else you've found in the game?
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="15" id="3175201"] Quoting Glazunov1, reply 14Or keep it as it is, and provide buildings that improve that percentage. Which, I suspect, is one thing we might see in beta 4. I hope not, I think that is a terrible idea Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] Who knows? Brad probably does, but I doubt he'll accept in-game gold to tell us.
[quote who="Glowing_Ember" reply="13" id="3175009"] Its a joke item you can sell for the money. I assume its an inside joke to one of the devs.[/quote] ...based on the complaints about the poor return on selling to merchants. Your one-stop rich item. Actually, I'd have no problem with the amount we get now for selling items, if only it was a higher cost percentage of the actual base price. In other words, lower the actual valu
I would have no use for it, but I don't see why others who want it couldn't select it as an option--provided, as was suggested, that some logical form of penalty was attached to attacking one naturally allied to your side.
I've had this happen sporadically--perhaps twice total, in any given series of 50 battles.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="15" id="3173852"]Essence is beer.[/quote] Oh, come now, Brad. You're an adult, with kids. You know what essence is. We shall draw a veil over the rest of this matter, so as not to injure young minds. [e digicons]O:)[/e]
I'd even go so far as to wish for a diplomatic AI that sees defensive weaknesses in cities but also a strong stack, and makes an offer to accept either a payment, or a quest to rid that AI of ABC monster lair, within XYZ seasons.
As this affects diplomacy greatly, and Brad is a fan of good diplomatic AI rules, I strongly suspect these values will be changed at some point before release. You are not alone in getting tired of AIs building an infinite number of spearmen who assume you and your Stack of Death are a pushover.
[quote who="hntr101" reply="91" id="3170938"]How do I get the mod to work? I am not sure where to put the files?[/quote] Try this: http://stormworld.wikidot.com/#toc5
I suggest it was morning wood, except that it was posted after 9 PM.
[quote who="joasoze" reply="24" id="3167048"] Quoting JMiddleton, reply 23 Speaking of the dragon, I think the developers need to make sure the monsters are appropriate for where they appear in the game and for the difficulty level the player has chosen. By all means tough - but not impossible. This is, after all a game - it's supposed to be fun! If its all appropriate, then its all boring I hope for a slider that can change monster aggressiven
[quote who="BlackRainZ" reply="10" id="3166683"] This is just simply not true. I have a decent system but it isn't top of the line. I played the original Elemental with the map generator that was made by someone and I set it to the highest settings it could go. I played 800 turns on that map with absolutely no problems, no slow down. I can see problems with a real weak system but anyone with a decent amount of ram and a decent video card would most likely be fine.[/quote] &nb
I think it might be reasonable to consider what games a person can and cannot run on their computer, before pointing a finger at any one game as being particularly slow. For example, my wife can't run FE on her laptop, but she also can't run most other games--they chug along very slowly, given a slow CPU, poor video card, and moderate RAM compromised by a ton of TSRs that absorb plenty of it. I've only got a 2.8 gHz CPU, but 4 GB RAM and a moderate video card--just abo
[quote who="Kalin" reply="8" id="3166811"]Put it this way, what's to prevent someone from hiring heroes, turn them into PotG (note that I do that now just for the prestige bonus) and just sit them around leveling and gain all kinds of skills (merchant/research along with the bonus city buffs) without really needing to do anything? It's like giving out free money and research...[/quote] Then perhaps one answer is to provide level-ups to governor-style heroes that
[quote who="Kalin" reply="6" id="3166794"]But do you really need heroes if you aren't going for conquest?[/quote] Yes, if you want to place cities and outposts favorably, protect against wandering monsters, and defend against sovereigns that will go for conquest victory. [quote]It's not exactly hard to level clearing mobs, get PotG, pick up administration, and sit. Why would you need more exp after that?[/quote] Beca
The one cheat I would like to see at this point is the ability to kill a unit that you've already killed with a spell. I'm really not fond of exiting the game and reloading it because destructive spells on the strategic map leave enemies walking around with 0 hitpoints, and fully capable of destroying my buildings and cities.
Some very good answers. A few thoughts: If memory is the limitation, does that mean 64-bit is required? What about those among us who have 32-bit, but more than 2 GB RAM? Can the FE engine use that, instead, when generating huge maps? If the issue is providing maps that not everyone can play--and I know how problematic that would be upon a game's release, still experiencing a version of that with my mods for another game--why
Known bug. If you've made a non-aggression treaty, logically they should be able to move through your land, but you should also be able to move through theirs.
So what you're saying is they can't provide larger maps for 64-bit users, while leaving 32-bit users with the current maps? Because that would seem a reasonable solution. "Sure, we have very large, 64-bit maps. But if your system can't handle them, you'll crash." I'm not sure why this is an either/or issue that can only include maps playable by both sets of users.
I understand the need for topological features, but the maps really feel about mid-sized to me. I want something that sprawls, perhaps along the lines of the huge maps in Civ IV. And yes, I know this isn't Civ IV; and I will take what I can get, given how much is already looking good in the game. But still...
To be honest, I don't expect responses from the developers, though I'm glad when these occasionally occur. They're not here for us. We are here to help the developers beta their product. If we didn't like this, we wouldn't be involved. Anyone's welcome to drop out, and just wait for the final game. Me? I put up my reports, and understand they're being read. Beyond that, I like the direction FE is taking, and don't
[quote who="Black-Knight" reply="62" id="3165442"]Certainly "ABBA" in your post is used as "commercial bullshit", which no strategy turn based game ever is. If someone wants to go commercial they make a RTS not a TBS game! So the comparison doesn't really work.[/quote] Since I was just going for humor and certainly not for a comparison, the line works. ;) I'm honestly not sure how one could compare any game to a work of Shostakovich. There's just