mqpiffle

I don't think it's always necessary to use the same tech strategy. That's just plain silly-ness.

Exactly, that's why you don't load unmodded save games into a mod. Mites bite the dust.

[quote who="Purest Warrior" reply="21" id="3238692"]I can't see how a warrior and a defender are similar in any way: One picks from offensive traits and one from defensive traits. They are also used very differently. At least when I play them. About the taunting: Taunt would remove a part of the tactical battles that I enjoy. It's all about getting your defender up in front, in the path of the attackers. Attackers will attack the closest enemy, if they can&

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="5" id="3238388"]Bob Sagat!!![/quote] My eyeballs are now bleeding. Thanks for that.

This has been happening for forever. It's definitely annoying.

As it says in the patch notes The tax rate is applied to the entire cities gold production, running with low taxes is much harder now Which translates to: taxes now affect all gildar gains.

Never load old version savegames. It will always cause problems.

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="46" id="3238675"]remaking[/quote] read: unmaking. And, it's only been 1.5 years.

There's no picture because it didn't happen.

[quote who="Lord Reliant" reply="12" id="3238598"]Makes sense, but what doesn't make sense is why spells could be cast more quickly/slowly because of the weapon you hold. Right now the system can be "gamed" by giving your spell casters faster weapons just to speed up their casting.[/quote] This is the problem inherent in the system. If you wanted to "fine tune" initiative drawbacks, why not start at 100 instead of twenty? That way, a dagger could be -2 init and

I agree with the sentiment that there should be two warrior-type Paths, two mage-type Paths, and the administrator Path.

I really feel like you guys could use another 6-12 months to iron this thing out. You're pushing it out way too fast.

[quote who="joeball123" reply="12" id="3238000"]The solution that would make the most sense to me would be to have regeneration (and perhaps poison damage) move to a separate actor in the turn list, with some fixed initiative that cannot be hasted. So if you had at least one unit with an active regeneration enchantment in your army, on the turn list there would be a turn for "Regeneration" and on that turn you see everyone with a regeneration enchantment heal by the amount that the spell is g

I think the balance needs to come from mana costs, not duration. Yes, debuffs can drive you crazy, but the problem is they are resistable, so they should generally cost less mana than buffs of equal power. Most of the death debuffs also have a casting time of 1. Blindness is unbalanced at the moment.

I was just about to bring this up again. Modifiers on weapons should only be negative. There should also be a couple more encumbrance categories, and encumbrance should negate dodge as well as initiative. Haste also needs a good beating with the nerf stick.

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="7" id="3237856"]Dafuq[/quote] Indeed!

After thinking about it, I'd like to see all tactical combat per turn effects happen at the same initiative tick, instead of being tied to the target's initiative. I feel like this would make spells and effects quite a lot easier to balance in the long run.

I like it.

I would just have the traits add poison damage and dot.

[quote who="ddd888" reply="8" id="3237559"]@mqpiffle the problem is that i dont want to change the value, i want to change other stats for example for spells i can make different ranks like fireball 2 with cooldown of 2 fireball 3 with cooldown of 3 etc , but i wanted to make a generic fireball N and then use other skills or gamestates to play with that N (being it cooldown or range or other stuff)[/quote] I know what you wanted to do, which is why I replied the way I did [

By the way, while I could live with a turn limit on tactical battles, I would like to find ways to finish tactical battles with a distinct winner.

Have you tried it since they introduced the tag? Also, not to go off topic, but I also just noticed the tag...what does it do?

Calculate should work on any gamemodifier that has the Value tag.

I have absolutely no problem with having higher level units costing a bit more to upgrade their armor and weapons. I just wish you could choose which armor and weapons they will receive, rather than it being a blanket upgrade.

Since the issues presented in the title are now receiving a bunch of attention by the devs, I would like to start a focused discussion surrounding them. I'm not suggesting that the proposals outlined are either mutually exclusive or all inclusive, rather a random smattering of ideas to try to inspire further thought about the issues. 1. Add Attack of Opportunity. If two or more opposing units are in adjacent to each other, and Unit Z tries to move away from melee, all