troglyte

1. Get rid of the store altogether. It does't make sense that I'm going to this store to buy uber equipment. I'm the damned King. Where did they get it from? I had to research it now they're selling it to me? Doesn't make sense. Items should be something you create with metal / magic crystals. Equipment for heroes should suffer the same restrictions as equipment for troops. 2. Get rid of "Adventure" tech tree. Adventuring is not something you research, it's something you *do*. Explora

Thanks Fb, looking forward to the changes.

[quote who="EchoingZen" reply="8" id="2903966"]It is an honor to get a reply from Frogboy, though I must disagree that WoM is not broken. The system requirements for the game states that Windows 7 is needed, and one of the essential functions of Windows is the ability to hit Alt-Tab in order to switch applications. When you attempt this with WoE, the game either takes an enormous amout of time to load, or will crash all together. This has been reported with multiple users.&n

To hell with essence, I think it's clunky and unweildly as a concept.

As I understand it, Derek, Jon S, and pretty much the rest of the crew are concentrating on FE while Brad and a couple hand picked cronies continue to tinker away with WoM. I believe that WoM will continue to see improvements, but not at the rate FE will. Not only that, but if people start abandoning WoM for FE en mass, I get the feeling not a lot is going to be done with WoM. In other words, it all depends. I would like to see a WoM 2.0 where all the rough spots are ironed out and the game j

1.19e, no

I get the impression that adding multiplayer is more about the time required to do it than anything else. It sounds like they are busy full time just getting the single player up and running, FE is in Alpha and WoM multiplayer is all but non-existent. Maybe after the dust dettles and before they start thinking about a new title... just maybe they will find time to squeeze multiplayer in somewhere. Understandably some people want nothing to do with it, but IF the game if fun like GCII was I wo

Whose boots are these? And why are the colors reversed on the title? Is it possible we've passed over into some strange mirror universe? (get it? ha ha)

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="1" id="2897283"]A big part of that for me was hoping to see related follow-through on the connecting-simple-systems-for-big-fun notion, which relates to my disappointment with magic so far. There are no spells to affect the dynasty system or meaningfully affect diplomacy. There are no spells available only through quests. There are no spells you can only get by recruiting a Truly Spectacular Champion. There are no spells that require you to work mult-turn

[quote who="Wizaerd" reply="50" id="2897229"]Here's a new and innovative idea for MP... Leave it out altogether!! That'd suit me just fine. [/quote] I honestly think unless they go all the way with multiplayer, there's no sense spending too much time on it because it won't really be used. The time would be better spent focusing on the single player game. Maybe an expansion could really take the time to focus on multiplayer, but we probably underestimate what kind of inv

[quote who="Tridus" reply="10" id="2896584"] I'm having a hard time understanding why. All I ever wanted out of MP in EWoM was to be able to team up with a friend or two and play against a lot of AIs. I have a hard time believing that fewer people want to do something like that then want a heavily balanced (and altered) competitive game here... I mean we've got Starcraft 2 for that.[/quote] This, exactly. Of all the things I could ever wish for, would be to play GalCivII with a f

[quote quoting="post"] But the big change in Fallen Enchantress is the sheer number of terrain types. In War of Magic there were only a few. [/quote] One of the big things I hope is changed is the available terrain types for modding. For example currently "Land" means grasslands, swamp, or desert. There are plenty of things I could imagine to be built on a swamp but not on a desert. I hope that each land type gets its own full category type. Also expanded terrains in general, su

No idea what kind of actions you will be able to perform in a turn. And actually I might be wrong about how the initiative system works, I think it might still be turns, but the initiative just determines your place in line. Then it would be the same order each round. I'm confused when Toby said the cat thing could get several poisonous strikes before the foot soldier could respond, he might have meant several because there are several of them, or several because they they just happen to claw

Wow, thanks for the update BoogieBac, FE looks really cool, I can see you guys have been busy! [quote who="Sethai" reply="77" id="2895352"]yay for initiative system; that will really help with the pacing, and mechanics (or so i hope). it was mentioned a while ago that this would be the replacement for combat speed, which i always thought was a horrible system. i'm curious as to how it works though. is there a random element? (ie you roll a dice and

My biggest fear is that it's going to turn out something like this: Let's face it, companies are in it for the bottom dollar. ISPs are already profiting off the maximum amount people are willing to pay for better internet access. They can degrade access much more easily than they can improve it, then charge more for the "new" (old) improved access. I don't see this move as being beneficial anyone, exce

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="9" id="2880459"]I'm guessing you'll still have the issue of building another one before the first one finishes.[/quote] No, that's the beauty. It depletes your entire store of resources to build one, and it takes ~10 turns to refill. So as long as your build time is not > than your replenish time there isn't an issue. After a bit more experimenting I have found you can go as low as 5 turns after foundation, but any lower and the amount of reso

[quote who="kenata" reply="6" id="2880056"] I am a bit skeptical as to your solution. This is the negative production is the same method they use for a buildings maintenance, so thus I can not imagine that it is multiplied in the way you are thinking, as this would basically be counter to what they want from the multiplier in the first place.[/quote] [quote who="Heavenfall" reply="7" id="2880062"] Edit: The negative production was not multiplied.[/quote] Y

[quote who="kenata" reply="4" id="2879709"] I used to use this method of enforcing mutual exclusion on buildings, but as heavenfall rightly points out, the AI will get some multiple of this resource due to the difficulty settings. This is one of the reasons I put my building mod on hold.[/quote] There appears to be a work-around to this. If you set a negative production bonus in your unique improvement equal to the resource production in your cityhub, the two should cancel each o

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="3" id="2861525"] [code="xml"] True [/code] This tag has no apparent function. It is included in most buildings. A few have it set to false, but this doesn't appear to break them. I haven't tried not including this.[/quote] - Seems only to apply when is set to true. In

That is really too bad. As itchy as I am to start working in some of my own ideas, I realize they are not focusing on modability yet because the core game needs so much love. Ah well. While I have your attention, do you know of a way to make building one thing prevent the option to build another? Like say you have to choose either a Shrine of War or a Shrine of Commerce. (Negative prerequisite, would also be extremely useful for skill trees / tech trees.) Oh yeah, and i

I have been experimenting with building my own improvements, and they more or less work how I would expect, but with the exception that I cannot seem to make an improvement build *outside* the city. It is always confined to the little green squares which are adjacent to the rest of your city. So what does this parameter do if not that? And is there a way to accomplish what I am trying to do? thanks.

[quote who="Fistalis" reply="2" id="2863434"]I personally use drop box.. its free and easy. Step 1 download drop box. step 2 install drop box and get a free account. optional step 2.5 Set drop box to not start up with windows step 3. Put anything you wish to share into your drop box public folder step 4 right click on the thing you wish to share in you public folder and click copy public link. step 5 paste it to forums in a top

[quote who="Diardiamond" reply="9" id="2862781"] In regard to alternate ways to win, I sure hope the AI doesn't try to win by questing or spellcasting. Both ways give no indication that you are about to lose. Good point. An idea would be chaging the game winning Quest into something a lot more roleplayish where you get the chance to thwart the enemies attempt in some manner. Of course, having the AI attempt to stop you from compelting that same quest would be a good idea as we

[quote who="Goldmos" reply="8" id="2862724"]if you want city spam/one big city both viable solution you need to remove the tile limit per city and make it global. In this case, you can build one mega city with a "small" zone of influence or many small city that cover a lot of ground. I think it's the only way to "kill" the city spam problem and add some importance to your capital.If you dont like the tile limit, make a global population limit, it will work well to. My 2 cent[/quote] &

[quote who="Lonemessiah" reply="80" id="2862318"] Considering that over 650,000 phyiscal copies have been sold, plus many more through digital means (over 1 million through steam has been estimated though they never seem to release figures) it is already nearly at half the figures of CIV 4 and this is within 15 weeks of launch. CIV4 in this time had just about reached the 1 million mark, meaning that CIV5 is actually doing better than CIV4. [/quote] If you want to go by numb