Schob13

What if we just got rid of the defense bonus a unit gets when ending their turn without attacking. Cavalry is not exactly known for its defensive posture ;).

I know how frustrating it can be to encounter the same bug beta after beta, Monsters ignoring AI is foremost on my list but there are others (like the AI offering to pay tribute and me ending up paying it ;) ). While I still see the game as going in the right direction like most of the posters here I also have several severe stability issues and savegame corruption with larger maps. And those issues need to be fixed. A savegame that is missing half the players e.g. is a rather useless save. (

It is not the game per se. It is AI players building their outposts without regard to monster lairs. Had the same problem with a rather cramped starting spot and in turn 56 I had 2 obsidian golems and 1 slag rampaging through my empire (playing as magnar) and randomly stomping my improvements and cities. And as in previous betas they seem to ignore the AI but unfailingly take course for my empire if I glimpse them from afar (if they are already in the cultural borders of an opponent of mine).

I really like the idea of questable resources with different outcomes. The development of the world via quests of varying difficulty could adress much of this issue without actually having to change anything in terms of pioneer costs or pop count. Like we have to shut down a death cult to make that fertile land near the river even arable (e.g. usable for city building). With higher quests granting acess to better spots. If there really is such a scarcity of food that is not only a problem for

The same issue seems to exist with the slow spell. If I cast slow on a unit after some time has passed in tactical combat the unit gets no more turns for quite a while until it resumes its turns at the reduced pace. I am not so sure with slow since it is harder to see but the evidence seems to point that way.

Exactly.

I do not know if they changed it in 0915 but in 0914 i remember administrater 2 giving - 10 percent on unit construction and admin 3 giving -10% on unit construction and -10% on gold production (Thats what it said in the popup though I think the later is a bug)

Yes, I know. But a unit with less initiative (after haste) moving three times before one with more initiative (my hasted champion) moves again is not just changing combat order it is the use of time that ahs already passed to build up the steam it needs to go again and again. It is like you coming late to a board game and asking to join. Then you sit down and say:" Wow you are already far in the game, I will have to go 3 turns withoutany of you interfering because I cam

yes ran into the exact same bug but in my case it was an army from tarth that ran around with 5 units that collectively had 3 hitpoints between them and then trashed my mines. I don´t mind the mine thrashing but they could have the good grace to die when they are supposed to ;)

Haste is calculated backwards in time as well as forwards. What I mean is when one casts haste with multiple air shards later in a longer tactical combat the unit that gats hasted has multiple turns in a row ( up to 4 so far with 5 air shards) after those 5 turns the usual combat order ensues again. And now the initiative of the unit in question was not high enough to allow that. Defenders in this case with 16 base initiative, while I had already hasted a champion with 24 initiative at

In my current game as Ythril magnar offered me tribute so I accepted only to find out that according to my gold popup at the top of the screen I was paying 4 gold per turn for treaties. Now it might be that my command of english is not quite good enough to figure out who was supposed to pay whom, but I read his proposal really carefully and was sure of his meaning.

I leveled my administrater today and came across a little text bug (at least I hope it is only a text bug). The Popup over the skill administrator 3 says that it decreases buildtime for buuildings and units and gildar earned. I think it should say it increases gildar production.

There is an unrest penalty for taking over settlements that starts out at 50% I think and over time gets reduced to 25% where it remains unless activly combated by the player. So your captured cities will always yield less production/ research than your own native cities unless you agressively reduce unrest there.

I would probably buy the game twice more, (or rather I would gift it to my brother and my flatmate), so that we could play multiplayer. So yes I would also pay 1$ for MP support.

You can hurry the build for no cost however. So you do not have to wait the full 3 turns.

Nobody has gotten anything to add/say. At this point even an "It´s all old news" kind of post would be welcome fellow forum goers ;). As it stands I am feeling a bit left in limbo [e digicons]:|[/e] .

Is it even possible for us humble humans to copy that winning strategy? As far as I know I cannot build caravans nor can I combine my armies with those that move arround as a consequence of my treaties.

[quote who="Sunjah_Kahn" reply="35" id="3157272"]Both of these are civilized? They are rude.[/quote] It might not be an atmosphere full of respect and reverence for each other but as far as I have seen things rarely degenerate to namecalling and peole seem to be VERY patient with each other most of the time. Compared to forums that cater RTS, action RPGS and MMORPGS, TBS forums are really heaven as far as politeness and intelligent conversation are concerned. I think it

When it first happened I put it down to chance. But I saw it three times since. I sometimes like to turtle and see if I can handle what the AI comes throwing at me. So I started a small map with two kingdom empires and played Umber. I found a nice big valley I could turtle up in and built my 5 cities in there. Soon the two kingdom AIs were at my doorstep and predictably they declared war soon. SO far so good. Since then all I have been doing is to raze some of their outposts and kill off the

I have got a similar issue with the spell frozen bones. It is a hostile city enchantment that gives -3 initiative to all units stationed in the city and it seems it can be stacked indefinitely is this intended?

Ah yes I just remembered if you are into dark fantasy then anne bishop and her dark jewels trilogy is a must read.

Well here is my take on the situation with cities and outposts at the moment and my suggestions what could be done to improve things. I will mainly focus on the problems I have with the current razing mechanisms. Problems: 1. Outposts: I think most of the ppl here who play the beta at the moment are annoyed by the ease with which outposts and wild resource improvements can be razed. Especially since even when we ar

Feist and Belariad are much easier reads than song of ice and fire (can not say much about wheel of time only read one book, book 9 i think so not much of a clue what is going on). Joe Abercrombie and his first law series I can endorse heartily his heroes are really a great read.The chronicles of Thomas Convenant are and enthralling first read but for me at least impossible to read twice. (english is not my native language and his descriptions get really complicated at times and also a bit wi

[quote who="Kalin" reply="20" id="3156344"]The change basically consists of better ice rods, 2 ice hammers instead of the lightning hammer, and some ice resists (whether from armors or trait).[/quote] From a balancing standpoint what you say makes perfect sense I just feel that sides should play innately differently. So I would not even give everyone the better wands or rods. It just does not make much sense to me to give them stuff that feels "magical" with their irone

[quote who="Kalin" reply="17" id="3155646"]And how exactly do you expect anyone to counter that weapon once its user get past say... 10 levels? [/quote] I do not really, ideally it would be a system of diminishing returns in weapon effectivness/armor reduction. So that some armor say 40% always remains, but I could also see them as close combat only weapons so the only counter really required is ranged combat. It should be a high end weapon only in that case. But I see