You're right, that's probably what happened. I was confused because I didn't notice any message announcing I lost the fortress to Kraxis but same thing happened again later and this time I noticed a message saying pariden won the city from Kraxis. Is there a way to block that spell ? I know it costs 1000 gold a cast but it can be really annoying.
As the title says, suddenly my capital a fully teched fortress is in possession of pariden. I'm at peace with them, I didn't get any kind of message of warning and as far as I'm aware I didn't trigger any special event. Is this a bug or part of the scenario? If it's a bug any idea if I can edit the savegame and change the allegiance ?
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="30" id="3356178"] Tactical battles are designed to allow your strategic decisions to manifest themselves. That is the design point and we are very pleased with how Legendary Heroes has come out in this way. Speaking for myself, I don't enjoy games that focus too heavily on the *tactics* of warfare. I don't want to feel like I have to place my units before starting a battle. I don't want to have to worry too much about how good I a
[quote who="Azunai_" reply="31" id="3356179"] umm how are rations and first aid kits useless? they adress one of the big problem of late game combat - units getting killed to quick due to the shifted balance of attack damage vs. HP. those items are there to make new units survive a few more hits, so late game battles aren't over after 1 turn. they didn't fix the problem entirely, but they are definitely a step in the right direction. though i wouldn't mind some of
[quote who="Anelyn" reply="28" id="3356068"]Precisely, wish peeps would specify in their threads / posts: IN MY OPINION, things are great, or suck. You can't say the game sucks because you say so and bring other games (which we may or may have not played, care about or not, and are focusing on different aspects of game play) in as an argument.[/quote] On these forums I only represent myself and whatever I write is my opinion argumented to
[quote who="Borg999" reply="20" id="3355751"]So do I, to a point. By mid game, I just don't have the desire to go into tactical battles with any left over low level monsters. Better to just auto -resolve and be done with it.[/quote] I really like what they did in heroes vi: you can autoresolve any battle and if you're not happy with the result click a button and play the battle yourself. This saves so much time end game when the army is strong enough
Despite the disagreements about the quality of other turn based strategy games it seems everyone agrees LH tactical fights are meh. Saying this is ok because other games have boring fights doesn't make LH any better. Reading this thread and the fact ppl defend the current state of the game by saying X or Y wasn't part of the development focus prompt me to be blunt, game doesn't shine in any way, every aspect of it is damn boring after 40 hours. <p
[quote]I played some hours with Eador and i am back now to LH, to try the scenario. I am stunned now how bad, shallow, meaningless is the tactical battle in LH. In erador if i play well i can win the battle without losses, if i play wrong my complet army is dead. Every move, attack and counter attack actually matters. Here in LH it is nothing like that. Most of the battles i can win if i dont do anything, just clicking the attack on the nearest enem
Another thing that could be wrong is the increase group size upgrade cost. In my games it always costs 30 g no matter what equipment the group has. I think that allows for some exploits, build a small size group that costs only a fraction of the crystal mounts and production time then upgrade it for a measly 30 g. Maybe group size upgrade cost should be dynamic and/or the other upgrade costs should be reduced.
I don't like the armor upgrade process. I would like to be able to pick what slot I want to upgrade to what item to be able to manage upgrade costs and preserve or get other stats besides defense.
The XP disparity between monsters and AI forces the following game-play: Keep peace with AI while one army of doom roams the map hunting monsters. When bored turn on AI and raze city after city till bored again then cast spell of making.
You had many horses left because you were doing well and your empire was controlling several sites. I finished 2 games on normal on 0.87 and at start, when I had around 3-4 towns and really needed the mounts I didn't have as many as I'd liked to (and maybe that's a good thing). Another resource I lacked a lot was crystals, I kind of lacked crystals whole game even in the end game when I was the largest empire. <
I'm playing 0.87 so it still happens. So far I've had this happen for up to 2 units out of a full army. I think the maps were a bit too small (or narrow) and there wasn't any good place to put my units and still have them at a distance from enemy.
As the title says, my units were positioned outside combat map with no way to reaching the enemy whenever the start position was narrow. You can see the screenshots here: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198051342862/screenshots/?228260 (have a bit of patience the files are large and host has run out of steam)
Only enthusiasts spend time to mod games and usually they transform them entirely. Game is pretty fun as it is, the main thing I want is more options for every upgrade slot and an AI that can put those options to good use. While options can be added through modding I doubt the AI would know to use them decently.
[quote who="Alstein" reply="13" id="3352723"] Best solution there would be to make armor proficiency a 4th trait slot. [/quote] I agree with you, I hate to lose a trait because of armor (after I spent time researching it). Chain mail and plate armor already come with initiative penalties to mimic the old encumbrance system (and adds another disadvantage besides research time and locked trait).
[quote who="Kantok" reply="19" id="3353421"] The new amounts are great. You have to consciously decide when/where you want cavalry, as it should be. No longer can you have horse mounted troops everywhere. They are a powerful complement to your army rather than your entire army. [/quote] I don't mind the fact it's harder to field a mounted army but I don't like the new bonuses. The bonuses are so small
If it's intended (and I still hope it's not) the weaponsmith icon shouldn't appear on the research tree (armor branches are not displayed for civilizations that can't use armor).
I think Ceresa's faction cen get those spider mounts and I think there's also a lizard mount summoned by an item or quest. Anyway, I hope to get more mounts to make the slot more interesting.
I also encountered the crashes (vesion 0.87) in that army selection screen. I tried moving units from one army to the other and the game crashed every time.
Would you play without necklaces or boots? Mounts are just another upgrade slot. You're asking the devs to make it useless or leave it empty and that is a bad thing for the game. Mounts don't have to be balanced against infantry because mounted troops are an upgrade to infantry not something meant to be in parallel. Mounts should be balanced between eachother wargs beeing just as useful as horses
I hope this is a sideeffect of the implementation that will be fixed soon, not an intended behavior .
As the title says, this building is not present in the build list for my fortress (level 4, capital) . I didn't build it elsewhere since i have only 1 fortress. I'm playing with a custom race without armor, I'm mentioning this because one of the bonuses granted by this building is decreased armor cost. Does anyone have any idea what I'm missing ? Is it a bug?
I'd like to be able to pick what to what items i'm upgrading for every slot.
Thx for the quick reply, I'll look for that thread.