sjaminei

I beg to differ, if you got a corner start where you have

[quote who="Twentyslashdash" reply="6" id="3399664"]I was thinking kinda.. that it'd be badass if you could essentially create a circle of 4-5 cities that, with heavily snaking essentially create a 'Caravan style" defense around your capital. Or block off a mountain pass. [/quote] With or without the snaking mod, that is easy to do. Though the AI does not like it and fails to attack properly when you do -_-

@Davrovana feel free to tweak around with my mod file. It should be easy to mess all stats up to whatever floats your boat. (I've "obsoleted" the old bows, giving you complete freedom to tweak the "new" xbows to whatever stats you want without touching the "vanilla game" at all. (meaning that if you delete this file, it will return to default)) If you think it works better than the core game, post it, and hopefully Stardock will listen to it next patch ;)

Cheating goes both ways. You are allowed to do stuff that the AI isn't allowed to, so it evens out. The whole "AI cheats" argument is really hollow in my opinion. Care about your performance first, the AI's second. (It's only role is to provide a challenge as you climb, and it does that adequately imo) Hell, beating swarming AI with intelligence is were the fun part is ;) I want an AI challenge, so if it cheats to get there or plays intelligent does not matter to me. Eithe

I watched it. British humor is not appreciated by itself by me. Idiots are idiots. Karma to whoever converts an idiot to a contributing human being.

If you ever thought something was to silly to make a thread about, ask in here instead ;) Any question goes, even what the meaning of life is, however questions about the game is recommended over off-topic ones. (I will try to answer stuff to the best of my ability, and if anyone else is obliged, they can chip in ^^)

[quote quoting="post"] I tend to modify the original factions in order to enhance their natural strengths, and Resoln are no exception. [/quote] The original factions aren't designed to be at 100% strength. If you want stronger factions, make your own, and yes lucky and wraiths seems like they should always be together ^^

[quote who="smeagolheart" reply="25" id="3397326"] I got a bright idea to customize the scout with stealthy! brilliant eh? [/quote] I did that too! I don't anymore however ;) Edit: This is a great thread btw [e digicons]:borg:[/e]

Yes. Upload the save and let us look at it if you are still stuck.

Then it's a patrolling mob you have missed ;)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/95181126/Xbows.xml Put this file into your mods folder. Go nuts. (66% armor pierce, you can edit the file if you want to tweak the stats a bit)

I actually have the opposite experience, but I have modded my game and tweaked elementaldefs.xml a bit. (raised maximum tile yield to 11 or 12) After the patch I am seeing a lot 3/3/3 sites, and even the odd 4/3/3 site, and that almost never happened pre-patch.

Raise land spell (Earth 3) for regular swamp tiles. For the wildland, loot all lairs, they are hard to spot sometimes, and look just outside the border to see if there is some patrolling mobs there. Most cases I get confused like you do, it's a loot lair that is the offender.

Heh? I have different colors, but they look similar and can get annoying. You must have clicked a UI setting or something.

Until the later stages, then it gets fun since you've spent time investing in research etc. and hopefully are fighting hard enemies. A good campaign has a training mission (skippable), and an increasing difficult progression throughout. (I only like the campaigns in HOMM4 for instance, the scenarios were pure crap, and HOMM3 was better for that replayability, and still is... [e digicons]:blush:[/e] )

[quote who="GFireflyE" reply="21" id="3399626"]For me, I'm just tired of the AI choosing 1/5/0 locations to settle on when there are 2/3/2 locations RIGHT beside.[/quote] Haha, up your difficulty mate. ;) When it is high it doesn't matter if it's 1 Grain, they will somehow get it up to lvl 5 anyways before your first lvl 5. (and when you capture that crap location, it will be lvl 5 with tons of goodies in it, so the tile output does not matter, a "hidden" bonus to playing

Hey there is a 1% chance that it will get colder!!! Global warming is a fraud! [e digicons]}:)[/e]

Hmm.. maybe I need to experiment more in the elementaldefs file. I want big maps with few spots to settle. Any way to add materials/grain to the land to make them show? The bloom spells are just making desert etc. into land right? I would love a high mana cost spell that added +2 Grain + 2 Materials for instance to one tile.

[quote who="Daiwa" reply="322" id="3399409"]This is an appeal to fear, not an argument, based on an unproven premise. A significant human-caused rise has yet to be confirmed, even accepting that we make some difference in global temperature. However, it's not yet clear whether that difference is positive or negative with respect to global temperature. We've seen record regrowth of the Arctic ice sheet this summer, in the face of CO2 'approaching levels not seen s

Interesting blog! New gif for global temperature rise. ;) http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2013/08/Escalator_2012_1024.gif However, I would actually question this gif motives as well. Notice how he places his line below the "skeptic" average at the start, and above the average at the end to make it appear more "climby" than it really is. Fun gif to show difference of perc

Firstly I said: CO2 levels are approaching levels not seen since Dinosaur times: Source: http://www.biocab.org/Geological_Timescale.jpg We are not there yet, but we are approaching it. Notice the sharp increase in CO2 after being stable the last million years. Secondly, the Dinosaurs all died out, who is to say CO2 levels were innocent in the extinction? Do you have any proof of this? M

What level of magic are you using? Afaik, more shards = more essence.

[quote who="Daiwa" reply="315" id="3399348"] I would posit that the argument you advance is the deflection here. Reality has failed to validate the models which predicted, based on the devout belief that rising atmospheric CO2 would force an acceleration of global warming via the greenhouse effect, that average temperatures would be much higher than they have turned out to be. [/quote] You are the one deflecting here. The

[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="311" id="3399296"] Quoting sjaminei, reply 309 I mean we have trouble enough predicting the weather for more than a week If we cannot predict the weather for the next week, why would anyone think we can predict the climate over the next 100 years? The process of science is indeed pointing out the flaws in the conjectures of others. Without that process, we would still believe the earth was flat, fire was an element, and ether

So easy to point out flaws in hugely complex issues. I mean we have trouble enough predicting the weather for more than a week, and you expect perfect predictions in something that takes into account ALL the weather on earth in a period over years? Yeah, you are buying into politics not science if you think the above article means anything other than what it quotes. That a prediction was slightly wrong , it doesn't even say the exact