[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="59" id="3352361"] Its released, let us know what you think.[/quote] Does it have a high chance of breaking .85 saves (or messing sufficiently with balance stuff that a game started on .85 will break?)
heh, yeah, if the AI could do snaking, it might do 'ok'. The Pioneer spam that they do really hurts them in the long run, as their pop tends to be fairly low for a long time due to the outposts they like to create. I'll be releasing another one from this series in a bit (today). I don't think I'll post each video here though (kinda spammy) but will post the link to the playlist for it.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="28" id="3352025"] Some AI tweaks too regarding diplomacy.[/quote] Something to fix this issue: https://forums.elementalgame.com/443837/page/1/ basically, the output of a treaty should have weight in the costs of the treaty.
I'm thinking that the AI's cost estimates should be looked at again, wrt the Trade treaties/tech treaties/etc. There seems to be a very real disconnect from what the output of the treaty is vs what they expect you (or they) to pay for it. Whether or not they like you should be a bigger factor in the costing of treaties, rather than the relative military power between them and you. Even then though, the relative output balance of the treaty should als
yeah I finished this quest in .80 and felt horribly underwhelmed with the final reward. The dragon should be at least a level 10 dragon, and you get some cool uber weapon/armour (dragon scale armour?) for bothering to do the quest. and yes, an army that is capable of killing the 3 dragons is also capable of wiping the map or finishing the master quest.
I've seen spiders choose not to web my archers in .85, but they still 'overkill' web/beguile on to a single unit, rather than spreading it out.
I played through as the Capitar on v.80 (Ridiculous AI/monsters) recently and thought I'd share the videos here. [video]http://youtu.be/kLQy0vTFuMA[/video]
Accuracy converts to more hits -> more HP damage. My Mancer run had the General (who I made a Commander) at some silly high Accuracy level (well above 100) for most of the game. My units easily ripped apart everyone.
[quote who="parrottmath" reply="10" id="3350859"] Quoting schattenjaeger, reply 9 Quoting SBFMadDjinn, reply 4I have noticed that Ctrl-N eventually breaks the game if you use it more than once/twice in a row. I think they have a problem with not dropping all used resources when they remake the world map, so it gets slower/eventually crashes if you use it. The first time I used Ctrl+N, the game crashed immediately, so I don't bother with it. I also make s
Spikes are 'in the blood' -- if you take Kraxis blood, you get a Spikes of Kraxis, regardless of if you take defensive. Defensive won't give you a starting unit change. I think some of the other bloods give similar (Najaborn for Urxen - poison vial given). It would be nice if the militia was converted for a few bloods though. Right now I've only seen the spear unit modfied.
yup on the 'gotta get re-civilized' part. Also, Derek has specifically stated (somewhere) that he's not interested in properly balancing start locations, so if you get a start you don't like, just reload or roll with it. Consider it a better handicap. That sort of start (no essence) means make your capital a town and then add the monument and the Town Hall for 3 extra distance on your borders. Push out into a non-swamp/
I just finished the Dragon Eye quest and got a measly 85 XP for killing off 3 dragons. The dragons killed off my whole army (high level units that can wipe out everything else with nary a scratch) except for my level 11 hero and a storm dragon. I'm fine with dragons being very dangerous and potentially wiping out entire later game armies, but the XP gain from the dragons is very low compensation. but the real XP problem is still enemy fa
[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="121" id="3349293"] Quoting davrovana, reply 120Not sure I understand the place of swords now that they've been nerfed even further (-4 attack to longswords, wow), but you made axes and maces really distinct in LH, so I'll assume I need to tinker around with swords to find their strategy. The main place for swords is defenders, those unites you put on the front line and set to guard stance so when they attack they counter. With the
you mean (to clarify) you want hot keys for Strategic layer spells, correct?
[quote who="Alstein" reply="7" id="3346782"] Still think my solution to this is the simplest Backpack= +2 trinket room (for a net +1) This is already a general skill.[/quote] so, let's do a little thought process here: I have 1 slot left. I add a backpack, which uses that slot. Now I have 1 slot left. why did I use a backpack? If the backpack
agreed on overpower and being made available earlier in the tech tree. They definitely come so late in games that you may never even see a player or AI make one (let alone have the tech for it). As per damage output, other than adding overpower, we should be able to customize siege units (unit design) to add various options to the siege's attack. Increased attack (better rocks/more solid construction), greek fire (magic addition), something to cause vari
+1 hp, as is, even on brand new units, doesn't really help much - even early game. Most anything can do more than 1 HP of damage to a unit. 1 HP/figure would be worth taking it.
I'm perfectly happy with the current implementation as it prevents spam of outposts to lock out opponents. This is much worse with Arcane Monoliths as you just need some mana. If you prevent outpost flipping, then there's nothing to stop a mass spam of Arcane monoliths around cities to lock them in and prevent them from accessing resources on their borders. It'd be far too abusive to be considered 'balance'.
that's been the case for a long time. And i like it as is, actually. Why pay tribute to someone that is likely to DoW you at any moment anyways? It'd be an exploit whereby you could demand tribute, get their gold, then DoW them anyways. That's the wrong way to go with the diplomacy system.
too many purple factions. Core factions, that is.
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="11" id="3346509"] I am pretty sure the facts in this case are with me, good sir! You may want the defender to be something different, but it is the damage absorbing class.[/quote] To be fair, the list I made was what I think the classes should focus on, rather than what is actual. But yeah, defender = tank only lasts until a unit type can smash your face in... which
yeah, I somewhat agree that spears seem to be a little much without encumbrance around to balance things. With encumbrance, you needed horses to get extra capacity to fit the heavy armour (in game), without it, there's not a nice benefit. With the other changes happening as well, I'd be very happy to switch over the spears bonus vs. armoured to the mace. But that's a little off topic.
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="9" id="3346476"] The defender is suppose to be the "tank" character, being able to take hits and the warrior is a damage dealer. The armor seems fine to me in this dynamic. [/quote] I'm not sure I agree with that assessment. Assassin - Glass Cannon Warrior - Front line unit able to stand up to, and give damage to, units. Defender - Booster in defense and healing/etc for other
One big issue I have between the hero types is that I think the defender and warrior use of armour is backwards. The defender is there to boost your army (resistances/etc) and to stay behind the army (guard helps). The warrior is meant to be in the line, not hiding in a corner. So switch the defender and warriors armour abilities. Warriors should get chain for free and have easy access (by level 5ish) to plate armour. Defenders s
A few extra wouldn't hurt the game. Right now there's only a couple that I ever bother picking, so more choice would be nice.