lord xia is awesome, adults swear all the time ^^ there's nothing unintelligent about making full use of the english language. it's often used in a positive context. Fallen enchantress is a fucking awesome game ^-^
i usually make my soverign into an assassin, ideally with a berserker broadsword, lv3 shadowstrike, and insanely high dodge and accuracy. i never get hit, and i can kill almost anything in one long maul-combo. In practical terms, a melee hero is Just Fine. You can fairly easily make an army of melee heroes that is completely indestructible, and will easily slaughter anything the game can throw at you. but magic is better. it can do the same thing, but faster. end battles in on
i think the stacking is broken and wrong, i want it fixed. However, on the other hand, i enjoy it. in the lategame, having an army that can move 8 tiles per turn on the strategic map is very useful, and feels well deserved for your effort. Tireless march needs to be nerfed, but we also need some other methods of boosting strategic movement, to fill the void. One thing that might be fun is a "Forced March" trait (or spell). it would cause an army to be able to mo
i've never seen them in the design screen. |I could swear that they were never there in the first place. afaik, pioneers are "hardcoded" defenseless settler units. They're the only unit that can perform that role, and they cannot be given equipment or traits, or altered visually.
Hi all. I noticed quite a few people agreeing with me in the announcement thread, so i thought it might be worth seperating off into a new discussion. https://forums.elementalgame.com/436082 Stardock is planning to release a map pack for FE soon, and apparently going to use it as a factor in judging future DLC releases. My opinion, which quite a few others shared, is that a pack of premade maps isn
i must give my 2 cents, that i feel dragons are overpowered in the earlygame (due to roaming and nomming your armies) but they're too weak in the lategame. A combo like graveseal+flamedart with a ton of spell damage, can sometimes 1-shot them. i think they just need more HP. bump them up to 1000 or something ^^
what are these stamps people keep talking about ?
[quote who="stage62" reply="42" id="3270399"]I'm not sure how you can not agree. If you can produce an axe as good as a sword for less metal, and less production, the axe is going to end up being the superior choice every time [/quote] no. You've misunderstood the definition of "as good". As i defined earlier, i believe all weapons should be useful in a roughly equal number of situations. This means there would be situations where a sword is superior, and situations where
i just want to say, if a DLC pack was only maps, i wouldn't buy it. To me, this sort of game is best with randomly generated maps, it being an unknown is the big draw for me. I've not even touched the built in maps, and i don't really care to. I'm a big supporter of DLC though, there's plenty of things i WOULD buy. Like, rather than complete maps, new quests, wildlands, interesting encounters etc, that would appear in random maps. I get hugely for ga
i've not played the new patch. i was going to, but reading about this bug killed that desire. i would agree that gamebreaking is a good term for it. with the way i play, i'd definitely find myself being overrun by a million AI soldiers even on beginner difficulty :p
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="40" id="3270238"]Axes don't have to be as good as swords, they need to be balanced by needing less resources and time to train. There are other ways to balance them out.[/quote] Personally, i disagree. I don't think one class of weapon should be allowed to be objectively better, but also more expensive. This imo removes strategy from the game, and makes it more a game of economic force. We already have a mechanism to re
i just want to say, that a cast delay on a DOT spell makes it worthless. I fight very fast and efficiently, i rarely have a battle lasting more than 4 rounds. I've played a resoln game and i never found any situation where dirge was useful to cast. For what it is (an all-targeting debuff) i think the mana cost is fair, but the casting time is not. It needs to be an instant spell, first and foremost. The damage and manacost should be balanced around that.
it sounds like the AI is cheating in completely remarkable ways. Being able to build in blocked tiles, and getting free essence, are pretty ridiculous cheats, imo. Omniscient knowledge of the map is of course a cheat too, but that's at least pretty standard for AIs in games. Stardock is known for amazing AI in galciv 2, i remember reading lots of blog posts from developers boasting about it, and describing their algorithms in intricate detail. i expected better from this gam
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="32" id="3270026"] Currently mages take the bacon what power-heroes go anyways, so all heroes wears daggers anyhoo. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] a good point here. if you don't intend to use weapons, you're better off taking a dagger (as opposed to a magic staff, for example). this seems pretty illogical. i'd love to see something changed so that staves are a more logical choice for mages. Maybe giving them significant
the inability to upgrade old troops is annoying in many ways. especially when it comes to accessories. weapons an armour can be upgraded, but only to a computer-determined "best". we should have the ability to upgrade a unit into any arbitrary new unit, paying gold appropriate for the equipment changes. Just like in galciv II. i don't see any purpose to not having that feature in (i have a vague feeling they use the same engine)
i have to say that i agree with most of the facts the OP gives, but not really the spirit of it. It has a lot of flaws, but i think it's still fun for them. it does need lots of work to be truly great, and especially lots of rebalancing, but it's a good game nevertheless and not too hard to make better. i do have to agree on the point that cities and heroes feel a bit disconnected, like two games side by side. gold and mana is all cities really exist for - if you play a hero c
it wiould be nice to see animals able to gain traits when levelling, but give them access to an entirely different trait tree. evolved carapaces and claws, venom sacs, adrenal glands, that sort of thing. give them abilities that compensate for their lack of equipment, and feel different to play.
i don't find animals very useful due to their low defense, and inability to get more of it. they gain HP when levelling, but that's about it - they never really reach a point of not feeling fragile, i think.
ohh number limits are a good idea too. perhaps a limit of 1-2 henchman for every champion you have, or one per each city, or every two cities. in my last game i just made an unstoppable army of my soverign, a krax spearman i found, and five henchmen of differeing specialisations. by endgame they were all around lv32 and my army rating was long since past "epic" :p
i have to agree. i've never won a game by conquest yet, i just quit when my victory is inevitable. conquering and trying to defend all those cities is just boring, especially given the way that the AI spams units everywhere. At least some way of turning over control of the city to an AI governor would help relieve issues. As would some kind of fortifications that can be built by non-fortresses, so i don't have to repeatedly rush new units before i can move on if i ever
henchmen are really thoroughly overpowered. However i don't think taking away their immortality would be a good way to weaken them .it just wouldn't be fun :( The immortality of champions is a means to discourage save scumming. It's really annoying to constantly reload to avoid losing your favourite pet lv30 unit. it sucks fun out of the game. Letting them live, but with an injury, is a way to penalize death that players can shrug and accept, compared to the permanance of de
I wanted to mention a factor which i don't think anyone else has mentioned here. First hit gives superiority. Damage in this game works by adding up the total damage of each man in a unit. If some of the men in a unit are dead, the unit's attack drops appriopriately. While this may be only an occasional factor with smaller units (3 people) at the higher levels it becomes almost inevitable that at least 1-2 people in a 7-person unit will be killed with the first hit
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="3" id="3269297"]There are some tings to take into consideration. What resources do the weapon take? Yea, that mace sucks compared to a lot of other weapons, BUT it takes no metal or crystal. Also, there are some tough things out there that are weak to blunt damage. [/quote] well when it comes to resources, almost all nonmagical weapons require only metal. i personally never have problems finding an abundance of
spiders are dumb, i'm sure we can agree there. They should be prioritising mounted units for webbing, and the strongest unwebbed physical attackers, for beguile. it doesn't make sense to use beguile and web on the same target. Farthermore, there's often situations where using EITHER ability doesn't really make much sense - webs are useless if i took first turn and i'm already up in your face, and beguile is easily nullified by keeping a space between attacking unit
[quote who="Tuidjy" reply="1" id="3269284"] Actually, dragons cannot be knocked down prone.[/quote] oh darn you're right. all large creatures are immune to it (and all mounted soldiers too). So in that case, i change my verdict, and i will say that maces are entirely useless [quote who="Tuidjy" reply="1" id="3269284"] This is one of the many ways in which something that works against the AI d