[quote who="ls35a" reply="21" id="3525004"] Yeah, the mid to late game turns on CiV, even on a smoking PC, take forever. Not fun. [/quote] I personally didn't have such experience on my 5 year old PC. I admit they are longer then in FE, but with no such strange issues.
Get your army to move fast (forced march + wargs/horses + capitar trait maybe) so you move strait to enemies cities before they have an opportunity to cast strategic spells.
1. Seems reasonable to tie the two. If it were different slides, it will be just addition to difficulty, but tied togather give players choice of playstyle. 2. Empire building is a must. Without it it is no more 4X, even assymetrical one. For me it feels almost ok now, but a little bit of additional city spaces (or ability to create them via spells, quest, etc) would be nice. 3. Expansions are great, but it is too early to speak about them in any level of detail. 4. &n
What will be worth exploring depends on how the base game will go. For now I do not feel doom timer pressure at all, but get multiple one-shoting apprentises in weak huts instead.
I agree with first change - if outpost cost logistics, resource buildings should not. Now we have double taxing with both consuming your logistics. And i do not see clear reason for the second change. For quick start there is additional logistics, and you can choose how you spend it. I see no need to additional complexity here.
[quote]I wonder if there's an API to force it to use the discrete. [/quote] one minute of googling. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16823372/forcing-machine-to-use-dedicated-graphics-card
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="16" id="3507333"] I hear a lot about "persistent bugs" and yet when asked what they are it's either a list of feature requests (saving a game in a tactical battle) or issues that we just don't agree are "bugs". We want to fix any bugs that are troubling the player base but it's hard to do that when no one is actually naming these bugs. My suggestion would be to make a lost called legacy bugs and list bugs that are bothering you. <
I'm wondering if we can travel rivers by ship? If not, we definitely should! (and ship is generally faster).
Naphaz has this red cross on his weapon slot, so thought one cannot give him a weapon till the very end of that game. With weapon he really looks amazing. I found Peregan with melee weapon is good, too. Most of his abilities works with sword, and he is cool firing swords from his bow :). Low hp is an issue, but manageble.
If bosses learn to use their spells, they will be more challenging and interesting already.
Dr Franknfurter. Sorry for skrewed up numbers :) - I haven't played many games of Dominions, but from that few I found that you basically line up your troops and issue orders one time Then you "test" them in battles, pretty much with the same position/orders. -Strategic speed is ok, as I've mentioned above. - Ranges. I ju
1. About tactical battles being a test for your units and spells/skills/equip you've aqired: there are games where this is true, namely Dominions and Endless Legends. Played have very limited control and units just clash into each other, "testing" their powers. I see no reason tactical battles to be "testing" in the presence of full manual control. 2. Battles already have pretty neat mechanics to become interesting: initiative, swarming, passage blocking. These shou
400 (average likelihood) * 100(or so items) = 40000. Type was not enough? Really some 16 bit type was used? Was the reason behind this rand() which can't actually generate more than 32K? No surprise random things are not very random.
And they should be diverse. Right now there will be just rush for maul and than fill in whatever skills occur close to that in tree.
As I've metnion already, I do not see how humors fits this game. That can be nice to have easter egg or smth, but humor in every dialogue in a game about world end? If somebody will be so kind to mod it, I would appreciate it a lot.
Sounds very ambitios. It is fine to promise thing which will be done. But I'm very cautios about promises of quality or emergent properties of things.
[quote who="Thormodr" reply="8" id="3502719"] The unit editor seemed to be used by most people to just pile up initiative boosting stuff. [/quote] One can still pile up 6 initiative rings in one's high level rider and enjoy 3-turns-in-a-row. Overall, i think ordinary units have just enough individuality with these forged items. I also don't think we need some choices on level up. Every unit except soldier has potent level-ups now, and this is OK,
I dont want my scrolls and potions to be used on lame encounters, which i can win without any hp loss by hand. And I haven't got heal in my last game (one cannot reasearch all the spells for some reason).
Bugs that were around for ages: - AI moving multiple units in one square in battles. - Units (i've encountered in battles only, but possibly happens in global, too) hijacking mouse events of GUI above them. - Sometimes you just cannot select a square in battle (mostly because of Verda). It is even worse, because you can no longer rotate the camera. - Simultanous events in AI turn leads to non pleasant effects. Like shard is destroyed -> Go to -> show
First of all - thank you, StarDock for working on this game, it look very promising. Here are my concerns and observations of big picture - features and mechanics that have strong impact on game experience. 1. The real difference from FE:LH is crafting and, maybe, logistics. Thats good, but IMO not enough. One big enemy with some lesser fractions fiddling around really doesn't feel that different. Battles are not something new, too, though completely differe
I think it should massively scale with distance from kraxis border. Exponentially. May be even cheaper then 1000 for immediate neighbor, but quickly raise to dozens of thousands for cities on other side of the map.
[quote who="rossanderson48" reply="40" id="3473076"] Thus, you got what you wanted but sadly only about 2% of players really play multiplayer so it's important NOT to have multiplayer balancing in a few games, like this one. [/quote] Again, multiplayer balancing makes overall experience better. [quote who="rossanderson48" reply="40" id="3473076"] Hopefully Brad will see the light and... [/quote] Oh, this kind of word
I don't think AI and human player are Liskov - substitutable :) There can be a lot work needed to add more players. Now there is no notion of a winner, for exapmle. There is only one subject to diplomacy for the AI. Now everybody moves simultaniosly except the player and so on. Each issue does not seem particulary hard, but there are lots of them. And from my point of view, the game is too long with each round makes very little difference, to this game to be
[quote who="geniusisme" reply="1" id="3472412"]Redicolous point scaling is exactly what causes such things to begin with.[/quote] Can you elaborate, please? I can't catch how high attack lead to not dealing damage? If you look to others games around (4X and not 4X), you'll see that characteristics scale with exponential pace for a reason. I highlighted that a bit in the first post.
Staves on troops are, actually, very effective. Mostly because they ignore armor. And one can scale them with trinkets. And what is wrong with power progression? With linear one we will end up with never ending battles, where weapons are not dealing damage to armored troops. Also don't forget that player should receive remarkable reward for reaserching technology, and 16 -> 18 just do not get there. +5 fire is huge. One should work ha