LordRikerQ

Its been delayed hasnt it? Its 1:30 EST and no release.

Those are some good suggestions, though in regard to champions i think adding in some RPG style progression would fix things At level 1, champion isnt much of a hero yet, and should be considered an aspiring one, whom can only handle Rats and perhaps wolves (but not bears). How is this different from now? In RPGs you wont find anyone really taking on groups of soldiers on the open battlefield LOTR style until at least level 10. Perhaps scale heroes so basic

Your playing the wrong game if you want Champions as Generals not heroes. You should try Heroes of Might and Magic, this game is designed entirely around active heroes.

[quote who="malekith" reply="19" id="3072783"] Who's going to build this canon fodder, and why is it a good decision?[/quote] The AI will of course, maybe a human player wont but keep in mind this game seemed geared for PvE not PVP.

[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="17" id="3072767"] Quoting LordRikerQ, reply 16 Nerfing is the lazy way out. It's not lazy, it's efficient. If something is broken, you don't break everything else so that is is less noticable. You FIX it! No one said anything about fewer options. In fact I argue for more options that are 'viable' not just possible. If obtaining a viable balance between champions and armies means bringing out the nerf

[quote who="malekith" reply="17" id="3072771"] Quoting EviliroN, reply 13THIS is what champs should be... all of them If every champion is as powerful as Sauron, there's no point in building normal troops, and they may as well be removed from the game. If they're removed from the game, who is Sauron going to send flying?[/quote] They dont need to be removed from the game, every Sauron needs cannon fodder to slaughter. I approve

[quote who="EviliroN" reply="10" id="3072165"]Brad has said before that champs are supposed to be like Sauron in LOTR, killing swaths of fodder. How much would it suck if Sauron had to stop attacking after he killed 1 unit? Give me a break. Too many people are going to complain and champs will get nerfed into oblivion and then this game will suck in a different way. [/quote] I fully agree with this I wish people would stop trying to turn Ele

[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="14" id="3072663"] Quoting dracophoenix, reply 11 Again, Nerf mentality is fail. Many people enjoy this, some don't. Does that make one more right than the other? No. Lets focus on creating MORE playstyles and not LESS by destroying one that many find enjoyable. Only in the world of video games do normally intelligent, rational human beings make such nonsensical statements. Let me put the whole idea of 'no more nerfs' into a real w

[quote who="Das123" reply="46" id="3072178"]I'm not sure if the goal is to shift the game more into the RPG sphere at the expense of the strategy component. One thing Frogboy mentioned a while back is that the team was very focussed on 'choice' and I guess this struck a chord with me. I felt that having 'choice' as a primary goal was ideal for this sort of game. Frogboy had also mentioned that many of the design decisions in War of Magic where about balancing at the expens

[quote who="Civfreak" reply="43" id="3070968"]I got a new idea thats very similar to the one suggested in this thread and another thread which I can remember. The idea is to assign one leader per army, but I wouldn't limit the heroes to 1. Instead I would make champions give really good bonuses to their army based on all their traits. Since only the leader would give these good bonuses it would be a nice incentive to spread your champions around while not limiting you to j

I also believe the OPTION to Lord of the Rings the game is good, but it should be a option, this is why additional game setup options is needed. Perhaps an setup option to limit how many heroes you can recruit, and how fast they level? If someone wants to pretend they are playing Heroes of Might and Magic (Which is not the design of the game..) where heroes are pretty worthless and require armies to do anything, why not I guess? Sounds boring to me but to each his own,

I think some of the problem here is people keep expecting a HOMM clone where a single hero shut ups, sits in the back and supports troops instead of actually participating and being all Skyrim-esque and able to get powerful in their own right and form Fellowships of only heroes. Aside from completely destroying the whole Strategy/RPG hybrid that this game is designed around, perhaps a good compromise is limiting 4 champions to a group. 4 is the standard number of Advent

LoL Its those Bears of Doom. Many, Many a kingdom has been wiped out by Angry Bears with Overpowered Mauls.

We also need a separate XP slider, so people who dont want Champions of doom can set their heroes to get like 90% less XP and those who want more active heroes can set it to get full XP amounts. This will also do wonders for the difficulty level.

I have to agree, Random events are fun, hopefully the engine supports this.

[quote who="seanw3" reply="23" id="3068248"]They could, but people seem to want a slider for everything. Why not just take a few mints to learn how to mod the XML? You can change it as much as you like, but it will throw the balance of the rest of the game off as everything is being balanced with regular troops not being able to level as fast. I like the current leveling pace. Leaders get more XP and troops get more Con but have to be upgraded with gold to improve. Otherwise we would have to

This is trying to force a playstyle. What if people want to play Lord of the Rings Style where heroes are actually hereos and your fellowship can cleave through enemies without additional forces? They should just introduce a XP Modifier slider , when set to superhero mode, heroes level fast and can become real heroes, and when its set to General mode heroes level slowly and need armies to survive. everyone is happy.

So I've been thinking about the current large issue, there are two camps of thought. One that just wants to kick back and have fun with games, perhaps play an entire game in a half hour session and those that want to run a realistic empire simulation that could take months. Nothing is wrong with either, I think FE is ripe for BOTH kinds of play. Civilization has done this expertly, you can play a game that takes months (I've done this) and you can play a game that takes less the

[quote who="OneLion" reply="36" id="3067318"]I really can't agree with you. Possibly this happens if you miss some important point but my heroes always get very strong very fast and are able to protect my lands pretty good. Also monsters mostly stay out of your zone of control which is good. Plus the monsters should be a real threat, you should aim to avoid strong monsters and build armies to defeat those big monsters before going further, building new cities and everything at

[quote who="Sarudak" reply="23" id="3067115"] Quoting Dreadcough, reply 22 i think you're doing stardock a diservice by letting them off that easy James. It was very much the same thing with war of magic, hordes of people coming to the forums stating how great the game was, blinding the developers and setting them up for a huge surprise when reality hit. i'm the kind of hardcore gamer they should be listening to, i represent by far the biggest market for this, people who hav

[quote who="Dreadcough" reply="8" id="3066942"] also remove Derek as lead designer, with this he's shown that he doesn't have the creativity to create new game designs that are revolutionary. [/quote] Thats a bit harsh. I mean i dont know if Derek or who designed the new features like quests and heroes systems but there are alot of good stuff in here. The only issue I see is balance, a change of some numbers and FE will become much more fun

[quote who="Wintersong" reply="28" id="3066844"] Quoting LordRikerQ, reply 15I vote for this, but leave it as a option so the hardcore types dont get uppity. I'd recommend stardock not listen to people who are intent on ruining the game for a vast majority of people. Options are good, people being fascist gamers and saying there is only on way to play; the hardcore way is bad for any game and is not conductive to a successful product. Repeatedly making hate posts is allowe

I really wish more waiting wasn't the only option, but I feel your probably right josh. All I can say is for the sake of the game I really hope it doesnt go out in this state of balance. I believe in the product,and as I said the additions are great but another failure wont bode well for the future of elemental.

First, let me say I love so much of what FE brings. The new map, with alot of places to explore, the new hero and quest systems, the new customization options and the nice loots. Yes, I did just say i love most everything FE adds, so why am I bored you might ask? Because I feel like im playing a spreadsheet. Let me state for the record I love Civilization games, Galactic Civ and Sins of a Solar empire and all those Empire building games, I also love RPGs like Dragon Age, Baldurs Gate

Your knowledge of my name and affiliations is impressive friend, I have taken your advice and random maps work much, much better, i've been able to settle a city as soon as the game starts, and as far as I can tell, so have the npcs now. I think those maps under load is just plain broken.