moi-meme

I mentionned this in a previous post, but have now done some experiments. It is difficult to level up heroes past level 12 for lack of XP. I started a new game and did an early fight against a bunch of skelettons. - sovereign with militia, spearmen, sand golem: 12xp for sovereign, 5xp for trrops - sovereign with militia and another hero: heroes 5xp, troops 2xp - sovereign, hero, both troops and sans golem: as above Since the sovereign has

So, I played a full game of LH. I have many points and some bugs. * Bug 1 : I once found myself in a combat loop, where my hero repeatdly had initiative until he killed his opponent. Impossible to have a save of that situation since save in comabt is not possible. Any of these conditions may help pinpoint the problem: - the hero was adjacent to the enemy - IIRC, he was usin

Well, after a long game, I find that the new system requires at least a good explanation, or possibly an overhaul. I've played a large map, more monsters than normal. I won by quest, but before I cleaned three special areas of all monsters, and I also faced a special event 'the world is becoming more dangerous', which spawned numerous nasties inside my territory. Despite having fought all of this, I ended up at barely level 15. Needless to say that in the fi

And what precisely are the multi-hero XP penalties ?

Difficult to know. Depends on how one plays... I strongly feel that the XP value has been lowered, and that my heroes have a hard time levelling up. Still, I cannot be sure since I have no figures to back my feelings...

I used to level my heroes till level 18-24 at the end of a game. Since the 1.3 patch, I seem stuck with lowly heroes who barely make it up to level 10-12. Has anything been changed in the xp system ? If that's the case, it is not indicated in the release notes ; if not, what's up ??? Thanks! Yves

I'd usually choose off. However, on can be usefull for correct positionning of buildings in large cities.

No, definitely no. That was HoMM in the early stages. That's not what we expect here. Ideally, heroes must indeed be able to single handedly fight armies ; that's what made them so special in MoM. However, there are significant differences: In MoM, the opposite wizard can always cast spells in a battle ; that would keep you on your toes, especially when said wizard could cast mind blast (bypass armor) It should not be that easy to wipe ou

8/3/5

I have played again MoM, just to be sure about what I remembered. There are many good points in the previous posts here: MoM has a deficient AI ; thus when you play, you know you'll win, and that won't be that difficult MoM has an impressive array of varied choices, be it in wizard selection, races, troop kind, spells, tactical abilities, summoned monsters, magic item forging... MoM has some very not nice point'n click aspects, such as ci

[quote who="Mmrnmhrm" reply="34" id="3071806"]Me thinks some people are too full of themselves. In the poll, https://www.elementalgame.com/journals, nearly everyone has rated the beta good to great. Yet, reading this..thread..you would think the game was in dire straits. What are the developers supposed to think? I would rate the current beta as good. There's a lot to do especially in balance and AI. A lot of the criticisms posted here would apply equally

Just one question to any who reads this: Whom among you did actually play Master of Magic ? Those who didn't should give it a shot, even though it's graphics/interface are absolutely outdated. It gives a good hindsight of what FE should be. Yves

[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="27" id="3071645"]@moi-meme While you make a lot of interesting points, your rating system seems abritrary and just an attempt to drop some zeroes on the game.[/quote] Yes, it certainly is arbitrary. It is only meant to give a indication of my feeling of what is good and what is bad. It is as arbitrary as any review you can read in any paper or internet review. Currently, I'd give the game an 8/20. As long as it is not out, it still h

[quote who="Thormodr" reply="24" id="3071271"] Thank you for the level headed post. Group think can indeed be dangerous. Keeping in mind that the game is a work in progress and supplying constructive criticism rather than doom and gloom/histrionics (It's going to be another WoM fiasco sort of idea) is the sensible thing to do. As is the key to basically everything in life, balance is the key.[/quote] You're right. But as far as I can tell, the game conc

[quote who="DsRaider" reply="17" id="3071061"] The stance I have taken since global mana was first introduced in WoM is that it is a superior system but it could use some tweaks. I have said pretty much the same thing as you. They should bring back a small amount of personal mana or essence based on either intelligence or a new essence stat. This personal pool would allow casters to cast a small spell or two every once in a while without depleting their global pool. However if

[quote who="StevenAus" reply="16" id="3071045"]I don't think there are very many games that are great right off the bat, very first iteration. [/quote] How true! MoM was a vast failure till patch 1.32 IIRC. [quote]And there are still up to 22 more versions of FE before the release v1.00. However if we give up on it now, guess what? The potential will almost certainly not be realised. This game won't be released for months, so we can do a *lot* in that

[quote who="Stupidity10" reply="2" id="3070919"]If your SOV can hire any champion he is equal in lv too then leveling your SOV becomes the game. Why even bother with cities? Just quest for loot and gildar till you and your hero horde steamrolls the map. [/quote] Unfortunately, that's the way the game unrolls now. Yves

[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="5" id="3070935"] Magic tech tree is still in the game. But I agree that it needs to be expanded. -A early game tech for multidiscipline spells. -Mid-Late game tech too unlock last two magic lv talents for champions. Archmage and whatever.[/quote] I do not know what you mean by "multidiscipline", but it lets me think of something I had forgotten ; that is multischool spells, which a mage can only cast if he knows the requisite schools at th

I have already played several games with the beta (0.75) and would like to share my overall opinion on the current product. Even though I will heavily criticize the current state of the game, I hope that this will be taken as a constructive criticism aimed at improving the game. I would not even bother to write this otherwise. I'm not going to speak about bugs, which will certainly be reported by others, but on a general feeling of the game. Read this as a preview.<

I begin aggressively. My hero recruits heroes as much as possible (usually the two nearest) ; then I build one or two military units. My group then goes outside and fights as much as possible. I may lose one or two units, and I replace them as required. At some point, the three heores have found enough equipment and gained enough experience to become able to handle fights on their own. From that point on, my group of heroes continues to explore, while my city(ies) deve

I find that the cost of spell maintenance is too high compared to spell casting and resplenish rate. As a result, it is much better to cast direct spells in combat than boost troops with enchantment. Something should be done to let an enchantment tactic viable. The current XP assignment tends to push the player to have a main army composed mainly of heroes. I think something should be done to make other tactics palatable. Heroes with Governor advantages sgould get a

[quote who="rwemack" reply="79" id="2754180"] What about this?[/quote] Personnally I have no problem with huge attack going poorly. It's just that the giant maul did really hit me. But maybe not in an heroic way. "Ouch, my poor little toe", I exclaimed... Everything is not heroic... Still, that could work. On the other hand, this leads to more volatilty in combat (read larger standard deviation, or more randomness). Not sure you'll be happy to lose

I like the refinments you suggest ; different initiative, attack dmg not going to the next man and so on. At this time, all of these are interesting refinements. But first of all, we must get the removal of the current "death squad"! Yves

[quote who="Tormy-" reply="46" id="2750173"]Good discussion. Just a note[on-topic]: Squads/Group of units -> I think that each and every unit in a squad should have a separated attack roll / defense roll. 1 att/def roll / squad makes no sense imo.[/quote] This is one of the many improvements I suggest in this thread . Yves

read my thread about this. Yves