hmm Relias has always been a bit odd. for the other premade sovs, it's somewhat obvious which path(s) the designers probably had in mind, but Relias has a weird combo (Kulan, too, for that matter)

Derek - In .87 will still have the issue that on tactical maps with restrictive terrain (bottleneck) the fast melee troops were in the back, which would cause a loss of turn for them. Any chance for a fix on that?

Have there been AI fixes / improvements since 0.8 that are not being listed? Because investing time into the game only to have the AI send lone heroes against my cities is less than appealing.

Anyone else not able to get the update.  Steam doesn't seem to be pushing the 0.9 update yet.

I've gotten it, and sometimes you can do things to force steam to do a check on your system, like verify file cache.

Thanks. I will try to force steam into action.  At least I know it is actually out there now.

Agreed.

So do we have to start a new game to get the most out of this update?

I always assume so, because there are some XML fixes and you save games save all that XML data.

Yep, the city size changes alone were enough to make me restart

Probably what I will do when they fix the weird AI decisions in diplomacy, and add more substance to it.

...But I did complain once about the KoA, so I'm right there alongside him. Right now, it's a bugfix players make, and shouldn't be.

Wow thank you Kael.

I didn't know about the hidden Revenge Skill.

Quick question, any way to change world / AI difficulty for scenarios, or at least see the information on how they are set?

Otherwise I presume all settings for scenarios are standard ones - in which case would be nice for release to have the option to buff scenario difficulties or lower it (for those who are not very good with strategic part vs multiple AI's but still want to see the story unfold).

Thanks!

They are in the senario folder in the LH directory. The elementaldefs... set some of the difficulty levels.

Thanks parrottmath

Still would be nice to have an in-game option to change or see those difficulties!

So far I am loving the scenario.  It's much better than FE's.

I can't understand how Roslin can curse my city without even seeing it, maybe a bug, dunno.

Had the same question. I assume it's triggered in the scenario, and I'm fine with it happening since it make sense that the Oracle could see and do that. I just don't want it happening on a non-scenario game.

She is an Oracle... she sees everything.

Don't you just hate it when oracles can do that?

About the scenario:

I've noticed that in the scenario, I can snake cities over to forests and rivers to make logging camps and docks become available for construction. This is not something that I can do in the sandbox game. Is the change in snaking mechanics intentional? If so, why is it available in the scenario but not in the sandbox game?

Personally, I prefer this to be possible, but I think that game mechanics should be consistent, since the LH scenario feels much more like a normal sandbox game than does the FE scenario. Otherwise, it will likely cause spurious bug reports and frequent questions from people who play the scenario to learn the game and then move on to sandbox games.

Maybe they are experimenting with the option of expanding your city into a forest / river / coast to add the production or food bonus.

Am not really sure if it would be good to allow construction of those 2 improvements with snaking, they would sort of kill a bit of decision making when settling a city, and only factor to take in consideration would remain the number of essences available per tile.

As it is now, I can go for a no essence 2/4/0 or 2/5/0 tile that is near a river or forest, or 5/2/1 near a forest etc. But if I can just sneak to the forest or river, then obviously I'll go for highest essence tile.

On the other hand it would make sense to be able to take advantage of a nearby river / forest if my city borders connect to it.

How to balance this out?

The easiest way I would like to see here is the ability to build NON OUTPOST buildings with pioneers. I wouldn't mind the ability to build a pioneer and plop this dude on a nearby forest increasing the material yield of a nearby city. They already have radius set up for building outposts too closely the same mechanic can prevent these from being so closely. Similar with piers.

I've done this, I enjoyed playing with it... I just don't like the fact that I have to ignore the upgrade outpost button when doing this. If I could get such a little tag in the building improvements to say this is an outpost type or not, that would be grand. I would like to turn off the outpost upgrade box.

Also, if you would like another extremely complicated rule can go into place is that you can snake to a forest and pier, only if there is no essence in your city. I think I can already set this up right now. Then add another type of camp if it is adjacent to your city and you have essence, thus keeping the mechanic. Not a good idea as this is a rather complicated rule.

Is anyone else not receiving the multiple +1 defense from the Shield of the Sentinel? I'm only getting +1 defense after the first attack.

IIRC, the FE scenario wasn't in the beta, it was only pushed out (outside their internal testers) until release ... and it had bugs.  My guess is they hope to nip the scenario bugs in the bud before release this time.  That's what beta is supposed to be for, anyway ... yeah a lot of us (paying customers instead of 'real' beta testers) get so caught up that we've turned beta tests into opening-Christmas-presents-months-early can't-wait-for-release early plays, but there really is a point to Beta to make actual release smoother.

I am very irritated with buggy 1.0 releases ... their ubiquity does not excuse their ubiquity, but I also scoff at the derp-users who pre-pay to get access to a beta version, then swear off the game studio or publisher because the beta version has *by gosh* bugs.

Glad to see that obvious concepts can be acquired, finally. Thanks.