1. Get rid of the store altogether. It does't make sense that I'm going to this store to buy uber equipment. I'm the damned King. Where did they get it from? I had to research it now they're selling it to me? Doesn't make sense. Items should be something you create with metal / magic crystals. Equipment for heroes should suffer the same restrictions as equipment for troops. 2. Get rid of "Adventure" tech tree. Adventuring is not something you research, it's something you *do*. Explora
troglyte
Thanks Fb, looking forward to the changes.
[quote who="EchoingZen" reply="8" id="2903966"]It is an honor to get a reply from Frogboy, though I must disagree that WoM is not broken. The system requirements for the game states that Windows 7 is needed, and one of the essential functions of Windows is the ability to hit Alt-Tab in order to switch applications. When you attempt this with WoE, the game either takes an enormous amout of time to load, or will crash all together. This has been reported with multiple users.&n
To hell with essence, I think it's clunky and unweildly as a concept.
As I understand it, Derek, Jon S, and pretty much the rest of the crew are concentrating on FE while Brad and a couple hand picked cronies continue to tinker away with WoM. I believe that WoM will continue to see improvements, but not at the rate FE will. Not only that, but if people start abandoning WoM for FE en mass, I get the feeling not a lot is going to be done with WoM. In other words, it all depends. I would like to see a WoM 2.0 where all the rough spots are ironed out and the game j
I get the impression that adding multiplayer is more about the time required to do it than anything else. It sounds like they are busy full time just getting the single player up and running, FE is in Alpha and WoM multiplayer is all but non-existent. Maybe after the dust dettles and before they start thinking about a new title... just maybe they will find time to squeeze multiplayer in somewhere. Understandably some people want nothing to do with it, but IF the game if fun like GCII was I wo
Whose boots are these? And why are the colors reversed on the title? Is it possible we've passed over into some strange mirror universe? (get it? ha ha)
[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="1" id="2897283"]A big part of that for me was hoping to see related follow-through on the connecting-simple-systems-for-big-fun notion, which relates to my disappointment with magic so far. There are no spells to affect the dynasty system or meaningfully affect diplomacy. There are no spells available only through quests. There are no spells you can only get by recruiting a Truly Spectacular Champion. There are no spells that require you to work mult-turn
[quote who="Wizaerd" reply="50" id="2897229"]Here's a new and innovative idea for MP... Leave it out altogether!! That'd suit me just fine. [/quote] I honestly think unless they go all the way with multiplayer, there's no sense spending too much time on it because it won't really be used. The time would be better spent focusing on the single player game. Maybe an expansion could really take the time to focus on multiplayer, but we probably underestimate what kind of inv
[quote who="Tridus" reply="10" id="2896584"] I'm having a hard time understanding why. All I ever wanted out of MP in EWoM was to be able to team up with a friend or two and play against a lot of AIs. I have a hard time believing that fewer people want to do something like that then want a heavily balanced (and altered) competitive game here... I mean we've got Starcraft 2 for that.[/quote] This, exactly. Of all the things I could ever wish for, would be to play GalCivII with a f
[quote quoting="post"] But the big change in Fallen Enchantress is the sheer number of terrain types. In War of Magic there were only a few. [/quote] One of the big things I hope is changed is the available terrain types for modding. For example currently "Land" means grasslands, swamp, or desert. There are plenty of things I could imagine to be built on a swamp but not on a desert. I hope that each land type gets its own full category type. Also expanded terrains in general, su
No idea what kind of actions you will be able to perform in a turn. And actually I might be wrong about how the initiative system works, I think it might still be turns, but the initiative just determines your place in line. Then it would be the same order each round. I'm confused when Toby said the cat thing could get several poisonous strikes before the foot soldier could respond, he might have meant several because there are several of them, or several because they they just happen to claw
Wow, thanks for the update BoogieBac, FE looks really cool, I can see you guys have been busy! [quote who="Sethai" reply="77" id="2895352"]yay for initiative system; that will really help with the pacing, and mechanics (or so i hope). it was mentioned a while ago that this would be the replacement for combat speed, which i always thought was a horrible system. i'm curious as to how it works though. is there a random element? (ie you roll a dice and
[quote who="troglyte" reply="6" id="2894602"] I haven't played MoM so I can't comment on the balance, but it sounds like the unit power and type was weighed with the stack size, so scaled easily.[/quote] Forgive my ambiguity, what I was trying to say is that with a game that is tightly integrated and well balanced, yes you can do things like increase stack sizes between 1-8 and even 1-12. But just throwing it in as part of a hodge podge of mechanics that draws upon classics which
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="61" id="2894063"]I don't know if it's completely irredeemable, but there are some major flaws in its design that have not been addressed. Mainly that land has no use and is of little importance. Games like Civ and Alpha Centauri, each spot of land could be mined or farmed, etc, but unless this has a special resource, its worthless. Secondly, the Tactical battles. Fundamental flaws still exist in how the AI attacks in combat, they can be kit
Hugest NWN2 disappointment for me was not being able to save skill points between levels. I mean come on, as a multi-class rogue I should be able to expand my skills wherever I choose. Why limit skills to each class? Seems to defeat the whole purpose of [i]multi-[/i]class. I ended up tossing the disc I was so upset.
Here you go.
[quote who="Glowing_Ember" reply="2" id="2894557"]ok lets see, there are a few ways of pulling it off. I am not sure how dominion handles it, but two really good examples are Master of magic and Heroes of might and magic. They do it in different ways,in master of magic you have "units". each unit can have between 1 and 8 individuals in it. when it attacks, each individual in the unit makes an attack roll and each roll is dealt with seperately. <br /
[quote who="kenata" reply="1" id="2894553"] Heroes of Might and Magic was fairly successful at making this functionality work. Really though, I have never really had a problem with WoM for this. The current mechanism simulates each unit attack at their standard attack power ( ie not combined ) and defending at their standard defense. This is really a good way of handling this. Honestly, the only reason to break down units into a smaller size than one tile is to allow some kind of move th
Something always bothered me about having a square with one unit, then increasing it to 4, then eventually 12 but within the same size square. I also don't like how the individual unit runs around inside his big square to meet attackers from different directions. I'm thinking it would be better if each square was further broken down, so that when you have only one unit it takes up 1/12 of the full square. A square obviously doesn't divide equally into 12, so basically I'm saying th
I like the faces that let you mold them by stretching and compressing different areas. Mind you, I might spend 15 minutes making a face at the start of a game then never think about it again. I hope they don't spend too much resources on new noses.
[quote who="Thormodr" reply="48" id="2893917"] Sounds pretty good to me. EFE sharing only a few art assets but little else with EWOM sounds very encouraging to me. A total redesign basically. So does this nasty looking creature in the article. https://www.stardock.com/press/CustomerReports/Stardock2010.pdf Good enough news for me for now plus the fact that they'll release it when it's ready is also great as t
[quote who="Dsraider" reply="22" id="2893135"]Limiting units to one attack per turn would make weapons much harder to differentiate. What advantages would a dagger or short sword have over a heavy mace....[/quote] A dagger? None whatsoever, except that it's cheaper to produce. A short sword is lighter, reduces unit fatigue, and is quicker, so is less easy to dodge. A mace on the other hand does more damage when it connects. [quote who="Dsraider" reply="22" id="2893135"]I
[quote who="kenata" reply="16" id="2893114"] "yes to unit ZOC with Attacks of Opportunity for units leaving or moving through ZOC." I actually never liked this mechanic at all. It is one of those D&D mechanics that I always felt was odd. So I am fighting a person with a sword and move back, now you get to attack me without using an action. The only reason to have this would be in the normal D&D sense where a unit could simply move into range attack and then out of range agai