joeherbert48

[quote who="25Atan" reply="4" id="3340067"]Yes I agree that the most reasonable option would have these units fighting to their death I fishined Xcom:EU several times, watched some playthrough as well from the older version and the latest released version. Ever played Warhammer? There was an ability called frenzy. Basically the "berserk" we have, except you would lose its benefit when your unit would "lose a round of combat" to make things simple. Was merely pointi

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="38" id="3338135"]My 2 cents (to recap) is this: 1. Getting the AI to summon things effectively is a lot of work. 2. The current balance doesn't make summoning that effective a strategy. Therefore, I'd like to see summoning boosted substantially. In tactical battle, I think you should be able to summon multiples. You could have each additional summon cost more mana than the last. I think that alone would

berzerk means just that. Basically losing your mind so retreating would be an option. Ever play X-Com? Worked quite the same way in that game as well. Unit could run, fire, fall down and cry, just about anything when berzerk, of course in X-Com it was called Panic but same thing just berzerk uses more adrinilin so even more likely to run away or rout. :{p

[quote quoting="post"]Since this affects both fe and fe lh, maybe we can fix it for both. The spell of mastery tech comes too early in the magic tech tree. A lot of AIs just head there and build the towers, rather than spend the gold/iron/crystal on units or something's else. They also don't actually try for the VC much. My thought on this is to move the spell mastery tech back past the third book of the magi to ens

[quote]And the Devs/Publisher would be wise to yield to the points that get brought up time and time again.[/quote] Disagree totally. If I make a game it's "my" game and though I would like feedback it doesn't mean I would be "wise" to do what a handful of forum members demand or cry about. You have to be realistic those that goto forums are "not" your normal type players. They are the disgruntled or those that want to design their own game but don't have the money to do s

[quote who="GFireflyE" reply="85" id="3338445"] Quoting joeherbert48, reply 84Now of course if an army from another faction captures the city then there are no restrictions. An army would be able to destroy a level 1-5 city poof 1 turn. Imo, when conquering a city, destruction of said city should only be allowed after a number of turns equal to it's city level have passed.[/quote] They tried that it didn't work or last so now it'

I rather like the idea that the level of the city should determine the outcome vs basically unintelligent monsters excluding dragons and high level creatures. lvl 1 destroyed lvl 2 random # of buildings destroyed no loss of city, random chance city destroyed lvl 3 2 buildings destroyed no loss of city lvl 4 1 building destroyed and x # of population no loss of city lvl 5 loss of population no loss of city. Now of course if an army fr

[quote who="ben_sphynx" reply="8" id="3338328"] Maybe we need buildings that use up horses. eg Chariot races Unrest -10%, upkeep 1 horse/turn Slaughterhouse +1 grain, upkeep 1 horse/turn (empire only?) Ploughed fields +10 food per grain. Costs 4 horses to build. [/quote] Good ideas!

[quote] If I may suggest something that may help AI greatly. If AI's were able to 'mimic' what player does in order to make his faction strong it would help him a great deal.[/quote] I've said this for 100 years (yes I'm that old lol not), but anyways a database should start to build up of how the human player plays and the ai mimic it in some situations. What's that saying Quid

Did you play against maximum AI or just 1 or 2 vs you? I find those that say the ai sucks on higher difficulties usually setup games that don't favor the ai. Play against max ai on the smallest map on insane/insane and then get back to us. Then I might agree with you.

I could go for a BLIND setup phase where you don't know the positions of the enemy and you setup your units like say in Dominions III. I kind of have to agree putting mages in the front and melee is the back is sort of ridiculous. Now archers in the front I wouldn't mind since those nasty bassturds rip me a new one sometimes.

[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="1" id="3337328"] I think Bandit Lord should summon one bandit captain, two bandits with melee weapons and one bandit with a ranged weapon in tactical battles for 4 gold.[/quote] I agree

[quote who="rtw1323" reply="3" id="3335390"] I think the Maul ability is ridiculous and should be modified. At minimum, it should be limited to a few extra strikes instead of the chance to deal huge damage over and over based on a percentage. If not that, then the maximum damage of each successive landed strike should be reduced by a significant percentage. When a Maul unit gets lucky and kills an important unit of mine, it feels cheap. When I have a Maul unit of

I would also like to see city defenders have dual class. They can start out as archers and then close as melee when the time is right. This would increase defense of the city and not make the defenders so one dimensional either or. Also this is the first game I can recall that you have to defend OUTSIDE your keep or castle or city walls....what's up with dat? HOMM

[quote who="Mistwraithe" reply="14" id="3333882"] Quoting Morkleb, reply 7How about as someone else mentioned trying to get the AI to plan an attack before declaring war and thereby surprising and threathening a player the moment the ai declares and perhaps now and then catching a player unawares? For me just the uncertanity of having a friendly ai player mobilizing units near my borders not knowing but suspecting an attack is fun. Is this hard to do? I think that is a

[quote who="Zwollenaer" reply="13" id="3336067"] I don't think this is so unbalanced at all. It seems that the "Dance with dragons" is just another ending to the game just like the forge of the overlord, only more satisfying than building a few buildings and casting a spell. It is made for games that have drug on for much longer than they should have. The tech is placed at the farthest end of the tech tree, so it seems like it was deliberately put there as a game ender to me. Whoeve

[quote quoting="post"]First of all, the bug: I have been able to recruit Listrid twice in the same game. Actually, i HAVE recruited Listrid twice and stationed her (them) in the same city. Then the request: I'd like to see a popup when an enemy curses one of my cities. It's really annoying, especially when you have more than one city to continuously scroll through my cities to see if any city's been cursed. It would also help if you could make the info

Sky Drakes (namely blue lightning dragons) were the game over unit in MOM as well. Still was fun as hell romping around the map with a stack of them and just crushing my enemies. This is also why the game will never be a good multiplayer game. Too unbalanced and can never be because Stardock said they would never balance the multiplayer game in favor of the single player game. ;_)

[quote who="Star Adder" reply="2" id="3334634"] it's very simple just not to use them. Maybe, but I'm not buying or playing a game to not use some units because they're overpowered or available too early. It's up to the devs to get it right either in the first place or later on. One good step towards that was to ensure that the AI finally also makes use of em. Do YOU let your unitsfight with pitchforks when you have swords available?! [/qu

[quote]I don't like the liner progression of skill trees, in every game the level up process will be the same. I'd rather the skills be random so that it's a different experience every time you play. Even though you are given 4 or 5 choices to pick your next skill it's same the 4 or 5 choice every game, it's boring.[/quote] I agree wholeheartedly with this ^ I'm sic n tired of static tech trees they need to find a way to randomize them without makin

[quote] 1. Allow an option to flag cities that finish their production and have nothing left in the queue - including cities that finish production of a resource.[/quote] Definitely agree with this ^ or also have something that when a city is not doing anything unless YOU specifically put it into idle mode that when you click on end turn that it goes to that city for production input or something. Basically a failsafe cycle through cities that aren't doing anything unless

I think mages are just fine as long as SOME people don't EXPLOIT the situation. You know it's very simple just not to use them. ;_)

Well all I got from this OP was dripping news that Steam and the Game are PRETTY AWESOME! LMAO You gotta love these 2 hour players that gotta run to the forums to give THEIR 2 cents before nobody cares anymore. lol Well with that kind of review nobody cares pretty QUICKLY. lol Sink this thread to the depths of hell pretty quickly please and let's have some REAL REVIEWS up here. Thanx. :_)

You broke the quest chain by not using the collar on the intended so YOU CHEATED, not the game messed up. You couldn't even follow one simple quest line you just HAD to see what would happen if you used the most powerful collar on something else. Shame on you, I'm tellin your mommie. ;_)

LESS is BETTER in that the AI never really follows any great paths of power in any of these tech tree games. Even in HOMM I was so powerful the highest powerful AI player couldn't stand toe to toe with me and the game became very boring. I personally wish no characters leveled or got traits or very minimal ones at that and they had the traits they'd mostly have and use upon creation. This would allow for a more balanced and CHALLENGING game than one where the player just steam