Bellack

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="35" id="3265103"]I'm just parroting what other have said. [/quote] Can you say "Lord Xia want a cracker." :)

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="GaelicVigil" reply="31" id="3265094"] Quoting Bellack, reply 28 Are you confusing WOM with Total War? In Total War the Dynasties were good. But in WOM they just plain sucked. Oh and by the way are you crying right now? Becuase your coming off as a Entitiled spoiled brat. GIME GIME GIME RIGHT NOW WAAAAAAAAA!!!!! That they sucked is your own opinion. I thought they were awesome.<b

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Kantok" reply="26" id="3265073"] Quoting GaelicVigil, reply 17 Except that developer effort is already done for these features. They simply need to be turned on again. How long would that take? A few hours of work. The developer effort ISN'T already done for these features. If they were to throw them back in as they were in WOM they'd be tacked on, poorly integrated crap that would confuse ne

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="GaelicVigil" reply="16" id="3265031"] Quoting GFireflyE, reply 12 Quoting GaelicVigil, reply 5 So you don't want the toy in the happy meal. Don't use it then, but don't force others to play the way you do. & I don't care what you like and don't like. Don't force me to do what you like. And I shouldn't have to pay for ships in an expansion that I ALREADY paid f

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="GaelicVigil" reply="14" id="3265028"] Quoting Alstein, reply 9 Dynasties if done right would be something good to add back in the expansion. Same with naval combat, though I would ok if that was axed for more interesting features, or saved for a mini-expansion after the 2nd expansion when it can be handled on its own (which is what I think it would take) "If done right"? They were cool before. Were th

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="rvgr" reply="8" id="3265014"]If you're gonna implement dynasties, you'll have to implement aging and death as well. I would be mighty pissed if I lose a lvl 20+ sovereign to old age. [/quote] I wouldn't be pissed if this was implemented. I like this in Total War series actully.

Reply to Dynasties and Sea Travel in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

Well FE is not WOM different game. However I do agree not having sea units is pretty lame and I do not agree with the decision. The Dynasty part I'm not really upset about. It was a cool idea but I could do without. The Devs never promised these two features with FE. Trust me I have stated my optinon about the devs not having sea units.

Reply to The game is too easy (challenging) in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="rvgr" reply="50" id="3264767"] Quoting Bellack, reply 49 Also the trait that gives Cerese (I think) the ability to hire Hero's for free is way over the top. That ability should give a large hiring cost reduction (50%) instead of hiring Heros for free. You're probably talking about Relias. The truth is that Karavox, not Relias is a champ-stacking machine: starting with 800 Gildar and the ability to recruit both Ki

Reply to The game is too easy (challenging) in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Kalin" reply="27" id="3264413"]Please don't judge the game on your ability to roll an AI... you're suppose to be able to (they want a certain viability to rushing if you like that kind of play style). Different AIs play differently, some focus more on building, and is vulnerable to rushes, some pumps troops and roll others... so beating one or two really doesn't mean much... especially on challenging. A smart player using some (rather obvious) tricks will easily destro

Reply to The game is too easy (challenging) in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="xarilius" reply="26" id="3264390"]While I agree that most of you probably know the game better than I do as you have much more games under your belt, this whole attitude of "go play 20 games then come and comment on what needs work" is silly. You do realize that the majority of the people buying a game like this may never get past the 5-10 game mark, let alone 20? The value of a criticism from someone that's played 2 games is as valuable as someone that has played 20 gam

Reply to The game is too easy (challenging) in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="rvgr" reply="13" id="3264215"] Quoting ntino, reply 11 Well, because if the AI is good, and the game is well designed then at the appropriate difficulty level you should have a hard time beating 1 or 2 AIs, therefore you should stand no chance against 5 ais at war with you. I just read one of Tuidjys posts according to which the AI gangs up on the player on higher difficulties, therefor if you are able to still win the game is not balanced&nb

Reply to The game is too easy (challenging) in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="ntino" reply="7" id="3264146"] Quoting rvgr, reply 3 quoting post Please feel free to suggest more fun settings to play on, or suggest why my analysis might be wrong. Fun settings? Sure. Large landmass, 10+ opponents. Difficulty level -- Ridiculous, both for the World and the competition. Race? Doesn't matter. This should be fun. Now if you're not looking for fun, but rather to g

Reply to "Everything in Fallen Enchantress is still bland and uninteresting..." in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="willie sanderson" reply="11" id="3264046"] And I have to disagree with MoM being better. I think people seriously fail to recognize their own nostalgia. I found the replay value in MoM to be very little, And I'd have to largely disagree with your "opinion" of MOM. MOM is still the greatest overall fantasy strategy game out there and HOMM II & III come in 2nd still. MOM has ATMOSPHERE and COLOR and great MUSIC. This g

Reply to "Everything in Fallen Enchantress is still bland and uninteresting..." in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="pomalley" reply="2" id="3263971"]Well, most people (myself included) find late-game heroes overpowered, so I'm not sure what the reviewer is thinking there. Personally, I haven't found too much issue in the attack/defense balance, but I haven't played too extensively. Generally speaking, though, in some match-ups the defense is essentially negligible and sometimes it's a low-damage slugfest. I do agree with the level-up trait selection, to a point--see m

Reply to Champion permadeath toggle in FE Beta Stardock Forums

I would perfer a system where you had perma death but had spells that raise the dead. And you could have different type of raise dead spells. Lower level ones my give one or two wounds for so many turns (or until healed) And higher level ones would heal everything. They spells couls come has normal spells, Abilities, in Magic items etc. And would be much better than current system.

Reply to Champion permadeath toggle in FE Beta Stardock Forums

10000% agree. I absolutly hate Immortal Champs.

Reply to Iron Golems rock? in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="18" id="3263236"]I really don't want "taunting" of any kind. It just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I can believe a world has dragons and magic, but to believe an intelligent opponent would constantly attack the enemy he is least capable of hurting and in return the least dangerous, boggles my mind. [/quote] Unless it was a magic based compulsion (which is how I look at Taunting in any game.

Reply to Rock Paper Shotgun reviews Fallen Enchantress in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="forthright55" reply="26" id="3263773"] Quoting seanw3, reply 16 What score? I don't see a score. They don't give scores on that website - their reviews are just an opinion. At least it wont affect the meta-critic rating. These guys are the writers of PC Gamer magazine in the UK. Personally their reviews often seem more like a student trying to impress in an English literature assignment rat

Reply to [1.00 UI] Would like to see treaty symbols (like the "at war" symbols in the Faction power view in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

The At War shows as cross swords. Don't know about any other symbols because I never had a treaty of any kind in this game if fact I think Diploymancy is broken or maybe it just runs weird. I have learned to never pay attention to the Diploymatic numbers because they appear to be meaningless. Everyone usally declares war on me and I take my armies and crush them. Never had an option to capture any Champion or Soverign

Reply to [1.0] Reflections Upon The Campaign in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

As I predicted months ago the campaign was not going to be good and it wasn't. The campaign seems like an after thought. Better than WOM's campaign but not by much. What makes it better is that the game mechanics are more solid. I would say that this would make a fine Tutorial except it does not have many of the elements that the Sandlot game has. Well the good thing is that I have never seen a good campaign out of any 4X game and I doubt I ever will. But t

Reply to I just don't get it. And I don't think I ever will. in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Kamamura_CZ" reply="15" id="3262683"]You don't get it? Well, it's not so hard. I personally was very disappointed by Elemental, and the reviews shows I was not alone. Even FE does not quite cut it for me, because it is not what it tried to be. And what was it, you may ask? A true successor to Master of Magic. While Master of Magic was not a perfect game, and parts of it, notably the AI, were outright broken, it fascinated and charmed people by its amb

Reply to I just don't get it. And I don't think I ever will. in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Parogar" reply="3" id="3262466"]Even just mediocre (in 1.1?) I'm not sure what version it was in when I started playing it, but I really loved it. I never had any problems with it, either. [/quote] Well your one of the few. WOM was a really bad game one of the worst 4x games I have ever played and I'm not alone in that opinon. However I have played and loved GalCiv 2:TA and I believed that SD could do a lot better. And they did FE is

Reply to [1.00]An experiement looking into AI behavior on Challenging. [Concluded] in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="50" id="3261913"]Btw, I wasnt trying to sound defensive earlier. I wrote my response in my iPhone so they tend to be more terse then. im glad people are looking at this. given the complexity of the systems in place it's difficult to be the only one managing themexit that's why discussions like these are helpful. But please understand that I don't take AI discussion personally. Writi g on the net is always a tricky proposition. [/quote]</

Reply to [1.00]An experiement looking into AI behavior on Challenging. [Concluded] in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="UmbralAngel" reply="44" id="3261829"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 30 The game defaults to Easy. There's two levels below easy. Sigh.... haven't you learned anything about player psychology? Never make difficulties below "easy." In fact, the easiest difficulty should be labeled normal! [/quote] Actully it should go like this: Beginner - cheats are heavely in players favor

Reply to [1.00]An experiement looking into AI behavior on Challenging. [Concluded] in Fallen Enchantress Stardock Forums

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="30" id="3261539"]Without responding to the particulars...why would new players be increasing the difficulty to challenging? The game defaults to Easy. There's two levels below easy. And above challenging, all bets are off. If I could play scary sounds to distract you to help the AI, I would. [/quote] I'll tell you why. Many gamers like me perfer to play the game on the challange level where no one cheat