[quote who="seanw3" reply="42" id="3086301"] Hordes of spearmen would probably be the Civilization choice.[/quote] I'm thinking more of an espionage via diplomacy choice.
mqpiffle
Strategic catapults like Civ IV - they damage x number of enemy units defending a tile, up to 75% of hp. they can also bombard to reduce city defenses. In tactical battle they should be nearly worthless - extremely slow (moves and initiative), low defenses, weak to fire, etc.
I say give bows -3 initiative base, and have some good traits that help counter this (Rapid Fire -20% acc this turn and next turn, +5 initiative next turn.) Also give move-and-fire tactics a beefy -x% acc modifier.
I don't know, I kinda like my incredible shrinking battlefield idea. Think of it like Tron, where the combatants could destroy segments of the battlefield with their little magical frisbees as a tactical option. Y'all aren't thinking outside the box. [e digicons]:borg:[/e]
I think a hired champion should have both the faction it is born as tagged and should also be tagged for the faction that hired it. [quote who="Heavenfall" reply="24" id="3084667"]Philosophically speaking, the champion could probably "hate" the catapult as it was something they produced. But is it the gut-wrenching, foaming-at-the-mouth hate he would feel for the people? I don't think so.[/quote] I don't know, I think you may be over-rationalizing a tad. I
[quote who="vieuxchat" reply="16" id="3085386"]Another thing would be to prevent movement from shooting units. You shoot OR you move (unless you have the good trait) and shooting should get a penalty to accuracy if you moved (harder to target when you move)[/quote] This is nice. An archer unit could move up to (tacmove - 1) and still fire, but if they move they get -50% acc on the shot. If they move their full tacmove, they cannot shoot, or maybe get -90% acc on the shot.<
Well, you have code that increases the size of the tactical map on initiation based on the size of the armies involved, right? How about as units get killed off in a battle, the number of usable tiles decreases, until it's so small that if it became a 1 on 1, it would necessarily turn into a melee (if there were melee units involved.)
[quote]When loading a game bonuses to movement are not given for the first turn. For example if I have a character equiped with a compass instead of having 3 movement points they only have 2 for the first turn after a reload.[/quote] This also happens when moving a unit out of a city on a new turn.
...and all the weapon type vs armor type stuff, as well as elemental damage vs elemental resistance...
I remember it on the Apple IIe with a chromatic green-screen monitor. It was the first graphical RPG I had ever played.
I get the feeling that cities in general will be changed overall in Beta 2, even though little has been mentioned about it. Pretty much everything about them was just such a huge issue with people in the first beta.
Or just balance the evoker trait :-/
Great read! Looking forward to getting back into FE. One bit of pre-feedback based only on the screenshots (I know, it's annoying) is that with the new "path-to" system, it would be nice to show where the end-of-turn locations will be, maybe with a small circle with a number in it to show where the unit is planned to end each turn.
Don't forget Pool of Radiance...
[quote who="vieuxchat" reply="31" id="3084519"]Sorry, but that isn't "Terrain" bonus but "Territory" bonus (and it's already in) You get it when you fight a battle in your territory (within the borders of your realm).[/quote] Frogboy alludes to the possible inclusion of terrain boni. the screenshot does not confirm.
I'd love to fry the poor knight who's wearing full plate with a lightning bolt.
It's a boolean tag. 1 = on, 0 = off.
I would rather be able to place units on the map at the beginning of tactical combat.
No, I'm pretty sure it can't currently be done. The devs would have to implement it.
I would like to see the addition of a GameModifier flag of vsFlanked, which would allow the gamemodifier to be applied only if the target unit were being flanked, as if it were engaged in melee combat.
If a player (AI or human) decides to create a single powerful army with all of their units, this is a strategic decision the player has made and does not need any counters except the fact that a good player will be able to hold off the army then counter-attack appropriately. It does not need any special attention, because any other player can decide to use the same strategy. I'm not sure why you consider it cheese.
[quote who="seanw3" reply="21" id="3083620"]Discipline: +1 Strength per level. You can guess what I think of this one. Too much Strength in the late game. Lower it to +1 per 2 levels and make it part of a Path trait for Warriors. You should want to avoid making traits that are so good it is not a choice, but an imperative. You could make each spell free and I would still rather have Discipline. It's so much better than everything else. It is also important to make sure this ki
[quote who="seanw3" reply="18" id="3083437"]I agree in concept, but 1 per level is a dangerous slope. 1 per 2 or 3 levels would be a better balance. It is hard to say because regular troops have such low stats. [/quote] Regulars will never be, and should not ever be, as good as heroes. The numbers I present are intended purely for demonstration, and are not meant to be taken literally, but I don't see what the problem with each class gaining +1 whatever per level is when we
After a bit of thought I have two main issues with the current level-up/trait system. Accuracy gained per level by every hero and traits granting bonuses to base attributes. Starting with the latter, I feel that it would serve the game best to not allow heroes to gain or lose base attributes through level-up bonuses, traits, or injuries. This would help mitigate effects like always choosing a certain attribute increase because it will positively effect X number of
[quote who="Manii Names" reply="21" id="3083047"]With the way spells ramp up based on shard type, I am against changing the shards in any way.[/quote] Why? If the AI can be taught how to use it properly, what would be the problem?