mqpiffle

mqpiffle

Joined Member # 4257179
1 Posts 143 Replies 4,170 Reputation

[quote who="seanw3" reply="7" id="3073250"]Assassin should get it from multiple strikes, poison, crits, initiative, and ignoring armor. So many interesting options. [/quote] Backstab, flanking, sneaking...

21 Replies 11,885 Views

I don't see a problem with a unit that can build roads, but I don't have a problem with the current system either, except that you can't currently build roads to outposts.

22 Replies 7,802 Views

Nice post. I agree with most of your comments. The single tech tree would be nice though I don't have a problem, per se, with the current setup, except that the Magic tree is completely horked. I'd like to see spells somehow tied into research. I also think the mana system, buildings, and traits need some rethinking (out-of-the-box style) and balance passes. I think the game was built with the right "guts" it just need some "attitude adjustment" to reac

52 Replies 169,181 Views

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="19" id="3072204"]Outriders, Swiftriders, Quickriders, Nightriders, Sunriders, Shadowriders, Dawnriders, Sunsetriders, Moonriders, Twilightriders, Yellow Riders, Blue Riders, Red Riders, Green Riders.[/quote] Rough Riders

44 Replies 25,038 Views

The purpose of this post is to simply jot down thoughts and personal opinions that arise as I go through the normal routine of playing a game of FE. Some may be deep, some not so much; most will be stream-of-consciousness style so please excuse the rambling paragraphs and bad grammar. The content will be constantly updated as I continue my journey through Elemental: Fallen Enchantress. *** La

0 Replies 601 Views

I understand and respect what you are proposing, but I have to say in theory I respectfully disagree with a good portion of the proposal, in terms of altering the base game mechanics as they currently stand. The warfare tech tree is the most "complete" tree in the game right now. I don't see why they would alter it, or the core mechanics of the game of researching technology, at this point in development. The reason I think the current system it's good and fun is t

22 Replies 20,428 Views

[quote]The hardest part of winning was that my mana and gold incomes were always low. So it took a long time to get a full group of heroes. Also, tech was pretty much a non-factor. [/quote] Mana, Gildar, and Tech production should be 0 if you don't have a city. Even if you have sovereign traits that give a bonus here or there, they should require a city hub at least, or better yet other buildings like a library or merchant.

8 Replies 8,647 Views

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="81" id="3070453"]nerfing[/quote] They aren't "buzz-wording" anything. This game is not released. It's called balance, and implementing sound basic game mechanics which they intended to implement all along is not "nerfing" anything. In fact it will be an improvement on the core game (see above post.) EDIT: That's weird, the board is showing me as quoting myself in #81, when in fact I quoted post #80...odd.

117 Replies 419,621 Views

[quote who="Wizard1200" reply="79" id="3070427"] because it delays[/quote] That's all we're trying to do. Balance the timing just a bit. And that's not really the issue. The issue is that if I defeat a tough foe in an epic battle one-on-one with a single hero, a battle which drained every last resource and forced me to use every trick in my arsenal, I want to feel rewarded for this action, not "Oh, why did I waste

117 Replies 419,621 Views

[quote who="seanw3" reply="19" id="3070431"]I am also a little frustrated that regular troops don't affect population enough. Taking 20 men out of the population would make training an army a more complicated choice. Currently, we just build units because that is what you do when there are no more buildings. 20 less men is .2 less gold, research, and production. That would make things very interesting. [/quote] Yeah - what happened to this??!?!? This was actually a GREAT i

33 Replies 26,553 Views

Well said. I too think the quest system in FE could be amazing, and I agree completely with every point made in seanw3's post. An intriguing and dynamic quest system would especially fill out the mid-late game. I want a reason to go into the wildlands. I want a reason to go to war with an ally whom I've trusted for countless years (not just "I'm suddenly pissed off at you for no apparent reason" ), besides my own ambition to "beat" the gam

8 Replies 41,302 Views

Great post. Agree with just about everything in it. Kinda cornfused about this statement though: [quote]Also as other people have said champions should not share xp from combat, it should be split. Otherwise you end up with a mob of champions. Troops however should share xp.[/quote] I'm not understanding the difference between share and split. If share means "each champion in an army gains the full xp value of the defeated mob(s)" then yes, I agree with t

5 Replies 7,849 Views

[quote]1. Not splitting xp: This highly supports the stack o doom mechanic and very quickly allows leveled units to get out of control.[/quote] Big problem, one that needs to be addressed. No easy solution. Regular units already only get 50% of their allotted XP. After that, I think some "weighted by level" method for champions would work best, to reduce twinking, or smurfing, or whatever the $#@! it's called. [quote]2. No Leveling Cap: Whether it is a ch

7 Replies 3,756 Views

[quote who="ydejin" reply="5" id="3068417"]Skirt tough enemies and go hunting for more heroes to hire. Loot treasure as you go along. If you're lucky you can get a band of 4-5 heroes and get them leveled up a bit and then come back and clear out those monsters that are preventing your settlement from expanding.[/quote] Creature AI is much more aggressive in .77, at least on Challenging difficulty. This is hard to do!

11 Replies 9,514 Views