Another suggestion about crossbows. Its current special ability almost never happens making crossbows less useful. Replace its special ability to "Sniper shot" (100% critical hit). Really crossbows are easy to aim since you don't have to strengthen to hold the bowstring. Shot from crossbow may make opponents fall 1 square back.
Give all races all types of clothes, faces and hair to construct custom units. Now I'm playing with mancers and they have scouts and spearmen with hair type which is not available in unit constructor. Why not to give freedom of customisation to player? Unit's editor is one of the greates features of FE.
Let non-hostile units to move through cities and outposts. Cities grow and block the way. It's very hard to move through allies territory since player needs to bypass allies cities.
This suggestion may be more complex, because you need to teach AI to use these strategies. I suggest more strategic options: attack city, blockade city, raid city. Attack - leads to battle with the garrison as it happens now. Blockade - leads a blockaded sity to stop produсing income, research and mana. This may be useful when attackers forces are weak, and defender has no troops for counterattack. Raid - if during a war an enemy unit reaches a tile with resour
Another thought. Now about heroes, who I think are relatively weak vs. common troops and very expensive to equip. I suggest equipment costs in shops should be redused - halved. Let AI heroes update their equipment to the best automatically and free of charge once any of them visits a city. I also suggest increase of Attack value per each level of experience. There is not much opportunities for wizards since mana is rare. Classes Defender and Commander are weak combatants. It needs a l
I suggest 3 diplomatic settings which could improve gameplay. AI should react to human players expansion. The first occurs when a player goes to war with any opponent. Thus others consider him a good target to attack. The second occurs when a player attacks an ally of that kingdom. AI Allies should react by declaring war to human player. The third occurs when human player just builds more cities. 1. You participate in war. - (This results in -10 to relations). 2. You are at wa
1. Best of all are warriors if they can cast spells. Mana may be low. But they have always good attack. 2. Useful are wizards for additional spells. 3. Occasionally useful assasins, thargs are best with double strike, perhaps. 4. Very rarely useful, almost useless defenders and commanders. Defenders expected to buff whole armies, but they buff only themselves. Commanders are of doubdt specialization. They are specialised for city government and for battlefield which ar
Let shields add 10-20 dodge or defence against ranged weapons. All weapons except swords have a special strike. Add a thrust attack to swords, which is 50% armorpiercing.
Crossbows are rather useless unless they gain more Attack and armor piercing. AI should make fortresses from the best villages or just buld more fortresses to produce better troops. Or let AI build only 1 city and onecloister and make fortresses from all other settlements. How to control unrest in huge empires if I like to play XL maps? Is there a repeating research technology that reduces unrest in all empire? E.g. Advanced administration? (I just don't know).
AI is too peaceful. Empires vs.Kingdoms should have -5 in relations. Also AI gets impressed by a player very easily. It should be impressed only if hoplessly weaker than a player. AI should be agressive -5 particularly against human player (we don't trust you). Emmpires should use horses. Wargs are less useful than horses. Let wargs give a bonus +1 to Attack (they bite).
1. After I reload a game, AI may not attack or build cities. 2. All hero classes exept warriors are weak. What if all heroes gain +1 to Attack per each level of experience? 3. I made a scenario and assigned a pioneer unit to AI. But at the first turn AI sent that pioneer to suicidal attack and lost it. 4. I can't place shipyards in the editor. 5. What if every race would have some dodge value? 5 for example. 6. If I produce pioneer, population is subtracted, thus I can increase growth in my
"Too easy?" - in my practise this is just one part of a problem. In some situations its easy to win, but in other situations it is easy to lose. There is not much options for continuous struggle where is is not obvious who will win. But this is the problem of almost every strategy game.
I try to count. Do I like encumbrance? Yes, its good for reality. No, most my heroes need many tweaks to carry equipment. Is it good for AI to remove encumbrance? Yes!!! Encumbrance should be removed.
What is balance of the game? May be it is the value of how much the winner may be stronger than a loser? If I begin to win the game becomes uninterstingly easy. I build 7-men units, I equip them with best bows, I equip them with best artifacts, I build them in enchanted cities, which give +4 to fire damage, +4 to initiative, +4 to armor, they are able to act first at the beginning of the battle - and they simply wipe away any enemy unit with 1-2 shots. Enemy rarely has a chance even t
All MoM, AoW2, FH have great potential, but all suffer from various drawbacks. MoM is easy and unbalancedat at the same time, and after reloading a game AI often retreats. In AoW2 AI doesn't use many things and it doesn't even build pioneers (but by modding its possible to make AI build them), but perhaps AI of AoW2 is the best of all three games. And it has the great and easy to use map editor, scripting and modding tools. FE has many great ideas - starting settings, unit constructor
[quote who="StevenAus" reply="4" id="3328605"] That's the way it was before, but then they introduced autoplacement of buildings (with a Manual Improvement Placement Advanced Option), and decided that it would be better not to favour those who did snaking (since the AI or players not using manual placement couldn't benefit from it). Basically, it's a design issue, and I don't think snaking will be coming back to the core game any time soon.[/quote] I hope d
[quote who="Leo in WI" reply="2" id="3328534"]As of now this is working as designed. You can install the snaking mod to change this mechanic. [/quote] Strange... The Snaking mod should be part of the core game.
This is an old issue but its strange to me why it still isn't solved. May be its a "feature"? Then why this was made so? I can build lodging camp only if a city is built near a forest. But if I build a city even 1 tile away from a forest and later build structures to move city hearer to the forest, even if I see that a building can be built if forest, I still can't buld Lodging camp. This results that I often restart my games, trying to have a better starting location.
It creates hundreds of starting locations and I can't make a map with just two starting locations. It always adds many new SL, even if I delete previous ones.
Elemental Forums
Earthquake spell is too strong and devastating. And while AI doesn't use it Human playercan use it frequently, which wipes AI to the grownd. Earthquake should be weaker, more expensive and available to AI.
1.Yes, I agree, that horses should have their own upkeep. For example 1 gold. 2. Mount should not give opportunity to carry additional weight. Instead every mount should give weight and accuracy penalties to its rider. Riders need to be lighter in weight to ride horses. 3. Riders should not be able to use large shields. Perhaps every type of shield should give less bonuses to mounted troops. 4. Riders should nor be immune to bash strike which makes them prone. Otherwis
Here is my suggestion on how Influence and Adventurer could be modified. It would be interesting, what everybody think about this. So, lets assume that Influence is the measure of how much a king is popular among the population. It means that Influence is needed to recruit troops, pioneers, henchmen, heroes, mercenaries. Indeed, who will join an army of a king who has no Influence? :-) For this to work it needed that settlements should produce Influence, since only Prest
May I propose some suggestions on how Influence and Adventurer could be modified. It would be interesting, what everybody think about this. So, lets assume that Influence is the measure of how much a king is popular among the population. It means that Influence is needed to recruit troops, pioneers, henchmen, heroes, mercenaries. Indeed, who will join an army of a king who has no Influence? :-) For this to work it needed that settlements should produce Influence, since o
I tried 1.3.for a while. New tiles generation seems strange but is intersting at first sight. Note that the less essence - the better because I often make unit enchantents on my cities, resulting in big advantage from fire bonus to units attack. New pioneers are better. Growth is the main concept of the game and its good that pioneers don't consume it anymore. But instead of gold pioneers may better require 30 influence! Then Influence will be in great demand, being very u
[quote]Champion Recruitment cost gets gradually more expensive based on the # of champions the player has[/quote] The most powerful trait Adventurer is now even more powerful. It should reduce cost of chamions by some % but not by 100%. If all champions are free, then what's the need in this update? Note thet most AI sovereigns are not Adventurers, so it's the AI who will suffer. Unfortunately, because trait Adventurer is so powerful, it makes other even most interesti