This is probably my biggest outstanding issue. I would rather have this than the line showing what city a resource belongs to. I have never needed that feature. Others may have, but I have not.
You fixed one of the most annoying issues! Fixed stuck turn problem caused by animation not syncing with moveable status Fixed bug where units would be running in place at the end of a turn Thank you for that!!! Now, can we get a fix for the resource destroyed message that gives no clue as to where the resource is? IMHO, that is the next biggest annoyance. (I won't go on a rant about the tile fertility
I don't know if anyone is doing this or not, I haven't seen it. It would be nice if, in the various suggestion threads, one of the devs would signal whether an idea was being considered or not. We would understand that it would not be a guarantee it would make the game, but just an acknowledgment the devs saw and liked an idea would be nice. There are so many great ideas being floated and it would be nice to know for sure if the devs a. see them and/or b.
If you like the mountains as they are, that's cool, it seems you haven't been hemmed in by them as often as I have, but I would like a map type that has no mountains.
The first is more than a peeve: PLEASE, PLEASE remove the mechanic that destroys a tile's fertility (and all surrounding tiles) when a city is destroyed!!! If I loose a city, that's fine, I deserved it and loosing all that was required to build that city is sufficient punishment. Given the absolute dearth of buildable tiles and especially considering map sizes, destroying tile fertility is too harsh a setback. Second: Can I please get a map
Woot! I was only able to play a few turns, but it looks good. It seems like the scale on the tactical battles has changed, but it is not a negative.
Elemental Forums
And why is it so difficult to create a pass through mountains that your units can use. It always takes me forever to locate that ONE tile that is blocking the pass!!! UGH!!!
Elemental Forums
[quote who="Kongdej" reply="6" id="3180426"] That said, the map generator should be a little better to equalize starting positions. Sincerely ~ Kongdej[/quote] THIS! [quote who="OrionM42" reply="11" id="3181901"] By the same token, I think that the starting resource distributions, and quality of the possible starting locations SHOULD be variable from game to game, and from playing level to playing l
[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="89" id="3184905"] quoting post Until then we have work to do, mostly in making sure all the information is being displayed in an easy to understand way, and generally polishing the entire game to smooth the edges. All the other stuff was not unexpected... so my favorite part of Beta 4 is quoted above.[/quote] Ditto that!!! One of my biggest beefs with the game so far has to do with knowing
When I originally typed WHAT I meant to type WHERE, so I'm with you!
I know this has been brought up before, but was playing this morning and got constant reminders of this issue. Please give us some indication of what resource has been destroyed with this notification. Can it be tied to the notifications in the right column? That seems like the best place for it, alongside all the other notifications. Any dev feedback on this would be greatly appreciated, one way or the other. Thanks!
I really like the idea of a common nemesis, but I have yet to see a computer AI handle this well in any previous games (e.g. MoO2). It would be cool if one player (based on some stat or resource like diplomatic capital) would be elected the supreme allied commander. They would then be given control of the units that the various AI players have designated as allied forces, with an option of more to be added based on progress against the nemesis. All the v
[quote who="Andrew Meronek" reply="2" id="3155626"]Have you tried a Ravaged map? There will still be mountains, but those chasms should break 'em up a bit.[/quote] Haven't tried that, but wouldn't that be the same situation, only the inverse?
How do you do it? The problem I see is that you can't build the buildings that reduce unrest, because you can't build buildings due to unrest. (Interesting little Catch 22 here.) It would be nice if there were a mechanic to reduce unrest by having a garrison of units. So how do you handle this issue?
Is there a way to get a map that isn't covered with mountains? I have tried temperate and swamp (the two map types that, based on their description, seem least likely to have mountains) and am still plagued with mountains everywhere. This is especially annoying near your start location. Too many times my start location is poor resource-wise, too close to AI players and cut off from the rest of the map by mountains. At least there is the control-N key combo!
I do have to agree that the random level up options for heroes are a little too random. How about weighting the choices based on attributes, that way a hero with path of the warrior doesn't get a lot of spell options and vice versa.
[quote who="seanw3" reply="95" id="3150931"]No offense taken. Not everybody enjoys satire. I do.[/quote] Normally I get sarcasm. I just missed it this time. Move along, nothing to see here...
I am sure this has something to do with the tactical damage indicator bar issue that was resolved in .914. If you mouse over a unit the data displayed will decrement the HP total before the actual hit.
[quote who="seanw3" reply="79" id="3150494"] I too have a list of unreasonable and insignificant demands: I want all of those things or I will also refuse to play the beta. I will however continue to post on the forum complaints and ideas even though I am not playing the beta anymore. [/quote] I have to disagree with you on a couple of points: 1. The issue at hand is hardly insignificant, nor is it unreasonab
[quote who="bpalczewski" reply="22" id="3149153"]No playing for me ... I made a mental resolution i am not playing this game anymore till they fix health bars and damage information to be shown properly ... [/quote] I haven't (and won't) quit playing because of this, but I can't believe it hasn't been fixed yet. [quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="27" id="3149195"] That's a
There are some very good ideas in this thread. I especially like the idea of monsters gaining levels and loot based on attacking whatever comes near its ZOC. I honestly can't see why many, if not all of them, could be implemented in the game. More free ideas for Stardock to capitalize on. Also, I could see the main monster staying, but lower level versions spawning off until the main one is defeated.
[quote who="Emperorjarin" reply="2" id="3148156"]Personally, I'd rather have more summoned units on the field than upgrading the tiny selection I have. I like having an army of summoned minions at my command.[/quote] Why not both?
I have almost always had problems with starting too close to the opposing factions, going back to beta 1Z of EoW. So much so that I often play with only three AI opponents on large maps, and even then I have seen it happen. The last game I started, I was out on a weird penninsula with a very narrow connection to the main continent. By the time I had discovered this, the AI had already started building cities there. This was a serious issue because I
I find blizzard to be extremely effective, at least in .912. It has greater damage and a larger area of effect than fireball.
What happened to all the mod maps? Where did they go and can they be used in FE?
