|
Taear posted:I've manually fought with six orc archers against a manticore rider and a draconian cavalry and my entire army was killed because they hit the rider three times for one or two damage, and that's it. Then I don't know what to say. You're playing a different game to me. Are you flanking properly (spread in a line, start from the edges and alternate so it spins each attack)? Standing behind cover, spacing and moving your units green distance so it doesn't get a full 3 attacks/turn (I'm guessing you mean it kills your archers in one full attack round)? An archer should be doing 8-15 per turn against a manticore, depending on how far you had to move.
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
[Reply is not edit, dammit]Taear posted:I've manually fought with six orc archers against a manticore rider and a draconian cavalry and my entire army was killed because they hit the rider three times for one or two damage, and that's it. I generally feel the economy boom starts paying off around turn 30, which is also usually around the time I have an attack getting in an AIs face, so I'd call that pretty slow. Continents do slow the game down as it puts a barrier between some players though. As for the manticore example: honestly it doesn't sound like you played that particularly well, though I think manticores are one of the stronger tier 4s. Veterancy and casting points is probably what would cinch that. Autsj fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Incy posted:Then I don't know what to say. You're playing a different game to me. Are you flanking properly (spread in a line, start from the edges and alternate so it spins each attack)? Standing behind cover, spacing and moving your units green distance so it doesn't get a full 3 attacks/turn (I'm guessing you mean it kills your archers in one full attack round)? An archer should be doing 8-15 per turn against a manticore, depending on how far you had to move. No, I mean a single hit. My T4s do as well once they're suitably promoted (which doesn't take too long!). I know a Rider is the most powerful T4 but it really quickly takes anything apart and the only thing I've seen hit them for the damage you're talking about is maybe "fire cannon" when flanking. And I'm usually attacking the AI by turn 100. I prefer to build up and explore I guess - that's why when I play Civ5, I am on Epic or Marathon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Taear posted:I've manually fought with six orc archers against a manticore rider and a draconian cavalry and my entire army was killed because they hit the rider three times for one or two damage, and that's it. Yeah but Orc Archers are garbage. Worst ranged unit in the game garbage. Use Impalers instead and you'd have won that fight. Hell use almost any other unit and you'd have had a fair chance of winning that fight. With spell support it wouldn't even have been difficult. I've said it before, but there's a ton of viable tier 1 and tier 2 units that are awesome and can be used the entire game. There's also a fair number of them that aren't even good early and you'd be mad to rely on them later. I totally agree that the later tier units tend to be far more diverse and interesting and nerfing them would ruin game progression, but there is plenty of reason to keep lower tier units around as it is. I think the one issue with Tier 1 units is that Pikemen come out a little late for the stats they have, but I'm pretty sure that's being fixed. Also Tier 1 sword units don't retain much value past the early game, but I'm ok with that, because they're just babies first heavy infantry and there's not much design space to keep them viable vs other units that do exactly the same thing but better. Good ranged units and support units are extremely useful the entire game, and Pikes are a cost effective counter vs several units. I don't really understand how much better people expect basic units you can build anywhere to be, or why massing them the entire game is more fun then moving on to more exciting and interesting units.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:16
|
|
|
After just running a test, 15 is optimistic but I was getting 10-12 damage from each trooper human archer against a trooper manticore. It needed 2 hits to kill each archer, with the first leaving the archer on about 1/3. Two archers dead in total. I think I'm going to have some fun later seeing what can and cannot kill a manticore, six horsemen had no trouble and killed it with no casualties, although five ended up on half health. E - I wonder if you can kill the manticore with no archer casualties by draining its ap on the turn it attacks through melee, then fanning out and shooting it from one square away. What other wonderfully practically useless tactics can be used upon this manticore in a vacuum? Incy fucked around with this message at 13:26 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
Incy posted:After just running a test, 15 is optimistic but I was getting 10-12 damage from each trooper human archer against a trooper manticore. It needed 2 hits to kill each archer, with the first leaving the archer on about 1/3. Two archers dead in total. I think I'm going to have some fun later seeing what can and cannot kill a manticore, six horsemen had no trouble and killed it with no casualties, although five ended up on half health. It's a lot of effort to go to (remember as well I was using Orc archers) to have to kill a single unit when you'd be fine with just two tier 3 units instead of 6 archers - which is the point we're making really!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:29
|
|
|
Taear posted:It's a lot of effort to go to (remember as well I was using Orc archers) to have to kill a single unit when you'd be fine with just two tier 3 units instead of 6 archers - which is the point we're making really! I do love the tactical combat in this game. I even play out the battles where your hero + elite army fight a small number of terrified goblins guarding a gold mine just because I like to kill things in the tactical map.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:32
|
|
|
I play on a small map with 5-6 players (albeit with the underground layer on for more space), empire building pace. Generally speaking my games are over, in practice, by turn 60. Sometimes it's in actuality as well. T4 spam isn't really an issue there, though I did take the time one game to build 24 Exalted and go throne sniping (that game ended around turn 100). It also helps if you make an ally out of one of the more powerful AIs left. Not because they'll help you - they won't because the AI is far too cautious to mount effective offenses - but because you don't have to spend more time killing them. That does bring up a point though: sometimes the AI needs to take risks. Including against each other. Right now they just compile huge armies and sit on them because everyone else is doing the same. Occasionally they ought to make strategic gambles for the sake of continuing their expansion. Right now they invariably stagnate against each other. As a human player I can accept some temporary strategic vulnerability and just go kill the poo poo out of a technically far more powerful neighbor because they're trying to protect everything at once all the time (and that's not even with the human edge in tactical combat - I've used auto-resolve exclusively for my last few games as a test). Corbeau fucked around with this message at 13:46 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:40
|
|
|
Corbeau posted:That does bring up a point though: sometimes the AI needs to take risks. Including against each other. Right now they just compile huge armies and sit on them because everyone else is doing the same. Occasionally they ought to make strategic gambles for the sake of continuing their expansion. Right now they invariably stagnate against each other. If you put the AI on different difficulty levels, the higher ones will kill the lower ones. It doesn't seem to happen if they're all equal, but they do have something in there that says "This person is weak and I should attack them".
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
Corbeau posted:That does bring up a point though: sometimes the AI needs to take risks. Including against each other. Right now they just compile huge armies and sit on them because everyone else is doing the same. Occasionally they ought to make strategic gambles for the sake of continuing their expansion. Right now they invariably stagnate against each other. As a human player I can accept some temporary strategic vulnerability and just go kill the poo poo out of a technically far more powerful neighbor because they're trying to protect everything at once all the time (and that's not even with the human edge in tactical combat - I've used auto-resolve exclusively for my last few games as a test). Yeah I very much agree with this, especially since this would also increase the pressure an AI could inflict upon a player. As it is right now as a player you ave a little too much freedom to build up as you please without significant threat. Taear posted:And I'm usually attacking the AI by turn 100. I prefer to build up and explore I guess - that's why when I play Civ5, I am on Epic or Marathon. This is why I said people need to start posting their game settings/playstyles when talking balance issues, I should've specified turn-times as well, honestly. Turn 100 is generally when I am ending the game, so when you attack you're probably doing it on something close to what I would call a "mop-up" economy, when I can afford whatever I want to just end things. I wouldn't be suprised if the economy just pretty much breaks if you go beyond 150-200 turns. I suspect there's plenty of people around who play this game more as a civ-like than the homm-like it was actually designed and balanced around. It's pretty cool that people can have fun with such radically different playstyles, but it certainly causes misunderstandings when talking balance. Right now I don't think the game is balanced at all around a slower, more civ-like style, and those are certainly issues that could use adressing, but I'm hesitant to judge balance on that front right now should Triumph implement a speed slider to scale games to playstyles better. Autsj fucked around with this message at 14:17 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 14:12
|
|
|
Autsj posted:I suspect there's plenty of people around who play this game more as a civ-like than the homm-like it was actually designed and balanced around. You say that, but I play HOMM the same way. Everyone I know who plays it does the same too - build up THEN attack. It makes an issue in a game like AoW because there are no alternative ways to win, so it makes the end game even more of an infinite slog. I guess for me the biggest "balance issue" is that all the dungeons and forts and all sorts are cleared out really fast (or it seems to me) whereas for the faster players they probably don't even get touched. Taear fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
Autsj posted:This is why I said people need to start posting their game settings/playstyles when talking balance issues, I should've specified turn-times as well, honestly. Turn 100 is generally when I am ending the game, so when you attack you're probably doing it on something close to what I would call a "mop-up" economy, when I can afford whatever I want to just end things. I wouldn't be suprised if the economy just pretty much breaks if you go beyond 150-200 turns. Yeah I've never had a game go past 100. Here's some screenshots from my last Orc Theocrat game with a bunch of guys crammed in a medium map ( I am red.  Had about 6 stacks, mostly looking like this. I have zero tier 4 units and haven't researched shrines. As you can see my army even has a single tier 1 tagging along. 
Nuclearmonkee fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
I managed to convert an enemy fire giant, then I thought I'd buff him to make sure he survived so cast that warlord spell that adds like 3 damage. I didn't realize it also gives strong will, which canceled the conversion. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
Autsj posted:Yeah I very much agree with this, especially since this would also increase the pressure an AI could inflict upon a player. As it is right now as a player you ave a little too much freedom to build up as you please without significant threat. To be fair, this is basically true of casual play of every strategy game ever. I still remember how after getting a taste of competitive RTS play (I wasn't even good, mind) that I simply couldn't watch my little brother play RTS games without raging. I mean, of course the correct way to play is to slowly turtle and tech up to the best units on every map, every time. Why would you do anything else? And stop telling me to build more villagers, 20 is more then enough. I have to agree that a speed slider of some kind is probably the only way to balance large maps so that everyone isn't at max reasearch before the game even gets going.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Balance is a kind of a nebulous term when you're talking about single player vs ai tbs anyway. Especially one with as many possible play variations as aow3 (campaign? scenario? random map? race/class? game length? map size? ai difficulty?), exacerbated by player playstyles (fast and aggressive? slow and buildy? exploity to the max? casual and relaxed?) I'd go more with 'patching out unfun and/or exploitive playstyles'. That is, stuff that's really effective or cheesy against (or from) the AI, but isn't really fun to actually use or have used against you. Multiplayer would be another kettle of fish, one I don't care about in the least, but I know there are certainly people who do.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:17
|
|
|
Taear posted:But all the T1/2 units are identical. No matter the race, they do the same stuff. This isn't even close to true. Take the archers for example. Goblins have archers that ignore line of sight penalties. Elves have archers that ignore range penalties. Draconians have archers that do AOE damage. Dwarves and Draconians have archers that can move their full movement before firing without losing damage. Other T1/T2 units have similar differences.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
madmac posted:To be fair, this is basically true of casual play of every strategy game ever. I still remember how after getting a taste of competitive RTS play (I wasn't even good, mind) that I simply couldn't watch my little brother play RTS games without raging. I mean, of course the correct way to play is to slowly turtle and tech up to the best units on every map, every time. Why would you do anything else? And stop telling me to build more villagers, 20 is more then enough. This is somewhat true I suppose, but I'm not going to go anywhere near the "casuals" can of worms, I'm not a 'competitive' player in this game and people should play whichever way they have fun. I do think that the economy in longer games shows some issues, whichever way you get to that longer game economy (either playtyme or mapsettings) and it helps to have an idea on how someone arrives there. A scaling option for bigger maps or a slower preference can help a lot, there's a reason civ had a speed setting AND scales by map size. victrix posted:Balance is a kind of a nebulous term when you're talking about single player vs ai tbs anyway. Especially one with as many possible play variations as aow3 (campaign? scenario? random map? race/class? game length? map size? ai difficulty?), exacerbated by player playstyles (fast and aggressive? slow and buildy? exploity to the max? casual and relaxed?) And of course, this, couldn't agree more. Autsj fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Thyrork posted:No please, go on. Get a decent video for me and seal the deal. You're making this sound possibly magical in its own way. Warlock 1 is a game where you can build a pirate ship, crewed by skeletons, pumped full of enough magic to make it fly, then jam your entire mana budget and the favor of one or more gods into making it nearly invincible to anything on the planet, then send it to go and fight an army of dragons. In the sky. In another dimension. If they have kept the theme consistent, well, you now know what the game is about. It's not balanced, it has no consistent or sensible lore, it's just incredibly stupid and fun if you like that sort of thing. It's quite different from AoW but I will probably buy warlock 2 when I get the chance, I enjoyed the first one. AoW 3 is a very polished and well constructed game. Warlock 1 was a relatively well constructed power tripping 5 year old imagination fantasy simulator. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
quote:This is somewhat true I suppose, but I'm not going to go anywhere near the "casuals" can of worms, I'm not a 'competitive' player in this game and people should play whichever way they have fun. I do think that the economy in longer games shows some issues, whichever way you get to that longer game economy (either playtyme or mapsettings) and it helps to have an idea on how someone arrives there. I don't mean it as an insult, hell I'm pretty casual with this series. I just mean most people playing any game ever default to slow and like to unlock everything and that's something you have to take into consideration.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Zurai posted:This isn't even close to true. Take the archers for example. Some of those (like the elf one) are racial abilities though, rather than the archers themselves. So an elf Horse Archer has it over a human horse archer, yet the human horse archer has Mariner. For the most part they're very similar with just minor differences based on the race itself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Taear posted:Some of those (like the elf one) are racial abilities though, rather than the archers themselves. So an elf Horse Archer has it over a human horse archer, yet the human horse archer has Mariner. Yeah I agree about this, I think they could stand to add some more unique abilities to some of the T1/2 units, maybe just some once-per-battle kind of things. Like, where's Round Attack? Or a melee strike that pierces through a hex. Human units in particular are kind of boring. I just would like there to be more racial units that are as distinct as Goblin Swarm Darters and Draconian Flamers. And on the subject of stuff that's missing, where the heck did global attack spells go? Like Firestorm and the like. Their absence means there's no reason not to bunch up your armies all the time. :I
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Gwyrgyn Blood posted:Yeah I agree about this, I think they could stand to add some more unique abilities to some of the T1/2 units, maybe just some once-per-battle kind of things. Like, where's Round Attack? Or a melee strike that pierces through a hex. Human units in particular are kind of boring. I just would like there to be more racial units that are as distinct as Goblin Swarm Darters and Draconian Flamers. Sorcerers get Thunderstorm, which hits all models in the target stack for something to the tune of 15 points of shock damage. Only one stack, though - as far as I'm aware there's no giant AoE version of that that'll nuke whole armies in one go. Personally I'd also like to see some sort of a scaling mechanic for spells - if you have a caster-focused hero, it'd be nice to get more oomph out of a single Fireball than a just starting character.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Taear posted:Some of those (like the elf one) are racial abilities though, rather than the archers themselves. So an elf Horse Archer has it over a human horse archer, yet the human horse archer has Mariner. Which kinda doesn't matter because for effect an elven archer is still different (and significantly so) than say a human one, and these things can matter. In your Manticore example for example, I suspect dwarven crossbowmen would've performed quite a bit better for you, with their max movement range and a single high-damage shot they'd have benefited noticably more from surrounding and flanking the Manticore. Gwyrgyn Blood posted:And on the subject of stuff that's missing, where the heck did global attack spells go? Like Firestorm and the like. Their absence means there's no reason not to bunch up your armies all the time. :I Still there? Mostly under class now though I think, Lightning Storm for Sorceror, Sunburst for Druid and Wrath of God for the Theocrat off the top of my head. You're right that there doesn't seem to be an area of effect type anymore though. Autsj fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Gwyrgyn Blood posted:Yeah I agree about this, I think they could stand to add some more unique abilities to some of the T1/2 units, maybe just some once-per-battle kind of things. Like, where's Round Attack? Or a melee strike that pierces through a hex. Human units in particular are kind of boring. I just would like there to be more racial units that are as distinct as Goblin Swarm Darters and Draconian Flamers. I'd love to see a round attack animation now that the units are multiple little dudes. edit; and there is a lightning global attack, but it only effects 1 hex. useful against machines though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
Autsj posted:Which kinda doesn't matter because for effect an elven archer is still different (and significantly so) than say a human one, and these things can matter. In your Manticore example for example, I suspect dwarven crossbowmen would've performed quite a bit better for you with their max movement range and a single high-damage shot they'd have benefited noticably more from surrounding and flanking the Manticore. Exactly. The complaint was that all t1/2 units are identical, and that's just not true. It is true that the archers and support units have the most obvious differences, but they all have their nuances. I do agree that humans are just boring, though that's a thing in almost every game. They do have a specialty which is nice, but it's one that rarely actually matters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Exactly. The complaint was that all t1/2 units are identical, and that's just not true. It is true that the archers and support units have the most obvious differences, but they all have their nuances. The complaint was more that if you want to protect your rear cities you're best making T3 units there and not just archers, because even a few enemy units just buzzing around at the back will come and take it off you, because T1/2 are just too weak to make a difference. I miss round attack too. I do feel like the lower tier units had a BIT more variety in the earlier games. I'm thinking of stuff like the High Men Avenger and the Halfling Sheriff.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
Maybe I misread it, then. I do agree that the lower-tier racial units could stand improvement. Musketeers are an exception, punching way over their weight but still being vulnerable. If we could bring the other lower tier units up to that level, it'd make the game even better. It totally should be a viable strategy to pump out a lot of veteran lower-tier units, and right now it doesn't feel that way except for the dreadnought. Dreadnoughts can get by with nothing but 4x musketeer 2x flame tank stacks for a long, long time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
The 6 unit limit per army hurts the viability of low tier units (or rather: spamming them, since what else are you gonna do against "good" units?), especially since you can't place your units manually and use poo poo units as screen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
I think the veterancy bonuses for low tier units could be tweaked to make them a lot more useful in the long run. Because honestly, aren't there myths and legends of a bunch of nobodies taking down dragons or holding an entire city by themselves? Maybe there should be a very hard to reach veterancy level beyond Elite, that makes T1 units up to recruit T3 levels or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Yeah the thing is that not only are low tier units harder to keep alive, but they actually get worse rank up bonuses than higher tier units. In previous games all units got the same bonuses for rank ups, aside from a few units that got new abilities.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
The worst thing about this game is that there's no production overflow. It means that in the late game, you get to choose between producing one tier 4 unit per turn, or one tier 1 unit per turn. Difficult choices. There is really no reason why you shouldn't be able to crank out as many tier 1 units as you have production for every turn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
I've seen the computer produce multiple units in a turn in several different matches now. In particular I was doing the mirror scenario, I cut off the enemies wizard in a town and guarded the bridge so no reinforcements could get in. Each turn she would produce 3 draconian hatchlings a turn. She ended up having 5 full stacks of these things which held me off until I could get a few more stacks over to her. It would be great if we could do this too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Mymla posted:The worst thing about this game is that there's no production overflow. It means that in the late game, you get to choose between producing one tier 4 unit per turn, or one tier 1 unit per turn. Difficult choices. This also irks me. If it turns out to be too much you could always put a cap on the amount of units you can make per turn. This would naturally lend itself only towards low tier units as high tier units require too much production to get multiples per turn anyway. e: madmac posted:I don't think I've ever build a single Tier 3 unit for Garrison purposes, except like Trebuchets. A couple archers or support units, maybe a low-tier class unit or Tier 2 Cav, possibly sub in a trebuchet or two if your racial ranged units are weak, will hold off anything short of an all-out attack, and it's a waste of resources and production time building a garrison heavy enough for that for anything but a throne city or crucial border town. quote:I have a feeling production overflow would end up benefiting higher tier units more then low tier ones in the long run. a!n fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
quote:The complaint was more that if you want to protect your rear cities you're best making T3 units there and not just archers, because even a few enemy units just buzzing around at the back will come and take it off you, because T1/2 are just too weak to make a difference. I don't think I've ever build a single Tier 3 unit for Garrison purposes, except like Trebuchets. A couple archers or support units, maybe a low-tier class unit or Tier 2 Cav, possibly sub in a trebuchet or two if your racial ranged units are weak, will hold off anything short of an all-out attack, and it's a waste of resources and production time building a garrison heavy enough for that for anything but a throne city or crucial border town. quote:The worst thing about this game is that there's no production overflow. It means that in the late game, you get to choose between producing one tier 4 unit per turn, or one tier 1 unit per turn. Difficult choices. I have a feeling production overflow would end up benefiting higher tier units more then low tier ones in the long run. You may not get multiple units per turn, but getting say, a Tier 4 every 3 turns instead of 4 would be rather powerful.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
I dont know about you guys, but I'd really appreciate an option to select what races heroes can spawn to offer their help to you. I just did an all goblin playthrough and I'd honestly really like if I didn't have to kill 80% of the heroes that offered their aid to me. Also, is there any point to the Terraforming spells? It seems like either I'm not doing it right or you can only terraform one square a turn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:I dont know about you guys, but I'd really appreciate an option to select what races heroes can spawn to offer their help to you. Devs are already working on it but it might be a few patches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
a!n posted:This is also my experience. I remember in Shadow Magic when I figured out that a bunch of low tier ranged units and some Druids could effectively hold off any ground army in a garrison by entangling whatever unit first enters the city gate and shooting the rest from above. The best city defenders in shadow magic were the basic "archers" for the shadow demons' counterpart (forget their race name). They shot an AOE lightning web with a pretty good chance to stun. I've had a single stack of nothing but those defeat 3-4 attacking stacks. Of course, Shadow Magic also had defensive city structures beyond city walls. The tower shooting magic every turn and the walls having a harmful "moat" aura helped tremendously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
quote:Of course, Shadow Magic also had defensive city structures beyond city walls. The tower shooting magic every turn and the walls having a harmful "moat" aura helped tremendously. City Enchanments are global spells now, but some of them are insanely strong if you can have them up. That Dreadnaught spell that applies fire vulnerability on the entire attacking army and also sets the walls on fire is just evil.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
madmac posted:City Enchanments are global spells now, but some of them are insanely strong if you can have them up. That Dreadnaught spell that applies fire vulnerability on the entire attacking army and also sets the walls on fire is just evil. The funny thing is there ARE defensive city structures.. in dwellings. The dragon dwelling even gets a 'guard tower' that shoots fire and ice every round.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
Business Gorillas posted:I dont know about you guys, but I'd really appreciate an option to select what races heroes can spawn to offer their help to you. I just did an all goblin playthrough and I'd honestly really like if I didn't have to kill 80% of the heroes that offered their aid to me. Terraforming isn't exactly intuitive: it doesn't work like other spells. Specifically, it doesn't take casting points. Your only limits in the number of hexes that you can terraform are your dominion and your raw mana reserves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2014 00:19
|
|