Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 255 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Single shot to triple shot? #157331


    Double shot at gold?

    I never use the one-shotters either. I know you can set up a flank, but in order to do that, they have to leave the safety of their lines, resulting in their loss most of the time.

    The t1’s simply aren’t durable enough to hold out against higher tiers. With the championlevels I even have less incentive to build them.

    I always prefer 3-shotters.

    in reply to: Do Mystical city upgrades depend on map size? #144268


    Yes the probability of getting some of those upgrades was definately tuned. I like it though, it really makes those few towns where you can build a focus chamber and the likes pretty rare and worth fighting for. Or a pain if your desperately looking for one.

    But map size I don’t know if that has anything to do with it.


    I’m wondering if it makes sense to have a discussion about whether females can be warriors or not, because such a thing is society-based as the titel suggests, where I think we cannot build a society but only an empire. Where the society it represents only excist in the players imagination.

    If one player wants to play traditionally he/she would love to have a male pikeman or knight to represent that. Where anyone who wants to play equality would love to have female units. Now who is right or wrong here? Do it one way you will disappoint the other and viceversa.

    Unless you add society-building as a game-concept as addon to the empire-building we already have. But that will be a lot of work (maybe as dlc or mod?). So you can choose a society-form as trait for your leader( and your opponents in sp).

    If you look at monoculture versus multiculture for instance, it doesn’t matter which way to go, since neither of the two will grant your units a buff and/or debuff in tactical combat.

    Perhaps it would be nice if something is added to represent that.

    Monoculturists units could get extra resistance towards enemy enchants/curses since the units would believe in their culture, where their own enchants/curses would have a lower change of succes because opponents would see them as racists where they don’t want to become part of.

    Multiculturist units could get it the other way around: a higher change to enchant/curse an enemy, but weaker resistances for themselves since their more open-minded.

    in reply to: Bot attacks spotted #142812


    Here is a new one in the balance section:


    in reply to: Questions about Tech Tree Research Mechanics #141222



    thank you for the answer. It is good to know how to force TR to show up in your spellbook.
    Once it is there, I can research BS or something else (altough it will not take long before I will research it).

    I use a different approach with WL where I tend not to use raise militia that much, since it draws population from your starting town and the upkeep is still in gold. If I have to build a settler as well, it takes forever for that town to grow, constraining your income.

    Plus if I encounter a hostile town close by I build up an extra army around the starting hero to conquer it, if it is friendly I do the same to fullfill its quest.

    And TR will grant me a 6th unit for free once I have build 5. And that is playing to the WL strenght I believe.

    in reply to: Questions about Tech Tree Research Mechanics #140792


    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Ricminator wrote:</div>
    hat will happen if you start with basic seafaring? It is an opening strategy of mine to ensure that your starting units can cross water whenever they encounter that.

    That is simple. Seafaring will get you advanced seafaring and after that is advanced logistics. That part of the tech tree is static as well as your units and CP upgrades. Here nothing will change

    Hmm probably should have been clearer on the question. What I meant to ask is: How would it affect my chance to get TR, if I were to start with basic seafaring. Since JJ points out that you can get TR early if you start with War Effort.

    So I have a feeling I should start with WE-TR-BS or WE-BS-TR. And not BS-WE-??

    in reply to: Questions about Tech Tree Research Mechanics #140757



    what will happen if you start with basic seafaring? It is an opening strategy of mine to ensure that your starting units can cross water whenever they encounter that.

    Besides does knowing how to get training regimen early not “derandomize” the spellbook?
    Personally I think having some form of failsafe is better for the “randomisation”.
    It is still random if it shows up as starting skill or as direct researchable skill or whether it will show up shortly after that.


    I agree with GeorgiSR with the fact that ALL the WL techs are usefull in almost every part of the game. That makes the WL techwise the best balanced class, but highly susceptical to the random spellbook. Given the fact that WL’s early game is poor, it actually hinders him to be the best balanced class.

    Now compare that to the sorcerer which is techwise not balanced (city spells are too weak) and you get the issue that the sorcerers strong early game is strenghtened by his unbalanced techbook, because you can reliably tech what you need and bypass what you don’t need( no randomness in the spellbook).

    So personally I believe that if the failsafe cannot be added for some reason, that we probably should find a way to buff the sorcerers techs to weaken him overall( if all his techs are a viable option you put him more in line with the rest of the classes and add randomness to his spellbook).

    in reply to: Questions about Tech Tree Research Mechanics #138778


    Very interesting this. The one issue I have with the spellbook is the fact that those lowlevel spells refuse to show up( like Training Regimen).

    Which is a real curse if it happens.

    For the rest the randomness is nice, once you know how to work with it.

    in reply to: Balance? #138532


    Isn’t the issue with the sorcerer the fact that it only needs the cp-upgrades, class-units and the passive empire-upgrades? Once he has those he is competitive( altough I never play like that). If you remember ExNihil’s posts it is possible.

    Because he doesn’t have that many empire-upgrades he can reliably plan to get them. Compare that to WL which has way more necessary empire-upgrades, but has no way of getting them reliably.

    I would love to have training regimen asap and thorough bred horses later( since it is early game pretty expensive and there are early game few units who benefit from it), but the RSB( Random Spell-Book) may decide otherwise.

    It is part of the fun, if it happens but there is a balance difference between the two classes.

    I think if you should tweak/buff the sorcerer anything should be ok, as long as it is not in the empire-upgrades. Maybe a small nerf there is necessairy.

    So you ensure that the sorcerer should research some other upgrades too.

    in reply to: Merchant guild for item sales and gold/mana exchanging. #134722


    I agree with Bouh too regarding mana/gold exchanging. If it is ever considered it should be at a high ratio otherwise it disturbes the balance. And resource management is a fun annoyment sometimes.

    Plus the map size should play a role as well. On xl maps it is way easier to get a lot of excess resources while on small/ medium it is much more difficult. So 400 mana for 100 gold is nice on small, but on xl it should be 1000 mana for 100 gold to prevent unbalancing.

    Regarding the item sales:

    that would be nice if something would be possible whether it is a caravan or a shop or simply add the capital to the courier list so you can send excess items there to create a supply for new heroes hired in the future.

    in reply to: Dev Journal: Improving Race Variety & Starting Perks #134713



    I don’t think the marauder should be sacrificed either.

    With the AoW t3 Phalanx you can engage an orc shock trooper or dwarven first born and win in a regular mixed combat, but the t1 (especially the goblin ones) really lack the hp to take the extra damage from fighting relatively ineffective. Plus the phalanx has a shield which helps too.

    So if the skewer is moved to the barracks that can definately work too I think (with a small nerf maybe).

    in reply to: Dev Journal: Improving Race Variety & Starting Perks #134536


    Or you can leave the pikemen where they are now and unlock the butcher at the goblin t3 building. Afterall that is what you use him for: to kill t3 fliers/cavs/heroes better (at least that is what I am assuming).

    So early game the skewer comes from the war hall with evolve maybe and later when the t3 comes out you can build your butchers there.

    in reply to: Dev Journal: Improving Race Variety & Starting Perks #134442


    Well I would just like the rest add the butcher, but keep the skewer. We already have some form of asymetry when one player has a naga dwelling and the other has not (t2 pikes).

    So if some races have a unit more, I don’t think it is really disturbing for the overall balance.

    in reply to: Some suggestions #132398


    Regarding “true resurrect” it is even possible to steal a hero that way. It happened to me when the enemy resurrected a dead hero of mine and it changed ownership during battle.

    I wonder if it would work on your leader? What would happen then?

    in reply to: Does race matter? #132247


    Well terrain matters too,

    In my recent game I started as halfling sorcerer, but the rmg put a lot of volcanic mountains around my starting city. So when I acquired a draconian town I decided to use that one to build settlers to expand and I kind of gave up on using halflings.

    So I wouldn’t introduce to many extra penalties, but use buffs instead.

    There is a lot to discover anyway. I only recently discovered why it is usefull for a draconian flyer to have the “Wallclimbing ability” or how I can level-up all my units in two turns to championlevel 1.

    in reply to: imba wild magic #131703


    Well those (lesser) elementals areNOT without weaknesses, so is it really nessecary to nerf them? Except to delay their arrival a bit.

    Personally I believe that that is the only thing what should/could be done to balance it nicely. Because I know that having 10 or more of them around turn 30 is game-braking op, but around turn 60 it is not.

    The spirit elemental is the only one with multiple high resistances( it melts under blight like snow under the sun), all others only have one or two immunities. So make good use of that, I would say and they go down fast. Or counter their damage output.

    in reply to: Patch v1.4 Known Issues, Bugs & Problems #131693


    In a defensive siegebattle with “enchanted walls” and “double gravity” up, it is possible for “enchanted walls” to stun a shadow stalker. When I replay the siegebattle it happened twice.

    in reply to: Is Attacking Undead a GOOD or an EVIL Act? #131012


    One thing I never understood is: why there isn’t a link between the players alignment and the alignment of the independent dwellings/cities, when they choose to declare war or stay friendly. I have pure evil archon undeads who are friendly to me, so I could acquire the town by quest, when I’m pure good and some good dwarves declared war to me.

    For me it would be more logic if the archons would have declared war to me and the dwarves to stay friendly.

    in reply to: Warlord Toughness #130433


    Just acquired an archon dwelling, so I can try to recreate this.

    On a sidenote:

    Hopefully I find a fey dwelling as well, so I can finally try to befriend an elephant. Or have some luck and get an archdruid hero.

    in reply to: Warlord Toughness #130418


    Well I will keep an eye out for this, right now I’m playing with sorcerer and I have a warlord hero( have to level him up further), so I’ll put some phantasm warriors with him.

    And I will see if I can make my enemy rogue surrender to me for some shadow stalkers.

    Pity I didn’t know it earlier. I could have tested this in an earlier game, where a rogue had surrendered to my warlord leader, but unfortunately I don’t have a save left.

    in reply to: imba wild magic #130367


    When does “Summon lesser elemental” show up for everyone? I choose wild magic twice so far( one in the campaign, the other just now) and both times it was preresearched.

    Maybe that can be lowered? So you have to research it first. If you can start summoning them from the beginning, then it is no wonder everyone is using them.

    It is a tier 3 spell after all.

    in reply to: Warlord Toughness #130321


    Physical protection of the wraith king is 60% so toughness would add another 20% for 80%max. Maybe a bug? Description doesn’t exclude anything. Toughness is the only one who gives 20% to all units, the rest is 40% now.

    in reply to: Warlord Toughness #130293


    Undead probably? Have to look it up myself.

    in reply to: A few hero equipment choices #130282


    Regarding the warlord hero:

    How do you want to use him? As army leader he has some nice boosts to the entire army, as you know, like blood brothers which will save yourself the effort of building multiple “Strong willed helmets”, but it costs you 10 heropoints. The ranged army upgrade is nice too.

    Personally I always build out my heroes for an army support role with ranged damage as side target.

    For the spells: I would choose tireless(relentless army), unless your using orcs which I doubt given the line-up. Since Blood bath has less use for your supports, while tireless for them is better once the enemy is upclose.

    Regarding the shield/quiver: Normally I find the quivers having more use than the shields who most of the time give +1def or +2. So unless I find a real good shield, I stick with the quivers off late. Found a nice one yesterday.

    As helmet I prefer a seekerhelmet, pity it cost more now. Before the patch you could add a +1 in sight range to it to make a sightseekerhelmet.

    in reply to: Suggestion: Your Actions Make Races Like/Hate You #129977


    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Lennart Sas wrote:</div>
    We’re actually hard at work designing a system that makes race relations matter, as well as giving more non-combat options of interaction with the world. There will also be better trade-offs when conquering a city: Absorb vs Migrate, perhaps you might be better off not attacking certain cities at all!. This would be a dynamic system, not the purely alignment based system from the previous games.

    This is still mostly a paper design, but as things solidify we’ll update!<br><br>
    Feel free to share any ideas of course

    I like it! Right now, for us evil guys it the easiest – absorb or migrate depends on which one takes less turns, and for the good guys, AI is still almost always Pure Good, so they got no absorb times to speak of. Make us want to migrate/raze based on whichever race it is, like in the first games!

    Ehh I’m always pure good( the fastest empire quest I always have) but absorbing a town always takes multiple turns, mostly 7 or more(even a small one), so being good doesn’t speed things up. (It doesn’t even give good points). Razing/Migrating is always faster.

    But the idea discussed here is a good one.

    in reply to: Warlord questions #129956


    To answer the op questions:

    Yes you should mix in storm sisters here and there. When defending towns 2 will do for each town you have + cav archers + berserkers. Your enemy will have troubles stealing your towns then. In the open field you can do the same, altough you lose some speed.

    If you have the dlc:
    A different approach can be using a sorcerer/theocrat hero ( or any other hero as long as he as a sorcerer/theocrat staff) with true sight as hero upgrade and cav archers build in a town with focus chamber( which you can build in a town with a vault of knowledge in its domain).

    Since the vault of knowledge is rare, it won’t be possible to do this always from the start, but if it is possible…

    Monster hunters are primarely used for scouting/ killing enemy scouts, because they can swim, so you don’t loose movement when crossing water. Dwarves are the best, because they have mountainering as well.

    Phalanxes are also useful when assaulting a city. True you don’t want to many of them, but once the enemy sallies out they are very usefull to protect the rear of your cav archers or to take care of enemy fliers/cav.

    Again if you have the dlc you can build phalanxes with +2 spirit damage which will help agains shadow stalkers( and for being t3 they have the hp to hold out for a while, without dying in 1 turn).

    Overall your doing fine, the rogue is a bit the hard counter for the warlord, because the warlord focusses on physical damage and the shadow stalkers are protected against that.

    Solution for (massed)shadow stalkers:

    have human, dwarven, draconian or elven supports ready, the rest have a damage type shadow stalker is immune for.

    combat spells( like fireball)

    deal with the rogue asap, all other classes can be taken care off later with the warlord units you have. Altough the dreadnought is the biggest tread to you after the rogue.

    depending on the visibility you have, you can put all your heroes in one army to intercept the shadow stalker army. But if he comes with more armies…, so it is a bit tricky advise here.

    The research path to follow depends a bit on how fast I can research. For the warlord you need “thorough bred mounts”, “training regiment” and the other empire upgrades as much as you need your units. And with the new disjunct system you need casting points too.

    So I can’t give a advise what will always work, you kind of need everything with a focus on most units and empire upgrades early and most casting points and most combat spells later. Manticores I tend to research them later in game, but like I said, it depends on the circumstances.

    I hope that will help and enjoy the warlord.


    <div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Fenraellis wrote:</div>
    Well, I would ‘argue’ that outside of actual combat, the average soldier that’s marching doesn’t have as much time for dedicated training as a soldier that’s stationed at a training facility. What little training they do when they set camp is basically them maintaining their skills from getting rusty, but they will still generally earn experience much faster than a soldier that’s garrisoned simply from seeing combat, even if it’s only once every three turns.

    Ok, good point.

    Perhaps the two proposals – XP globally for all per turn and XP only if garrisoned and/or buildings exist in the city to expedite training – are not mutually incompatible though. In fact, I would think it’d be best if garrison building provides something like 2 XP per day, whereas normal daily XP gain would be 1 XP per day.

    As an aside, I think this would really help the AI be more competitive as well. Just now I ended up defending a city v. 3 stacks of mostly gold Succubi and Stalkers, and it was surprisingly hard – largely because of the gold medal stats/abilities (I am not sure how the AI ended up with so many gold medal units without being Warlord, but that’s a different story).

    Well the enemy AI is already competitive enough in keeping his units alive. I met more than enough gold level and even champion level units so he doesn’t need more help( and no it wasNOT a warlord). But the roaming units/defenders will benefit from this.

    So implementing daily xp is great in whatever form, but I don’t think the enemy AI needs to gain more xp out of it than we do.

    in reply to: Patch v1.4 Known Issues, Bugs & Problems #129613


    Minor issue:

    The description of elementals in the Tome Of Wonders is a bit incomplete. The list of immunities is missing, so if anyone is wondering why stun, daze etc. isn’t working there is no way he can find out why.

    On berserk you can’t use it on a shadow stalker or succubi, it will give you an explanation why.

    in reply to: Patch v1.4 Known Issues, Bugs & Problems #129535



    I can provide a save, because you can berserk an blight elemental as well. Given the fact that charm and seduce etc doesn’t work, it is a bit odd that that one is possible.

    in reply to: imba wild magic #129322


    Yes the “Summon Lesser Elemental” is a great spell, but please don’t put it in mastery.
    Like freese2112 said: it is still 120cp for each elemental. That is huge enough for not knowing what you will get.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 255 total)