Article View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
Article #716682Fallen Enchantress revisited
From: Peter Huebner
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 07:56
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 07:56
70 lines
4806 bytes
4806 bytes
I posted here about Fallen Enchantress by Stardock a while back, when I was only just getting into the game. By now I have close to 150 hours of gameplay under my belt and I think I have a slightly better idea what game features I am talking about. The basic premises are mostly 4x bog standard ... resources, building structures on them, goodie huts, heroes as well as troups make for a nice rpg element. Sadly, the game looks dull and drab, and I am talking about brightness and colour here. From a couple of metres back off the monitor it's all ochres and blacks, for the most part, and I struggle to see anything unless I halve that distance. Ok, appearance, minor quibble really. The thing is: they keep twiddling with it. Some is good - bug fixes like the map generator now puts gold resources on the map, wild game, fruit trees, bees ... but also they keep changing the mechanics, and I feel not always for the better. Someone asked me initially about the overpowered hero stacks. At that point (just as I was getting started on the game) you could still build viable hero stacks, but I found they did not do enough damage to take down the really nasty monster armies like dragons. You had to mix them up with troups. The second to last time I played, they had not only nerfed the one useful enchantment spell so it could only be cast ONCE per faction, they had also introduced a bug so if you cancelled it you could not cast it again. From the description, the spell should not stack, but be possible to cast on each separate army at least. The last time I played I found that one of my armies, about half troups and half heros was not advancing in levels at all. So now they have introduced a bug, or a nerf, that maybe divvies up xp or otherwise slows hero advancement to the point where you still have a level 6 main hero by the time you've settled half the map, researched 80% + of the tech tree and you're barely able to cast the first fireball that has about as much clout as a handful of wet snow. The update before these two introduced a population requirement with building the settler-units; since the settlers are also the units that build resource harvesting outposts that almost slowed the game to a standstill, because you simply could not generate enough of them to get your empire started ... they have reversed that approach, but still .. Was that a stampede by a committee? Way, way, way too much fiddling with the gameplay mechanics yet. I don't like to have my game play differently every time I want to fire it up, not when the 'rebalancing' is as drastic as this. What's more, I have encountered a passel of bugs in the special high class enemy areas, the 'wildlands'. Rivers that aren't rivers for purposes of building improvements, cities that are supposed to be conquered but don't show as taken when they're taken, invisible monster lairs that can't be found even in a square-by-square search, a supposed settlement spot that doesn't show up at all etc etc. That sort of thing makes a strategy game excruciatingly frustrating when you're trying a new strategy and you're defeated by bugs and lousy design or beta testing after you've gone thorugh several hours of building up an empire that can actually tackle these areas. Because shit just doesn't work as they said it would. So all that is why I am back to playing Civ 4 and 5 at the moment for my strategy fix. Enchantress is overall a very disappointing game considering it's from the house of the makers of GalCiv. The potential is there, the engine is nice, I just wish they'd iron out the bugs before they keep messing with the gameplay -- and keep the fiddling severity down, puhleeze. Not to mention *test before you auto-patch my client*. -P.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<MPG.2ba703daad7976549896fb@news.individual.net>Path:
mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!yu2no8681414wib.0!news-out.google.com!g1ni56882wig.0!nntp.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mailShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Received: by 10.180.98.102 with SMTP id eh6mr1063998wib.7.1362902190252; Sat, 09 Mar 2013 23:56:30 -0800 (PST) Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!yu2no8681414wib.0!news-out.google.com!g1ni56882wig.0!nntp.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Peter Huebner <no.one@this.address> Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic Subject: Fallen Enchantress revisited Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 20:56:29 +1300 Lines: 70 Message-ID: <MPG.2ba703daad7976549896fb@news.individual.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: individual.net JCVhhdIcLVlFPaRGLDEmiwgLIgVQn6MEcfM4ysaMvwo8BHDwT4VHkJBNIClKC1lGHB Cancel-Lock: sha1:0pgYm5IX5nI0lAPORnIihR+whNY= User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4 Bytes: 4818 X-Original-Bytes: 4763 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit