🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Thread View: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic
3 messages
3 total messages Started by Peter Huebner Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:55
Fallen Enchantress
#716557
Author: Peter Huebner
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:55
41 lines
2848 bytes

Is anybody else playing this new Stardock offering? 

I've explored into the world by starting, then deleting a few games so 
far, and played through once, ending with an enforced alliance victory.

My biggest gripe so far is that the documentation is terribly inadequate 
-the pdf manual is well nigh useless, and the 'civilopedia' is hardly 
better (because you can't search keywords and it's badly organized).

There is at least one hero trait that I've not found mention of anywhere 
in terms of what it does. There is one MAJOR quest that I have no idea 
how to complete with no explanation given.

Apart from that - not a single glitch/bug/crash so far that I've seen.
Some RPG elements in the way you develop your champions/heroes; but 
unfortunately you have to put up with being given 5 traits (randomly?) 
to choose from when one of the guys/gals levels up, and they're often 
not at all suited to the direction you want to develop that particular 
characer into. I'm going to have to test this some to find out if the 
choice of traits can be 'scummed'. Getting to choose betwen strength, 
swordsmanship, and 3 other similar traits is a pain in the arse if 
you're trying to promote a healer/lifemage for instance. By the same 
token, getting a hero that's got no magical ability at all leaves them 
somewhat useless on the battlefield.

Gameplay is more or less standard 4x fare, considering a fantasy/magic 
world. A worthy grandchild to MoM. Graphics are a bit dark and dull for 
my liking, not that good for ageing eyes. 

The tactical battles are _much_ better than MoM, and I am still coming 
to grips with how some of the attributes, skills, traits, resistances, 
etc. pan out. This may take some time. The predecessor to this game was 
slammed for bugs and crashes in the tactical phase, haven't seen 
anything like that here yet.

Overall I'd say this is one of the better strategy game releases I have 
seen for a good long time - considering that I'm a tbs & 4x fan.

-P.
Re: Fallen Enchantress
#716558
Author: David Lamb
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:15
42 lines
3071 bytes
On 19/11/2012 6:55 AM, Peter Huebner wrote:
> Is anybody else playing this new Stardock offering?

I've inherited it from having played their earlier Elemental: War of 
Magic game, which was an interesting idea with abysmal execution. 
Haven't played it yet -- been very busy with other things -- but home to 
try it out over Christmas. Your positive comments remove some of my 
trepidation.

> My biggest gripe so far is that the documentation is terribly inadequate
> -the pdf manual is well nigh useless, and the 'civilopedia' is hardly
> better (because you can't search keywords and it's badly organized).

Hmm. Is there a decent tutorial at this point? Don't think the beta had 
one however many months ago I looked at it.

> Apart from that - not a single glitch/bug/crash so far that I've seen.

Yay! as you note, that used to be a big problem. I needed lots of save 
files. I think there may have been a correlation with times I alt-tabbed 
out or left the game and had my screensaver kick in.

> The tactical battles are _much_ better than MoM,

That's really great, since it was apparently one of the things they 
indented to work very, very hard at achieving. Do you play the battles 
out or do you use auto-resolution? I seem to recall that back in the day 
one rarely dared to use auto because human tactics from a 
modestly-experienced player were so much better. OTOH if the AI is now 
very good at tactics, tactical battles might be too hard for a tactical 
novice like me.

It used to be that stacks of multiple champions ruled. Have they 
restricted it to one champion per stack now?

> Overall I'd say this is one of the better strategy game releases I have
> seen for a good long time - considering that I'm a tbs & 4x fan.

I'll try it out again, but probably not until too late to provide 
feedback to your post.

Are the forums still dominated by haters?
Re: Fallen Enchantress
#716559
Author: Peter Huebner
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 19:19
53 lines
3224 bytes
In article <k8difg$n6a$1@dont-email.me>, dalamb@cs.queensu.ca says...
> 
> On 19/11/2012 6:55 AM, Peter Huebner wrote:
> > Is anybody else playing this new Stardock offering?
> 
> I've inherited it from having played their earlier Elemental: War of 
> Magic game, which was an interesting idea with abysmal execution. 
> Haven't played it yet -- been very busy with other things -- but home to 
> try it out over Christmas. Your positive comments remove some of my 
> trepidation.
> 
> > My biggest gripe so far is that the documentation is terribly inadequate
> > -the pdf manual is well nigh useless, and the 'civilopedia' is hardly
> > better (because you can't search keywords and it's badly organized).
> 
> Hmm. Is there a decent tutorial at this point? Don't think the beta had 
> one however many months ago I looked at it.

There is a tutorial but they hardly need have bothered. It's only brief 
and only explains the very basic elements of how to play.


> 
> It used to be that stacks of multiple champions ruled. Have they 
> restricted it to one champion per stack now?
> 

There is no limitation. I ended up, in the one game I won, with a stack 
of 7 champions. Mostly that was because I was too busy building up my 
cities rather than creating troups. I will focus more on building troups 
in some future game(s).

> > Overall I'd say this is one of the better strategy game releases I 
have
> > seen for a good long time - considering that I'm a tbs & 4x fan.
> 
> I'll try it out again, but probably not until too late to provide 
> feedback to your post.
> 
> Are the forums still dominated by haters?

I've spent about 1/2 an hour on the forums last night, there's a very 
nice stickied noob guide that I looked into; it has a lot more info in 
it than what's been offered up by Stardock. I looked through a few 
threads but didn't see any detractors, never mind haters.

I need to spend a lot more time with this before I decide if it's a 
keeper or not. It certainly seems to be a slow moving game. In an easy 
mode large map with fast tech advancement I spent 13-14 hours (99 in-
game years) before victory. Was nowhere near the end of the tech tree. 
Comparable maybe to Civ IV or V on a huge map? 

-P.
Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads