Αποτελέσματα αναζήτησης

I am truly looking forward to this new DLC

Are you sure there was a demo ? I think he said he got an early access and he posts the usual link to the Steam page, but I don't remember him talking about a demo.

The coop/barn's limit is on sleeping spaces and trough space for feeding. Babies eat for free if the mother is alive, and I think they also share the mother's space. Though when they hit adult they start taking a "space" so to speak.

add me back

Zone limit for trolls is 1 (2 during a raid). If you can straddle 2 zones you can get 2 but if you move one will wander away and as soon as one of the 2 is 64 tiles away it will despawn.

Lox have a zone cap of 3 but you have to get them to follow you to your source of stones.

I hope everyone understands this story and doesn't waste their money on a ridiculous game. They are exploiting you and not giving you any healthy game. Your time is valuable. Don't waste it on this game.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από 𝕻𝖗𝖎𝖒𝖊:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από space:

game's very well optimized as is, what you mean

hmm idk if you're being sarcastic or not

i'm not, game has stellar optimization

Wishing for a profile award. ( Need points to upgrade a profile showcase )
Much thanks and love

oi

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Triple G:

Also You missed the point of my post completely. And the comparison You make is also off. But yes, same can be said for field battles. They might be fun if You do 20, but not if You do 280. Nonetheless it has nothing to do with amount of factions, as these would provide variety.

Shogun 2 didn't have any faction variety. You essentially have to fight the same factions over 65 settlements, with both siege and field battles needed to acquire all of them. WH3 has 24 races with completely different rosters, spreading across 554 settlements. That mean you only have to fight 24 odd settlements for each races.

Fighting over 65 settlement with one race didn't bored you in Shogun 2, but fighting over 24 settlements for each of 24 complete different race did you in in WH3? It appears that the variety is the issue to your end.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Triple G:

But ask Yourself how many siege battles were fought in the vietman war.

The Defense of Hanoi, campaign against De Lattre Line, Siege of Na San, Battle of Dien Bien Phu, Battle of Khe Sanh, Siege of Hue, Battle for Da Nang, Battle for Xuan Loc, etc... Literally most of the decisive battles during Vietnam wars have been siege battles, and most of the siege battles we fought under General Giap's command involved years of meticulous preparation, digging artillery nests, transporting supplies, manpowers and equipments, alongside eventual encroaching and total encirclement of French/US/South Vietnamese fortifications all across Vietnam. Unlike popular Western propaganda, we weren't hiding in the forest and just waging guerilla skirmishes for the entirety of Vietnam war. The occupiers will never leave until you pry off all their footing in your country.

Not sure why you brought up my country, but there is nothing in our history book support your point to water down or remove siege combat when it come to simulating asymmetric warfare, left alone simulating conventional total war in total war franchise. No sane military leaders, east or west, fiction or otherwise, would left their military logistic and economic hubs at the mercy of their enemies without appropriate fortification. And there is also no quick "1 turn" solution to take on well-defended position whatsoever, even with access to airplanes, tanks and artillery (yes we had airplanes, tanks and artillery during Vietnam War).

If you want to bring real life in this discusion, French alone have 40000 fortresses and castles since middle age. Do you ever heard the British b*tching about having fighting thousands of siege battles during 100 years war?

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Triple G:

Even in medieval times the sieges weren´t really fought - it was about the siege and to show off forces. Maybe to starve the city out and cut them off of supplies. But logic says that sieges don´t make sense, when You have planes, and bombs, and artillery - or in this game: dragons and whatnot, because they defeat the point of building a wall to begin with. Still it was about the garrisons in comparison to the lords on the field in the game. Obviously in a field battle You will have Your own lord and heroes - ad units. And not three T1 spearmen, two T1 archers, and 2-6 other crap units which need to fight the lvl 46 enemy lord, his two lvl 50 heroes, and the 17 three gold chevron high tier units, while the lord alone with all his skills and items would beat the garrison. It doesn´t matter if anybody has ass ladders or not, when the perfect vigor unbreakable guy with healing and 10k health, 97 defense, 30% ward safe, 40% missile resistance and 800 damage, who causes terror, shows up. You can click auto-resolve in that case - and You don´t question how they design the sieges. Because that´s a general problem in the game - which can´t be solved by changing the sieges alone. One would need to change the complete balance of the game, so the lords are just some other guy without some fantastic abilities, or items, or skills.

That's a lot of mumble jumble you got there. Dragons are end game t5 units that won't show up until turn 40, and neither you or the AIs start the game with level 46-50 lords/heroes with perfect vigor, unbreakable, 10k health, 97 defense, 30% ward safe, 40% missile resistance, causes terror and 800 damage. This game is not the first game in the franchise with end game siege ender weapons/units, both shogun 2 and med 2 have units that can trivialized siege battles too: the cannon and the trebuchet respectively.