Give me an example? What is the difference? What rewards are meaningful. Aren't all achievement same in the end?
As Lord Irontoe has said there are completely different types of achievements. The game already has an achievement system in the arena, however the arena does not provide a unique piece of equipment.A meaningful reward would be something I can use in-game, like some extra skill points or focus points, or a special piece of gear. Steam achievements are just cosmetic badges that exist outside of the game so they don't mean anything to me.
Then my idea would work as it would slow down that spread I do not disagree that troop training should be slowed down overall, however by having more specialised training, they could lower down troop experience gain. It would also get players to have more varied companions to help with training the troops.No im talking about that they are putting general troop training all over the skill tree so it doesnt matter what youre specializing in you still get substantial buffs in troop training of which is allready way to easy to do
I mean it was so easy before just to get your troops up to t5 in 5-6 looter battles. Sure you have now slowed down the higher tiers a little but then you choose to spread passive soldier training xp boosts all over the skill board ? Whos in charge of these decisions because i want to have an talk with that person if him or her are feeling alright atm....
I know its a process to find the best middle ground for balance but i seen it so often now that you fix something good then you have another part you put in that goes totally the other way that makes no sense. Its like sitting with an good cop and bad slapping you around If there was some in leadership perk and maybe one in pole arm or one in handed sword (excl bandits that is alright in rogue) i would be alright, but its all over the place and its already still easy to level them up
From my understanding, Dr-Shinobi is asking for more specific training from whomever is leader of them. Passive experience boosts should be set for each skill, archery has one that boosts experience for archers etc. But that is my reading of what they wrote I may be wrong.What, exactly, are you arguing for? To put all the passive training perks into one place or to get rid of them altogether?
The hope for me is that they've been working on the bigger content over the past 8 months and it will start to be implemented into the game in more rapid patches the closer we get towards final release.
If this isn't the case, they really don't have time to work on worthwhile content if they want to match their original 1 year EA access schedule. There's still so much needed to be done, it's just not possible if they don't have content built up already.
One thing I keep pushing Callum to do is, to announce the EA will be extended by a minimum of six months. Most players would accept this, my major worry is that they will make big updates as the near the time and we will be getting nothing but more and more game breaking bugs. If you look at the updates up till now, every one of them has been filled with bugs.Yeah we can hope so, but given TW history I'm not holding my breath. If I were a betting man I'd bet against this being out of ea in a year. But if it is no one will be happier than me.
This forum is for discussions about the game, for you to state that women did not fight during the middle ages, must therefore be in reference to the amount of women in the game. As to my Joan of Arc comment, I merely noted that she is the most famous of women generals during this period. I then went on to mention several other women that actually did fight.What does this have to do with the conversation? I never proposed this, I was referring to established cultural traditions. First you cited two irrelevant points in your Joan Of Arc post, then tried to back track, this type of argument is not gonna work on me buddy. Don't plan on being a lawyer anytime soon.
This statement is false, it is real life that is a myth and does not existThe internet is just an myth..it doesnt exist
Can I just confirm that you do realise that Calradia is a fictional world? As your comments seem to state that you have not realised this yet.Women in Islam have been in the harem for time immemorial, there are extreme exceptions in nobility, these are incredibly rare. The idea that this was ever practiced consistently in any of these cultures is absurd. "Cultural Marxism?" Perhaps it is? It's whatever you want to call something emotive that is missing rational objectivity or truth.
Khawlah bint al-Azwar.Noble women were highly important in court and in the military planning at times, but the one thing they never did was fight in the battles. This is true in the Occident medieval period. Women never even participated in any form in Islamic politics or armies period.
You could say that of a lot of generals who went on to be famous. A figurehead leader can be as much an inspiration as a leader who actually fights, sometimes more so. I suppose that Caterina Sforza done nothing military wise either?Jesus Christ, for the love of God read a history book, Joan of Arc never fought a moment in active combat against anyone. This is known. Who is teaching you this? Joan of Arc was an inspiring leader of a movement, she was not an actual combatant. She never even swung her sword around, she always carried her banner. She was a general who lead an army, she outlined military tactics but stayed in the rear during battle. Women were not warriors save in exceedingly rare instances; get off Wikipedia and read source material. Anyone who claims otherwise is pushing an agenda, not history. Which is what many of you are doing like the sheep finder poster in this thread.
In answer to your question on women in the middle ages fighting, the answer is yes they did. There are a lot of examples of this including the most famous one Joan of Arc.Cleaned my posts up in here so I don't get an infraction, God these kids get on my nerves, made me feel sheepish.
well i was talking about walking and since a horses have longer walking distance steps this sounds to me like the data is incorrect thinking that horses have stam like beasts...but what do i know...im no expert in horses ^^
An infantry man would normally march approximately 20 miles per day. This allows them to sustain doing that every day. You have to take into account wearing full armour, carrying weapons and any other kit. The poor horse has it harder as they are carrying the man, all of his equipment and a saddle as well.Walking or running it doesn't matter, given enough time humans can outpace almost all animals, it's an evolutionary trait since we used to hunt beasts by chasing them until they droped of exhaustion.
Horses can run faster than humans for a short amount of time until they get too tired for it while we can keep at a trot and eventually caught them (the native americans hunted all their horses to extinction before europeans brought them back for example)
Why don't we do that anymore? Just because we can doesn't mean it's easy or "fun", much easier on the legs to ride horses around and exchange them with fresh remounts when they get too tired like was done everywhere before cars, trains etc lol
Programmers also make terrible testers. Testing is an underrated role which requires quite a different mindset and skillset.
A lot of TW release issues seem to be build/package quality control problems rather than missed bugs - like the icons misalignment in 153 main branch, which wasn't present in 153 beta.
Testers are only ever 50% effective as they play on a sandbox version of the game. Once the game goes live is when the real work begins. Welcome all to your job as live and beta testers for TaleWorldWell im still waiting for a call from Callum. Offered him my 12 hour service if they offered me a room to stay and food during the process with no salary.
Now the second question is if Rainbow six siege devs had even played this game ?! as they ruined one of my fav franchises with cod bs. Rip Tom Clancy