I'd Pay $10 for DLC if..

I would pay 10 bucks for more factions, more races, stronger differences, unique traits, unique recruitable mounts (skath pen - gives a skath mount every 10 seasons?), unique recruitables, items, crafting, techs, etc. Hell, I'd pay 40 bucks for all of it.

Line of Sight in tactical combat? No..

I don't understand what do you mean with Line of Sight...that is for the strategic map, but for the tactical?

For Tactical combat, I would pay for the type of tiles giving bonus/penalties (forest, hills, swamps,...).

And for Ships: fishboats, warboats, and why not, magic boats. Naval techs. 

And for a new game mode with The MasterQuest. The Wildlands expand over time, spamming monsters, so you have to ally with the AI to stop it before you can solve the master quest.

 

Line of Sight in tactical combat would be like not being able to shoot through those marble columns. 

I would not pay $10 for Line of Sight, I would hope it would've been included in the base game, and as such isn't worth extra money.

I thought I saw it mentioned that LOS was being considered for future releases

I don't find that Line of sight should not allow a shot. I'd rather to have an accuracy penalty (-20 or something like that) as it is more difficult to shoot through obstacles.

The penalty should stack for each obstacle (trees, other units, more columns or whatever) between the target. If the archer fails, might shot the wrong unit.

So the risks of shooting or not is yours, but you can still shoot it you want to try...

Include that system in the game, or not. But I would not pay for it.

Multiplayer!

Boats an dynasty returned in a way that works.

Additional content, especially magic items, so I don't keep on getting the same things over and over in a single game.

Better tactical combat. As it is, it's too close to the way MoM had it, and it was very primitive. The concept of initiative is great, now flesh out the rest of the tactical combat.

variable magic, dynasties, realm big boys spells, war of mages, additional planes ans subterran areas, city item caches, shield spells for cities, sieges forcities, tacticals with walls, swamps, LOS modifiers etc, sea vehicles, monsters and race,

 

in game inventing spells with combinations of shards.

more realm effects with multicolored /shards required)spells,

shards used for casting spells which dicharges them for a while,

better and more variable summons for eachmagic school,

item &scroll crafting (special locations and quest or recipe items...)

 

 

need more?

Id pay a lot for it!

Map DLC will sell lousy, and willl discourage them to make game better.

Hotseat and ev. MP-

 

 

I really hope you're wrong.

Stardock tests the waters here, to see how well DLC is received. But the results will be skewed cuz a significant chunk of these initial sales will be a result of customer goodwill garnered through the narrative of Stardock taking a financial hit in order to 'make-up' for a previous blunder. Course i think SD will take this in mind and base future from DLC sales from new accounts, but still i think whatever happens with DLC, this first run will be skewed. 

DLC worries me. It can easily be seen as taking content from core games. That narrative is heavy and persistent. Might hurt a franchise who dabbles in it overfar. Selling us in parts and pieces of what we might think should come with our regular purchases. A slippery slope this is. i think DLC will only have a prolonged future if it is used to serve previously under-served niches. Put the less than mainstream content in DLC. Use it to sell the things your core base might not be wholly interested in. But which the fanatics will adore. Keep the game fat, sell some sugar and spice along the way.

DLC = content

Expansions = code

If it requires c++ then it's an expansion.

 

i'm not much concerned about Stardock going "evil" with DLC. Time will tell it. Past doesn't support it. Will see. Though i think DLC is dated unless it morphs.

DLC is ok as long as it's either clearly a value or clearly a ripoff.

It's the stuff in the middle that drives folks insane.

 

as long as i don't come here and find 12 DLC packs, each one adding ONE faction (that i could make myself) and ONE map...

 

Look, when using DLC, i have no objection to DLC as a monetization model.  However, the idea itself is to sell a 3 chapter book then sell each chapter thereafter separate and im tired of having to buy each sold separately when it comes to software.  The minimization of "what i get" makes paying for it just seem dumb.

 

Sims 3 anyone?

 

However i would like to see DLC packs.  Perhaps a pack of maps, a pack of new factions, spells and items would make me happy.  DLC has a place, just like expansions and one can not replace the other because they both offer things the other can't.  I can live with it, IF THE DLC is something i can look at myself in the mirror and honestly say "I would not be ashamed for buying this" - i felt terrible for months after buying extra civ's in civ5.

Personally, I like DLC. As a gamer that is.

I like DLC that are things that wouldn't normally come with the game. I get mad if they feel like things they held back on.

DLC should be things that **not** everyone would want. If they are things that everyone would want, then they should be put into the base game or a sequel.

I am A-OK with DLC as content.  But please, fire whoever wrote the scenario that came with the game.  Anyone in my writing class in college could have written something better, if only because Joe Haldeman would have failed them if they had allowed 1/10 of the cliches in their final draft.

Which part don't you like? The writing or the design of the scenario? The writing was Dave Stern who helped me write Destiny's Embers and has written several sci-fi and fantasy books (including a Star Trek book).  The designer was Jon Shafer, who designed Civilization V.

I'm not pointing that out to try to invalidate your opinion - you're entitled to it.  But I'm just trying to say that the people involved were highly qualified and worked pretty hard on it.

The next scenario probably won't come out until LH and that's going to be designed and written by Kael and I.  Mainly because between the two of us, we can write and code at the same time.

A map pack is a fine DLC, the only problem is that it doesn't add content to the usual game type (random map) people play. Unless, of course, stamps have been included, I have not been following the discussion on the DLC. I have yet to play a pre constructed map (time issues) but I would still consider grabbing the map pack when I've got some money free in my team wallet (convenience).

It seems some people what too much too soon. I'm not sure how much production power you have over in the FE team but there must be a limit to how much you can work on simultaneously. I just want to play with this AI update Frogboy mentioned not too long ago

stamps have been included

What is LH?

I love DLC because I'll not play a game for months, download all the new DLC and its like having a new game. I\

 

As for LOS I want to be able use use the terrain to my tactical advantage. I aslo want to be able to build a shild wall in front of weak troops.

 

My guess is LEGENDARY HEROES although I hope I'm wrong.

 

As to the original question, I'm not sure.  Certainly not until I get the DLC (extra scenario/campaign chapters) which were promised for Destiny's Embers.  I bought the book for the extra game content and still have not seen it.  Have I missed something?