You're being ignorant. Games are not art pieces for the sole enjoyment of the creators. They are a business for which the livelihood of dozens, hundreds, or thousands of people depend on to do well. Data mining forums for common complaints and analyzing why those complaints exists allow companies to update products to be more enjoyable to a wider audience as well as design better games in the future.

If a person picked up a game, played it for a limited time, and found it so boring that they were emotionally driven to go to the company's website and complain about it then obviously their opinion is worth while to listen to. All the praise in the world from fans won't help a developer make their next game better.  

It is obvious that Fallen Enchantress is very much a Civilization 4 clone. Not that such is necessarily bad if done well and cloning mechanics done in a very polished way can produce a game far superior to the original. It was my huge enjoyment of both Civ 4 and Fall from Heaven 2 which got me to pick up Fallen Enchantress. As a stand alone game, it is okay, but I feel that FfH2 captured more of my time and enjoyment. 

You're just being a jerk. Your argument is shaky. And something tells me you are quite ignorant of the game business, as you throw the ignorance label out at others.

"People don't know what they want until you show it to them." -Steve Jobs

Customers are often idiots, and do not know what they want - until they see it in front of them. Don't overestimate the value of feedback. Microsoft is going to make truckloads of money on the XboxOne by ignoring a significant amount of customer feedback.

And they'd make truckloads more if they *didn't* ignore a significant amount of potential customers.  This statement completely goes against the point you're trying to make. 

And it makes me cringe when I hear somebody saying "companies are more successful when they ignore their loyal customers/consumers."  Like it or not, we're all consumers.  Don't you want companies you buy products from to treat you with an ounce of respect, listen to their consumer base, and give you something you actually do want?  Do you know comments like the one you made sound like somebody suffering from self-defeating personality disorder?  Because it's that exact anti-consumer mentality that helped get us to the pitiful state of affairs we have in business tactics today.

I think taming animals right from start is pretty OP. So I play without that. Also play with the premade leaders. i have been playing as Gilden and I find that they have a strong armies. i make leader a warrior usually get a Mage hero of another race to not get the casting cost debuff Gilden has. For above post I would suggest play without taming animals.

better yet for DEVS why not remove XP gain from taming animals? I mean you getting a new unit plus Xp? Seems a bit much.

Or they play the game expoitively and then complain.

I would agree that Stardock's AI isn't always as amazing as Brad thinks it is, and that it would be good of them to have a team of people working on AI instead of just one person, because as good as that one person may be at a game or at gaming in general it's just not enough to counter all players.

Do not get taming

Do not use save/load

Play with premade characters

If it's not enough, then create difficulties by yourself:

no mage heroes

no heavy armor

e.t.c.

last game i was facerolled by the kraxis on expert/expert.
I think for me it's good difficulty now. 

Until that cave bear resists Tame and wrecks your entire army. Might as well start over at that point.

Amen to what webusver said!

Not a whole lot of constructive criticism in this thread.  Mostly pretty vague.  I do agree that Tame is overpowered as is.  Tame needs to be nerfed.  And Wealthy (again).

Another thing that would make the game harder is putting a cap on how many Pioneers each AI player can have at any given time.  Make the cap 4 or 5.  In my last game that I played on Insane (started on 1.1), late game, every AI city was surrounded by armies of Pioneers.  I thought that was supposed to be fixed already.  The AI players have plenty of money, so I can't think they're doing it to save on wages.  I was able to level up several champions just killing Pioneers.  They even send them into my territory en masse, like "Here, have some free XP."  Maybe if the AI players built more combat units, they'd have a better chance.

Reasons Tame is overpowered:
1. You can get bears, who Maul, and Maul is overpowered, especially when you have Lucky and Commander bonuses.
2. You get wageless units.  Lots of them.  For not much mana cost.
3. Acquiring many of these wageless units inflates your power level significantly, which makes other factions that could probably trounce you not want to attack you.  Even though I was playing on Insane, nobody declared war on me until I started declaring war on people.
4. You still get the XP for the win.  I honestly don't disagree with this, but with all the other stuff, it is a contributor to Tame's power. 

How can Tame be fixed? (several options, but don't implement all of them):
1. Increase the mana cost and add a casting time of 1.  Adding the casting time prevents getting extremely powerful creatures (like the Hoarder Spider) early on.
2. It wouldn't make sense to pay bears and spiders, but maybe put a mana maintenance on the creatures you tame.
3. I think this has been partially fixed already in 1.2, with the change to how power levels are determined.  I haven't started a new game on 1.2 yet to find out.
4. Reduced XP for taming beasts.  Or at least don't give XP to the tamed beast.
5. Change it so it can only be cast once per combat.  Even with a 10 turn cooldown, I can tame all the beasts in any army.  It's a boring process, but I can do it.

Then there would be no point in playing the game. TC is where most of the fun is in this game at least to me.

I think this is well said.

I think the game tends to steamroll too easily one way or the other.

I can take out an enemy's primary army and then take over 2-3 villages before you can blink. Or i can lose my entire main army to a lucky monster hoard and find myself extremely far behind.

There isn't a lot of inbetween.

I think the big problem is that the AI mobs no longer attack cities, at least not with regularity, they do occasionally attack resources.

They used to wander in from all over the map and take out my cities in FE. What's one feature the AI does but human don't (it's why we win)? Keep garrisons in the cities. I know in one FE game 3 demons sacked my 3rd city and I couldn't get anyone back there in time to help. The AI meanwhile garrisons troops that could handle that situation.

Make AI mobs a lot more aggressive to settlements again, and make the cooldown on Call of the Titans actually work. I dealt with the epic quest in about 3 turns to get through the 2nd gate even though the point I had to keep going to was over a huge lake that would have required a significant detour, I just kept Calling over the lake. The only reason it took 3 turns was because of the combats and because you can't call onto a tile inside the red zones.

Human players against the AI don't keep garrisons and with a 10 turn cool down on Call actually working it would be harder to defend. Now, we would all just spend lots of time clearing the mobs instead of doing more settling, or settling near red zones or at choke points when we hadn't cleared the area behind yet.

That would at least slow us down a bit.