Even though a game like Wesnoth is a bit different (because it is scenario and tactical combat oriented) it really adds to the experience to play through an entire scenario (especially on the Hardest difficulty) while not taking taking any *unbearable - restart scenario* losses, and making more crucial level ups than you lose afterwards.  It is really traumatic when you get most of the way through a level and then the AI takes out a loss condition hero or a highly levelled up unit that you have spent multiple scenarios building up.  I could not imagine playing on the Hardest difficulty and getting through the entire Heir to the Throne campaign without restarting any scenario.  It is a challenge just manuevering and levelling up your forces and not having too high losses of crucial or "close to levelling" units (the AI especially targets units that are about to level up - as levelling up restores all health).  But when you've finished a level, you have a replay that you and other people can watch.

It is quite an achievement to even play your way through a campaign like Heir to the Throne and not reload at all in any progressing scenario attempt (restarting scenarios from the start are allowed).  Basically, unless you are a super pro and have super luck, I don't think you can complete a campaign on Hardest difficulty without restarting some levels one (or more, or many) times.  Completing a later level without significant losses in Hardest difficulty is certainly a feat in itself.

Best regards,
Steven.

Is it really traumatic, or simply unrecoverable ? It's been a long time since I played Wesnoth, but my impression was that the game didn't give you much breathing room. I couldn't afford many losses, it would just get harder and harder in later scenarios. This is what some people have to say about reloading in Wesnoth:

Moral of the story: there are players, including myself, who feel annoyed by caring about high-level units very much. For them retrying a battle until it survives can be very annoying, especially in a game as random as Wesnoth. I enjoyed replaying battles in Heroes of Might and Magic, because randomness is a pretty small factor there (occasional stroke of Luck or Morale), and it's helped by the law of big numbers. I used Save/Load in Heroes 1) because I enjoyed trying other approaches, tactical battles were interesting 2) Penalty for losing a battle is often lost game. Especially in hero/hero battles - one side gets a lot of experience and perhaps artifacts, the other gets nothing at all.

It seems the arguement for Save/continue games over save load games is purely for players who play to the hard edge of strategy where whatever is most effective must be used, including meta game options like reloading from save points, exploiting loopholes and unbalanced options, and taking advantage of AI failings.

For some players this is natural, but for others, especially those who care more about the flavour and character of the game, meta game options and the same tactics every time because they are the most effective is not. I've played both at times.

To blithely say:

I think city building sets Elemental apart, and right now seems it's biggest strength.  At the moment it isn't magic, it's not tactical combat, it's not diplomacy, and it's not adventuring.  We all hope to see growth in those areas but right now city building is the coolest feature of Elemental.  I think it was simplified and downplayed a little too much when they went for global resources.  I hope that gets reversed--it takes something away from the game.

As a suggestion: restoring life (or curruption) to the land as your influence (and cities) grow I think is an interesting game mechanic, and I'd like to see that  somehow play a bigger role in the game, maybe even a victory condition to have all or 90% of the land restored to life (or charred).  It would make victory a team effort among your allies and promote using diplomacy in single player and teamwork in multiplayer.  Influence could grow without anybody having to necessarily be defeated in battle with a mechanic similar to culture in Sins of a Solar Empire.

I say build the game upon its current stregths and uniqueness rather than bringing tactical combat up to the level of HoMM or adventuring up to the level of Morrowind, etc.  Elemental is an empire builder at it's core, where one must adapt to a land of scarce resources.

Couldn't disagree more regarding "pointless".  Just because one could save/load after sov death does not mean it would always occur.  Saying it's "pointless" is assuming your value is the only valid one.  I doubt I'm the only one who would continue a true succession game after Sov death, and even enjoy that.

It's your personal preference, not fact.

If you want to argue save-reload makes true succession less useful because it allows succession to be avoided, that's fine.  If you want to argue that save/continue would make true succession more viable, that's fine to.  But the above 'pointless' argument Austinvn made and you apparently support isn't fine.

True succession and the save/continue vs save/load argument are not inextricably linked as you and Austinvn claim.

Why not make a "Hardcore Mode" where you cannot save until at particular location, or at certain time period. I forgot what it was called, but it was in the Fallout: Tactics. In the game set up, you can check the box for "Hardcore", and your characters gain additional experience when you use this game mode. You cannot save the game during combat and can only save at the base.

This should be an option, because as we all know, it's hard to resist temptation. When you purposefully lock out the save option, and also not have inheritance as an option to keep going, then you'll really pay attention playing the game, and also less likely to fall to the save/reload temptation. I found any game to much more enjoyable when you don't have the luxury to simply reload at any time when things don't go your way. The danger makes the game that much more exciting because more stakes are in play. If you know you have a safety net then you will not play the game up to your own full potential. On the other hand, there are some frustrating and aggravating games that make you restart from the beginning, platform jumping games come to mind. We should try to avoid the tediousness of those.

Well, a loss condition hero dying ends the scenario in a loss, so you need to restart.  But if a high level unit dies, you really need to restart anyway.  You need to build up a good retinue of high level units to be able to survive later scenarios, so you need to do more than simply finish the earlier scenarios.

Something you might want to try is shown here.  Basically having three rolls for every attack (a RNG Smoothing value of 3), and a unit does either 0, 1/3, 2/3 or standard (3/3) damage, moderates the bad luck somewhat, but you still need to make sure that a unit can't be ganged up by 3 or more enemy units in one turn.  And RNG Smoothing of 3 means - if you are in high defense terrain and get hit, it's likely to be a minor hit, rather than a full damage hit.  And if you are attacking a unit that is on high defense terrain, you are likely to do at least some damage rather than all or nothing.  Try out wesnoth-xp with the above link, I only play using it now - regular Wesnoth games have far too much luck - and the effect of bad luck is *much* bigger than the effect of good luck.  (Bad luck can lose a scenario or high level unit, forcing a restart - good luck might mean you survive a little bit longer without as much pressure.)

You do need to level up (and keep alive) your units, and latter levels rely on having high level units to be able to complete them.  Try wesnoth-xp with 3 RNG smoothing and 0% Damage split ratio.  It is a much superior game in my opinion.

Try wesnoth-xp with the settings I mentioned - I think you might find the game a lot more fun - but still challenging.

Me too, reloading battles in HOMM is quite a different story.  If you are interested in HOMM2 with some extra features, try fheroes2.   I have contributed to that a reasonable amount, and some of the new options are quite neat (plus you can have more of the map on screen when you use a higher resolution).

Best regards,
Steven.

Yes, you don't play those games unless you are up for a real challenge, *and* you are in a reasonably good mood (not a good game for playing all day).  I'll probably play Elemental more as it develops, maybe even some MP co-op games.

Best regards,
Steven. 

Really? I'd be interested to know why you think that. Personally I think city building is the weakest part of the game. It is terribly simple and shallow. There's nothing interesting about it for me at all - just about every 4x game I can think of has more sophisticated city building. It seems to me the developers must have started with some good ideas but dumbed it down heavily over time - perhaps during the beta phase.

I hope to see a lot more work done in this area in the next few months - more economic, social and infrastructural game mechanics added to make city building interesting.

Hey, city BUILDING is awesome imho! Now, city management and specialization are seriously lacking, but the building thing? I'm ok with it (playing with words here, do not get mad at me!)

Stardock should just remake MOM with better graphics.

Forget trying to invent the wheel.

Im certain a remake of MOM with better graphics would be hugely succesful.

Sure you could even add things to it, but change for the sake or being different is a losers game and why we are still waiting for 16 years for anything as good.

HGL tried to be different for the sake of it. Stat feed was probably the biggest nail in the coffin for that game, but of course they had to be "different from diablo".

Blizzard knew what they were doing when they made SC2. Same game, better graphics.

I'm completely with Nick on this one. There is no conflict between sovereign succession and save/load. Not more than between, say, Tactical battles (that you can lose) and save load. Personally, I would find the inheritance as a part of the story and not necessarily bad - especially if you have prepared for it!