Frogboy

The world isn't completely free of powerful monsters. Rather, the world is free of powerful monsters right outside your starting base.

[quote who="bilskis" reply="5" id="2655639"]Looks cleaner than in 2-nil. In that picture I'd like to have cobbled streets, wonder if that is doable. Would hide that road as well, but those will probably see sense soon enough. You really want us to try this 'broken and unplayable' thing don't you? [/quote] It's coming (cobbled streets). Cosmetics are something we'll be addressing later on. The way things look and are animated are going to get a lot of polishi

[quote who="Sushikawa" reply="4" id="2655636"]This has been bugging me for awhile...but why cant that Inn be incorporated into the town itself? [/quote] The Inn is supposed to go away entirely, it's a bug.

[quote who="tesb" reply="3" id="2655635"]are you going to fix the inorganic look problem in the future? i mean: 1) the regular ground cover between buildings 2) adjectancy 3) merging of buildings etc. otherwise it looks good, release the new beta already [/quote] 1. Yes. 2. I'm not sure what you mean. We do want to have buildings that if placed adjacent increase the adjacen

Each city costs more to found than the last in terms of gold already.

There will be a 2-A and a 2-B. Then Beta 3.

[quote]I will bow to your insider info but that answer doesn't actually resolve my worry. If the most powerful Book based spells remain Shard based, then how can I be assured that the map will allow for any Book choice to be at a best 50/50 chance of the dice?[/quote] EVERYTHING in Elemental is overpowered. You start out with a shard in your area but maybe no food. Or maybe you have food but no metal in your area. Or maybe you have metal but no horses. Or maybe you have a shar

[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="61" id="2654497"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 60Well so far I haven't seen anything that causes me concern for the quality of Civ V itself. I like a lot of the new directions they're taking with it. I don't think they are "dumbing it down" based on what I'm reading. I think having the main map being more tactical in nature is going to add a lot of depth to the game.I haven't seen anyone question/criticize its quality (production-wise I think yo

Armies != Stacks. I'm a big believer in Armies. As an old Panzer General hand, using the strategic board for tactical combat is fun - if the map is small. It's a lot less fun when you want to move some distances (for me). (Panzer General) On the other hand, I also don't like stacks because you end up with just endless glombs of units in giant piles. (CIV IV) I also don't like "army stacks" which would be if you just took all the units and added them up and h

[quote who="shayde0007" reply="13" id="2654942"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 11 Mr. Frog said in a recent journal that city building would be getting some big changes, and basically there will be a lot less stuff to build. I am hoping I misunderstood, but I really don't like that idea. There isn't less stuff to build. We are greatly reducing repetitive building (unlimited gardens, multiple workshops, multiple studies, etc.). In XML, we can, literally, define how many of a

[quote who="John_Hughes" reply="20" id="2654528"] "Shards don't grow on trees." Given this was said by Frogboy, it does sort of bring up the question: How do I pick my Shard based Magic Books, which is done pre-map generation, with any kind of consistent knowledge they will actually see any use at all? Why would I spend valuable creation points if uncertainty becomes a factor? [/quote] You wouldn't. You're rolling the dice. But o

[quote]Mr. Frog said in a recent journal that city building would be getting some big changes, and basically there will be a lot less stuff to build. I am hoping I misunderstood, but I really don't like that idea.[/quote] There isn't less stuff to build. We are greatly reducing repetitive building (unlimited gardens, multiple workshops, multiple studies, etc.). In XML, we can, literally, define how many of a given improvement you get per city level, per faction, etc. So we're

[quote who="AdmiralDan" reply="15" id="2654473"] Quoting Nathaniel Richter, reply 10Correct me if I am wrong but where not many fortunes made and much influence exerted(through loans) by Italian and Baltic merchant republics in the real world during the renaissance? Through this they where able to exert much larger influence than they would traditionally exert. The world that you described above seems too narrow without this possibility. It seems that the evident strategies wo

Well so far I haven't seen anything that causes me concern for the quality of Civ V itself. I like a lot of the new directions they're taking with it. I don't think they are "dumbing it down" based on what I'm reading. I think having the main map being more tactical in nature is going to add a lot of depth to the game.

I just thought the shard was cool.

I'm liking what I'm seeing. My main issue remains the use of Steamworks but that's a seperate issue. Seeing the cut scenes and such make me feel better about having Elemental take a very different direction as we could never have competed with that level of production value. Those cut scenes of theirs are amazing and the sheer polish of the game is just breathtaking. Far beyond what we are capable of doing on Elemental. Luckily, Elemental has evolved to being sufficiently diff

[quote who="Bill_Door" reply="8" id="2653353"] Quoting Slainangel52, reply 7I'm seriously disappointed if the scale of the battles is just gonna go back to the HOMM era of a picture of a unit with a number underneath dictating how many there are. Or these great nations are only fielding armies in the low hundreds. I guess in my mind I was picturing total war scale battles but on a turn based field, I suppose without the psuedo real-time aspect they aren't going to be very exciting.

You'll still be able to have big cities but it won't be because you built' 30 gardens, 10 workshops and 8 studies. It''ll be because you worked through the tech tree and made careful choices of where to put what. One of the things I've been working on this week is putting in improvements that are only 1 per faction (right now, only the palace really does that). Specialization of cities matters and that can really only be gratifying by giving the player choices.

The cataclysm was over a hundred years ago.

Modding wise, it's trivial since the only thing holding back the number of units is gold which is settable in a text file. I play around with it all the time.

There will be a 64-bit version but not upon release. And yes, we're on schedule for August 24th. And No, that doesn't mean the gameplay won't dramatically change between now and release.

I played it a lot but I have the advantage of being able to make changes to the game as I play it. Examples: 1. Fixed the overpowered monsters lurking around at start. 2. Re-did the whole garden thing. 3. Re-did the whole city population to level up thing 4. Re-did the various books and treasures and items you get from quests thing to balance it more. 5. Wrote a ton of new AI code to make it better. etc.

Good feedback. We're reading this thread closely.

[quote who="Bylak2" reply="101" id="2651206"]In regards to update #1 (and understanding full well that we're still pretty early on with little of the combat system in place ), is there going to be a point to using shields for units? As it stands right now it seems like the only benefit for using a shield is a reduced cost for producing the unit. Will we see things like this expanded a little? Will different armour types and accessories (like shields) give us benefits to diff

Difficulty levels are't implemented.