Anything to make the dynasty system more of a gameplay element is good.
Maybe wait for the update to see the changes before saying "Noooo"? I'm sure there will be plenty of things for you to build, and as Tridus says, half the stuff isn't even in the game yet.
Seems like it: https://forums.elementalgame.com/383759 You'll notice mentions to features which will be released in 2-A, 2-B, 2-C....
[quote who="Zoe_E" reply="157" id="2653845"] Not having food resources available is like being stuck on a continent completely covered in desert or ice in Civ4![/quote] Exactly. In a completely different game, Civ 4, you could be likewise handicapped if you were to start in the middle of the desert or on the middle of an ice sheet. It doesn't happen (by default) because the pre-packaged map generators don't allow for something so grossly unfair to occur. Much li
[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="149" id="2653787"] Basically my point is that often when folks have a 'problem', instead of trying to fix it by improving their game play they lobby to get the game changed. As I see this 'problem' to be fairly easily avoided by more careful city site location, it's not an intrinsic problem requiring a game change, but is instead self-inflicted thus no game change is necessary. It's interesting how often 'arguments' (in the best sense of t
[quote who="Valiant_Turtle" reply="146" id="2653779"]Keep in mind that early cities are not a strong requirement for this game. The other day I started a game with a inventor hero and a 4-pack of adventurers by me. I recruited them all but didn't have enough $ left for a city (I'm not sure the game is getting the $ right on recruiting groups, I'm going to check next time I see one). We wandered around getting loot and fighting monsters until we were all level 4, at which po
[quote who="duke87" reply="143" id="2653758"] Gardens are their own punishment though- they just leave you with more options.[/quote] Perhaps, but I'm not convinced having access to some food is more punishment than having access to no food, as it pertains to your example anyway. In the case of your hypothetical, you would still be afforded more tiles total by the city leveling up and growing from the gardens, even discounting tiles you "waste" on gardens, than you would if
[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="142" id="2653756"] How exactly are we differing? Thanks! [/quote] Oh the only statement I didn't understand was: [quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="131" id="2653665"] Better to improve one's play than change the game to forgive non-careful play . It is, after all, a strategy game.[/quote] I was intrigued as I didn't quite understand how the reported changes in 2A (specifically, curtai
[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="139" id="2653734"] There should be a 'reward' to balance the 'risk' of not plopping down a city anywhere and instead taking some time to find a good spot. [/quote] This is indeed my point. Now the reward for carefully placing a city in a good spot will be infinitely higher than it was in the past. Specifically my point is, currently, gardens provide the exact function that you claim you are looking to avoid, they forgive non-caref
[quote who="Zoe_E" reply="133" id="2653698"] Also, inadvertently you are taking away a lot of the player's choice with this. Unless you are swimming in orchards and farmland a game without gardens would force a player to have a single ultra-specialized breadbasket city. One that would leave the player completely dead in the water if it was captured by another player. The player should have the option to pick the safe path so that losing a single city doesn't b
[quote who="Zoe_E" reply="132" id="2653690"] What if it takes you 30 turns to find fertile land while your opponent starts next to some? What if it's not even found on your continent? You might as well just quit the game at that point, it has nothing to do with "improving one's play". That game isn't fun to me.[/quote] What you're saying is true, but it also applies to any map that doesn't give players fair access to startin
[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="131" id="2653665"] Just plopping down cities without regard to food resources is the real problem. Better to improve one's play than change the game to forgive non-careful play. It is, after all, a strategy game.[/quote] I don't see how removing gardens will "forgive non-careful play." If anything, it will make it less forgiving. Now if someone plops down cities without regard to food resources they will have no recourse.</
Yeah I know, I have just had too much caffeine. In any event, I like the idea. Anything that gives more diplomatic options is good.
There doesn't have to be "good" or "evil," but the NPCs and Sovereigns could have opinions about things you do....
Did you just call the dynasty idea fluffy?
Between now and release I imagine organizing quests, and the quest system in general, will undergo many changes. I think limiting players to one quest at a time would be pretty unpopular. Furthermore, there will be a lot more sophisticated quests implemented, and I'd hate to be given a difficult quest which may take half the game to complete and not be able to undertake simpler ones in the meantime.
[quote who="Tridus" reply="77" id="2653090"] Food resources ARE important. The world is recovering from a cataclysm. Most of it is a wasteland. Doesn't that make controlling good sources of food important? Isn't it silly to have a giant city fed entirely by gardens, on land that isn't fertile enough for intensive farming? In the case of city spam, people are trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist yet with overly complicated solutions. Once maintenance costs are turned on
[quote who="Sanati" reply="52" id="2652925"] Personally I'd prefer a hard cap on number of cities, possibly tied to research. A max of 3 cities at the start, then a couple techs that increase that cap by 1 each. Maybe a talent you can give to a sovereign to increase it by 1 more. Currently there is no benefit of not creating a crap ton of cities, and I was hoping this wasn't going to be one of those games.[/quote] I guess what I'd like to see is city diversity. Some cities
Pigeons..... or magic. Or maybe both. Magic pigeons. Hey! I know what I want for dinner tonight! But seriously yes, this is definitely a bug.
Can't say that I have had this problem. I've had several games go much higher than 256 turns.
Looking forward to the changes, assuming it's planned for Thursday? I have to agree with Frogboy on this one, interesting though some of the mechanics might be, the game isn't really "fun" just yet.. not in terms of a game anyway. Perhaps fun to fiddle around with though.
[quote who="Tridus" reply="53" id="2652188"] Yeah, I agree with this. (Posted something similar in another thread. ) I also think that Gardens are the bigger culprit at this point. To grow a city where your food resources exist, you just build houses. But to do it when food isn't adequate, you build houses AND gardens. You need 2 gardens per house (IIRC), and that just chews up more space and adds more annoyance. If the number of gardens was capped at say 4,
Played a bit. Has some good framework. I am looking forward to being able to create my own quests and AI personalities via XML or other simple means. Going to play AoW: Shadow Magic with some friends until retail Elemental comes out.. unless it is delayed until next February, then we'll probably play Civ 5 until Elemental comes out. What I find interesting is that as many complaints as Elemental gets for having bland repetitive quests (which will certainly be
[quote who="segallion" reply="51" id="2652173"]I thought at one point there were talks of a governor stat. That the cities wouldn't grow past a certain point unless you had a governor that would allow it. I believe the example was do you use Ranger man as part of your army, or use him to take this city to L3 as he has a governor rank of 3. Did that disappear? [/quote] Yes I remember this too...... in fact <a title="here" href="https://forums.elementalgame.com/37
[quote who="klaxton499" reply="46" id="2652019"]Consider this. Housing doesn't limit city growth; Food does! Housing is just the player applying the food to a certain city. The complaints everyone seems to have are: Houses must be manually placed They take up a useable tile May have to demolish buildings in favor of housing to continue growth if built in the wrong order Therefore, can we move housing "outside" the cit