Gazz_

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="25" id="3086972"]Too much of this reminds me of the days when people railed because we started making Windows games (when we started out an OS/2 developer). We just want to make cool stuff that people enjoy using. [/quote] Just like it was totally unfair when developers started making games CD only, leaving their Loyal Fans™ (with floppy drives) in the cold! And then they did it again some time after DVDs came out! G

[quote who="Alstein" reply="7" id="3088126"]I do think the concept of licensing is too one-sided in favor of developers. If you buy a game, you shouldn't have that access taken away, UNLESS your actions hurt future sales of that game (like you distribute it out for piracy) [/quote] A handful of foul-mouthed neanderthals proclaiming the doom of the franchise, the company, and earth as a whole, could be construed as "hurting the future sales of that game". =) Besides,

All concepts to nerf archers to fix kiting are missing the point because they almost inevitably nerfs archers in situations where this isn't intended. So... what could melee troops do to counter infinite kiting... without making them overpowered in "normal" battles? I suggest a Charge ability (which differs from legacee

So I take it that the big issues, that have prevented WoM from superceding MoM, remain unchanged? That would be race variety (instead of humans, humans, and more humans), and seriously varied magic.

Well, the game is designed to be largely generic so the AI can play it. Now adding interesting and diverse races would pretty much defeat the purpose. Every player in the game builds the same units with the same equipment items and casts the same spells. (to be fair - while the units have identical stats, they do have 2 different sets of skin textures) Magic offers a little variance but it seems to be more a gimmick than an attempt to diffe

Fast play isn't necessarily a major problem. It's when the single player campaign plays like an online rush-fest. That killed it for me. You're always rushed to do this, run from that, relocate all your buildings before they get roasted... That's twitch gaming. It has nothing to do with tactics and definitely not with strategy. Maybe the online players like that but so what? They don't care about the campaign anyway.

[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="23" id="2932486"]It's very anti-thematic having your Sov being a giant pussy.[/quote] *shrug* It could be worse. Your sovereign could be sparkling.

I don't know how the tree is structured (or automatically generated) internally so the "mutually exclusive" is more an intention. Could also be 2 techs of which one is always "in", the other is not. These could then open into completely alternative branches. Lonely random techs sprinkled into the tree are a neat gimmick but don't really allow for change . They only allow for additional tech, not alternative tech. With alternative tech, you can

WRT balancing random techs and restarting to get "good" techs: Instead of only having the option to assign a prerequisite tech A to get tech B, how about a "mutually exclusive prerequisite"? When you have Cool_Weapon_3 tech, Cool_Armour_2 tech is never ever in the mix. That gives you considerably more freedon to balance random tech trees because you can design 2 equally desireable "branches" which are then mutually exclusive.

Correct. Combat will be resolved in a spawned first person shooter window.

[quote who="Goldmos" reply="217" id="2864624"]We can go on and on but don't want to add more .[/quote] In Bard's Tale you cast spells by typing in their acronym - like Ybarra's Mystical Coat of Armour.

New monster type: Un-Undead. Can be magically created by properly cursing an undead creature.

Oh, they exist alright. They are just an army of very very small golems so you mistook them for the gravel you walked over.

Why would you celebrate the width of bands and not the bands itself? It's far more likely that the peasantry can relate to a tangible thing and coloured bands are pretty.

Why not sheepform? Baaaaaaa!

A while ago I outlined another Healing system because the current one doesn't scale well with the military tree. Even adding something like a Heal 1 / 2 / 3 would only be a bandaid without fixing the actual problem.

X3 fits right in because you can play it on the "fleet" level - but it's no 4X game at all. There are no winning conditions. You set your own winning conditions and do whatever you like. It's a sandbox game at heart. Large scope battles or large empires will be next to impossible to control without custom mods and scripts... which do exist. And if the factories, ships, or fleets don't do exactly what you want - you can write your own scripts which control th

[quote who="gsitetfs" reply="154" id="2825067"]Also, for the benefit of US citizens, when we say "football", we mean "soccer"[/quote] Err, no, we don't. We prefer to confuse the hell outta them. What the US citizens call football should be renamed to The Other Handball because there is an original handball already. Hmm. Games. Why are there no games in WOM? People always play games. There could be a MUDS league. (Hah! Ya never thought I'd make this

[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="100" id="2826900"]... From what I have read, there are only 5 spell levels.[/quote] But it's a "Magic Overhaul". There is supposed to be improvement. What if there are only 5 levels because they could only think of "Stab of Ice 1, 2, and 3 are now the first three water spells...with Ultimate Stab of Ice 1 & 2 the last two". That's a problem we can help with! Stab of Ice Age Freezing Stab (this might spawn an entirely

Bear Goggles: The sovereign starts out with magical headgear that lets him spot bears on the strategical map at twice the distance.

Nah, numbers really sound a bit lame. It should be something like Watery Stab of Ice Minor Stab of Ice Lesser Stab of Ice Stab of Ice Major Stab of Ice Greater Stab of Ice Massive Stab of Ice Ultra Stab of Ice EPIC STAB OF ICE EPIC STAB OF ICE 2 (sorry, couldn't find a good name for the lvl 10 spell)

Estimated Time of Release means well... estimated time of release. A promised time of release would be a PTA.

[quote who="Kestral2040"]just wanted to point out that we agree with this assessment of spell resist... our magic resist stat isn't a blanket "resist to all spells" stat, its intended only to be applied to specific spells that state they 'can be resisted'. We are doing this so in the future we can introduce more granular forms of spell reduction/resist/avoidance. [/quote] That's good news. Some hardcoded resist routine would certainly be quicker to write but it would severely limit

[quote who="alborrelli" reply="179" id="2826615"]I'm curious as to the reason to call this 1.1? Why not just call it 2.0? [/quote] It's just a number. It has no special meaning beyond being higher than 1.09. Maybe SD should take a poll for which number (or name) should be assigned to which patch. =P

Come on, kids. Get along.