Alstein

Yep. It gets to the point where groups like Time Warner Cable, and AT&T (using ALEC and even the NAACP at times) decide it's better business for them to buy legislators to stifle competition than to actually compete. Look at how NC has banned municipal broadband, ever since Salisbury and Wilson curbstomped the private competition. If government did things so terribly, why would they have to do that? Or is it that big business is actually

I do worry that by the time you get around to making it, the "free-to-play" fad will have passed, at least for today's generation of gamers. (and yes, I do think it's a fad, outside of MMO's at least) I am also really hoping your post-Elemental project (GalCiv 3) is 64-bit.

I wouldn't mind seeing some 2-handed swords/axes/maces. Swords/Axe/Mace/Spear/Staff/Exotic should be the weapon categories.

I'd love to see infirmaries give a chance of healing a random injury each turn a champ remains stationed in them. (maybe somewhere between 1-5%)

[quote who="DsRaider" reply="62" id="3322476"]In my game magical staffs don't appear to upgrade anymore on designed units. If you click the upgrade button in unit design it selects nothing. The AI also built a conclave in a spot with no essence. That should never happen.[/quote] Not neceesarily anymore, the change to production yields makes it viable.

[quote who="Greyclouds40" reply="19" id="3322221"] Quoting BabbyLuring, reply 16I would like to see Minor Races added. These would be races that you could enslave, or vassals, allies or just someone to crush to take their stuff. They could also provide unique unit types, like lizardmen, orcs, ogres, etc. and also unique mounts like lizards, drakes, spiders and so on. Other races could provide a unique armor set, weapon set, trade options, spells and so on. This might be a bit

I actually thought about this a little last night after an awesome day, the answer that came to mind is L5R. I can just see many mechanics converting over all, though the team would probably have to add dual wielding.

[quote who="mqpiffle" reply="51" id="3321954"]I have noticed in 1.29 that when an AI champion ends his turn on a goodie hut, the goodie hut does not get consumed. No save or screenie unfortunately. If I see it again I will save and post it.[/quote] It can happen with players- especially when you move through a goodie hut on your way to somewhere else. Also happens occasionally otherwise.

These are good ideas, and real AI flaws.

one idea for the healing: bandages a unit can use to heal 2hp per unit, range 1, one use per battle. Requires Cooperation to create. Useless for champions, but great for large units. I would like to see better armor as you described it. Have the armor techs improve the quality of light/heavy armor. Oh: another idea for a tech gained from a lair: perhaps defeating a drake could give you "drake hide armor", which would be leather a

[quote who="Nathan E" reply="94" id="3321613"] quoting post FUN! Generally speaking, FE 1.3 is just a lot more fun. That said, the best way to make the game more enjoyable is to get more units for each side. The AI doesn’t design its own units. It uses what you create. The more units you give a faction, the smarter the AI gets. Don't get this. I have to design units for a faction in one game and then later play against that faction in a

Heavy armor has a counter with magic staves, spears and dodging. It's not a problem, outside of the AI not knowing how to counter it that well yet. I'd like to see more summons, and maybe some standardization of summons. Why is it air elementals can't be summoned, but other elementals can? AOW had four levels of summons, I think LH could at least have 3, one for levels 3/4/5 (3 being a weak summon, 4 an elemental, and 5 a nastier summ

I'd like to see him retained for GalCiv3. I think there's some good lore in that game (better than Elemental for the most part), but it would benefit from some further imagining.

How hard would it be to quick load an ugly map and play it out? I do think this is a real problem, especially if this is how AI's are doing combat. I think this would be a welcome change, even if it meant some increased turn time. (and that increased turn time would largely be early game)

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="6" id="3321395"] Quoting Alstein, reply 5 Quoting Frogboy, reply 2 Quoting Kongdej, reply 1 So, for balance/challenge, I suggest that when a city with a tower(s) is defeated, the towers should be assumed to have been destroyed during the siege, and the conqueror must start from scratch to build his own. I think this is a good idea, only bad part is the owner will lose out on any 1 or 2 turn chance to regain it. Good post, a

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="40" id="3321327"] Quoting Alstein, reply 39 Quoting Hemmy245, reply 38 Quoting Trojasmic, reply 34Now every time I fight a dark wizard and use autoresolve, I win! The dark wizard is not using his spells in autoresolve anymore. FIX IT! It seems autoresolve in general is extremely powerful compared to manual battle. By trial and error I have now found that autoresolve will make me win battles I would most d

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="2" id="3321348"] Quoting Kongdej, reply 1 So, for balance/challenge, I suggest that when a city with a tower(s) is defeated, the towers should be assumed to have been destroyed during the siege, and the conqueror must start from scratch to build his own. I think this is a good idea, only bad part is the owner will lose out on any 1 or 2 turn chance to regain it. Good post, at least for making me consider it (never really

[quote who="Hemmy245" reply="38" id="3321275"] Quoting Trojasmic, reply 34Now every time I fight a dark wizard and use autoresolve, I win! The dark wizard is not using his spells in autoresolve anymore. FIX IT! It seems autoresolve in general is extremely powerful compared to manual battle. By trial and error I have now found that autoresolve will make me win battles I would most definitely loose if I chose manual.[/quote]

Balance suggestion from playing around: Noticed AI building towers, beat him up, I have the towers and now everyone declares war on me. Might be a good idea that towers get destroyed if you conquer a city. I could see someone just waiting for the AI to build, conquering, then going for a quickie mastery win.

So far, outside of any bug issues, I am really liking the changes , particularly diplomacy, pacing (game feels faster), and the variable yields. Just need to fix those bugs/glitches.

He is a super-hardcore fan of the series. Personally, Civ 4 > Civ 5, but Civ 4 was largely an endpoint, Civ 5 had to be different, and the game did feel rushed at release. It's improved over time. It took two expansions for Civ 4 to become classic, Civ 5 has only had one (same with the Elemental series). My big issue with Civ 5 is ultimately the game is a cakewalk at fair settings, and the unfair settings feel like t

[quote who="stein220" reply="222" id="3320888"] Quoting Alstein, reply 216 We're not getting Capitar/Urxen back? Looks like this may be a job for the modders. Those 2 are still in there; you just have to make a custom sovereign for them. No modding required. I'm no modder and they show up in most of my games.[/quote] I know, but they're not fully fleshed out the way the other 8 are. </

I did one time an AI build a city on top of an outpost as of Brad's 1.29 build as well.

I don't mind AI ganging up on me if it makes sense. It's when it doesn't make sense that I have a problem with it.

Saw an interview with no new factions but that you plan to release in April. We're not getting Capitar/Urxen back? Looks like this may be a job for the modders.