Campaigner

I have played Blizzard titles since WarCraft 2 and when I first tried StarCraft, WarCraft 2 felt outdated. The graphics and animations were so much better. It was a new generation of RTS. That's what I thought. Jump to today though and StarCraft is a bit unplayable because of its ancient unfriendly UI. Have to fight the interface instead of the friggin opponent! To make a long story short, StarCraft 2 is on my "3 most anticipated games list" and i

[quote who="BoogieBac" reply="4" id="2121319"] 2. Simple Assets: Most of our asset making time will be spent on units, buildings, and art for the game worlds. The solution for dungeons cannot be a full 3d 'Diablo-esque' maze for your away party to explore. Our artists little hands would fall off...and they like their hands. [/quote] Perhaps they like their jobs more....[e digicons]}:)[/e] [quote who="BoogieBac" reply="4"

Am i the only one that's not impressed..? The best thing were the zoomed-out graphics. Nice looking. Didn't know there was an inventory system for the sovereign (and heroes I guess). But there were nothing to be excited about.

[quote who="Solam" reply="6" id="2089098"]Some of you would like to have auto resolve at the max setting right at the start while some others would like to have it scale with experience or something like it. I for one can't see my army right at the start battle out against the AI at the max setting. There would be no advantage to having a hero leading them. What possible gain could I have to bring a hero into battle? [/quote] Have you by any cha

OMG you two type much.... I want trade to be off like in GalCiv 2 since trading spells left and right destroys the spell identity of a faction (Like a Air mage in AoW Shadow Magic that trades for great Water and Life spells.... If we're talking about resources, then I don't want the instanteous, riskfree trading of AoW but instead something with more depth. Black markets, caravans and neutral raiding parties sound much more exciting. &nbsp

1. Absolutely 2. Online multiplayer 3. Think of our planet Earth. The Empire controls Europe, America and Great Brittain while the Kingdom have Asia, the Middle east and eastern Europe. You choose a continent and get figting on one of the fronts. Depending on the map size you choose you fight in a different place if you choose a XL map then if you choose a S one. So choosing XL you will be put in an invasion force of an enemy capital city while if you choose a Small map you'll

Leadership doesn't sound good. I would never fight in FC if I get better results in TC. And realism isn't a real argument. I always giggle when somebody mention "but the king/lord/god doesn't direct the battles himself! You're not a liutenent, you're the lord of the kingdom!" It's completely irrelevent to me. You (I atleast) go by what makes the best gameplay. Couldn't care less about realism if gameplay is compromised.... In Age of Wond

[quote who="arstal" reply="2" id="2086201"]One idea: Instead of leadership increasing your battle capacity, have leadership increase the size of the army you can command? [/quote] That makes leadership a skill you have to increase to have a big army then. Depends on how big an army you can have without the skill but it limits you just like in Kings Bounty. It can work but upkeep is another army limiter.

Continous turns (perhaps they mean simultanous turns like in Age of Wonders?) are superior to turnbased turns for multiplayer and allows the game to flow better. Feels like it's the future. Like when I played KotOR and immidietly thought it better then Ice Wind Dale and Baldurs Gate games.

The Sorcery spells from MoM and Magic The Gathering are grand. Would be heaps of fun to steal peoples global enhancements, unsummon their troops and disenhance their enhancements. When I'm done they would scream to their monitor [e digicons]:grin:[/e]

Ron Lugge: It's funny that there are different opinions on exactly what micro and macromanagement really is. StarCraft people associate macromanagement with unit production, building structures and researching upgrades while micromanagement to them is commanding your army. I hope that it will simply be fun and have a strong UI.

Universe At War is quite good (I bought it for the achievements and gamerscore) and is made by ex Westwood Studios veterans. The good: Completely unique factions The research system adds great variety to every match Some tracks of the music are fantastic and the OST can be downloaded from the developers website The bad: The balance is a bit lacking The game is dead as far as compe

If you didn't say this was an ingame screenshot then I would have thought it was art. Looks really good though.

[quote who="Spartan" reply="5" id="2049952"]Well with all the layoffs in the industry there surely is not lack of talented people available for Frogboy to select from at the moment. Of course there is always the weather factor to contend with...[/quote] Didn't think of that. Great point though. There'll probably be like 100 gamedevelopers outside their new office on opening day that all wants to convince Brad that THEY are the very best and the ones he need. You

Biggest hope: That the combatmechanics are good so it's enjoyable to fight. Biggest fear: That the combat will be too simple.

I'll add everybody to my GFWL account tomorrow. About those Soulstorm missions.... The Soulstorm stronghold missions are long and kinda tedious....looking for ways to shortcut them. Found a few. Sisters of Battle : Ignore the left side of the map (tank quest included) and instead setup lots of turrets left to the relic. That will deal with the crusade. Their tanks will come to your base and not do any damage so don't worry

Hey Alfonse, you're from GameReplays or some other competetive site? A few competetive gamers in a sea of casuals (Reminds of a quote from the Dawn of War: Soulstorm campaign: "One bright candle in a sea of filth and darkness !") Note though that I don't mean anything against the casual RTS gamers. I'm in the middle of competetive and casual. I'm in the DoW 2 beta but I haven't tried ranked games yet (I care about the s

I say like Yahtzee. The PCgaming master race against the poor consoleplaying peasants [e digicons]:grin:[/e] I'd say that the biggest reason people play consoles is because they are lazy and/or not as intelligent or smart as PC gamers. F.e. I got a friend that's slightly retarded (he's childish, slow and say dumb things) and he got every console there is but he only got a laptop in the PC department. And the excuse he came up with when explaining why he wouldn't get a

From what I have understood through reading Blizzard and Valve interviews, a game which isn't featurecomplete is in alpha. Beta stage is when the design is done. (This is from what I have understood). So does Stardock have different opinions on what beta and alpha stage mean or do you just think beta sounds better..?

I'm not particulary worried. I just hope that simultaneous turns will be implemented (never played classic (regular) turns in any Age of Wonders game). The solution for multiplayer is that as long as you can't attack your enemy, simultaneous turns will be in effect. But once you meet and can attack and steal mines from eachother (like in Age of Wonders) it will revert to turnbased. About the Tactical Combat vs AutoCombat. That is possibly impossilble to balance. I'll sa

The fact that there is no standard in what exactly minimum or recommended system requirements mean is hurting PC gaming....we need standards....FAST!! But perhaps the Windows Experience Index can help a bit....or more information or something.... Stardock should add that to their Gamers Bill of Rights.

I've just started playing Soulstorm and is really excited about DoW 2 [e digicons]:w00t:[/e] We nice people here should perhaps create a steam community or just add eachother on friendslists. My GFWL nick is Campaigner82 (since some bastard had the audacaty to take Campaigner before I took it....)

I know what I would do if I wanted to give the A.I a personality. "The Elite n000b pwner". It would constantly say "lol", "lulz", "gonna pwnzor yoouuuu" and tell you that you're such a noob. It would also do everything possible to win. As I frequent GameReplays.org quite a bit and like competing against humans and fight to win, I prefer A.Is that do everything in their power to win. I would like the A.I to know everything about a competetive map so it got the sa

I must be the only here who haven't tried it [e digicons]o_O[/e] Well, nice to see that things go extremely well [e digicons]:)[/e]

I downloaded some Warlords version from possibly the most famous abandonware site there is (Can't remember its name but something with "underground" and "dogs"....) which is the same Warlords version that Zamul linked a picture from in his top post. And that game was miserably bad for the little I played........The UI was bad so it was a bit hard to get things done. Then I built or trained something in my castle which made it impossible to train anything else (something like that....j