Stmorpheus

Stmorpheus

Joined Member # 1776303
52 Posts 535 Replies 563 Reputation

no, i only refer to quick games for people that play with strangers. you can be plenty competitive when playing against friends that you know will keep coming back to play a big game. i think especially more so on games that take a long time to play, you don't want to spend 6 months on a game only to lose! edit: yeah i looked back at my post, i didn't make it clear enough <span style="fon

34 Replies 125,170 Views

i don't know for sure, but yes i think that the game will head in that direction. prob starting at version 1.1 that will be released in october at some point. really though, right now the game is only being hurt by not having tactical battles in multi(autoresolve just isn't effective), and the lack of diplomacy with human players. add these 2 things in, and you would have a surprisingly fun game i think.

3 Replies 3,460 Views

nice, i like it. more info is always good, AND will help the game move faster in multiplayer. since people will be able to make decisions faster.

83 Replies 130,590 Views

multiplayer CAN work in this game, if you approach it right. you have to know what people want. example: people that play with friends tend to want to play co-op against very tough AI's in long games that can be saved. people that want to play competitively want quick games where they can come at odd angles toward their opponents, just like chess. you have to open your imagination. nobody knew what the wheel was before it was

34 Replies 125,170 Views

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="25" id="2789526"]One thing that I would request is if peopel coudl start posting their saved games. I would love to look at how people (real people) are playing the game. I would look at it from both an AI and game balance point of view. [/quote] interesting, i think this idea should have its own thread. so that they can be dissected, not just by brad(or even the whole dev team), but by o

52 Replies 58,717 Views

ok what you do, is create a spy pack. this pack is special in that it allows the STEALTH ability to a unit. the stealth ability allows you to enter a factions influence WITHOUT starting a war, AND it also makes the unit somewhat invisible. the more stealth units you stack the more likely that they will be seen and thus give the player being spied on the choice of capturing the spy and killing them automatically(regardless of CR) and starting a

143 Replies 376,044 Views

hey! this is an opportunity to make a new spell. one that allows you to see enemy cities. currently we have a spell that only gets rid of the black area. also, i don't quite understand why the AI can't see human cities. once you uncover the fog of war, you can ALWAYS see what that city is up to. its my opinion that we shouldn't be given so much information for free. it just kills the strateg

143 Replies 376,044 Views

well i am not so sure they should never set foot in hostile territory. are you saying that you would NEVER attack a settlement with your sov? i think they should boot the sov dies for good in enemy territory rule. there should be a penalty, but i don't see why he should just die. i propose that you lose 2 essence points instead of 1. that would be better.

13 Replies 3,032 Views

[quote who="Uriel1980" reply="2" id="2783503"]I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure a non-aggression pact is 50 turns... Totally agree that a slider is needed though (and a shift in the cost based on the power differential between the kingdoms and the length you want the pact to last perhaps).[/quote] yes, this would be excellent, and easy to implement i would think.

6 Replies 4,112 Views

one idea that i had was to implement corruption. basically, the more cities you create the higher your corruption would become, and as a result it would LOWER your influence across the board. of course you could eliminate this corruption by putting buildings in your towns that were expensive with upkeep, but it might be worth it if you could reach out to that elemental shard, or 2 old growth forests. what do you think?

193 Replies 141,871 Views

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="47" id="2782965"] What is needed is a way to respond to an attack (ala Magic the Gathering instants). This is something we're looking at and we think would add to the fun .[/quote] yes! yes! yes! this will be awesome! please make this happen!

93 Replies 34,133 Views

yeah there should be some sort of merchant that gives you really bad deals on things at first, but as you research stuff you can get better deals. a way to either sell or trade for what you want.

13 Replies 9,051 Views

[quote who="hairrorist" reply="2" id="2782537"]There is no enchantment management in the game. Enchantments target whatever unit is first in line. You need to waste movement points and time separating targets from their stack and then enchanting your unit. If you ever want to cancel that enchantment, you just cancel enchantments randomly and hope you get the right one. It is a nightmare.[/quote] Yikes! hars

7 Replies 8,039 Views

i agree that resources should be reexamined. there needs to be a way to get them, without sacrificing the exploration/challenge of the game. this should be at a considerable cost to the player.

18 Replies 8,828 Views

i have played a couple games with a friend of mine and we had a fairly good time. the only i wanna know is how to save and load games. i had 1 game crash, and another OOM error, actually i had 3 OOM during the same game WITHOUT the game crashing on the first 2, that was weird. i was told you can save and load, i am assuming this has not yet been implemented.

3 Replies 1,458 Views

yeah i totally understand what brad is trying to do by releasing the separate expansions. because there are certain mechanics that are going to be vastly different from what we have now. there are going to be people that like the way the game works as is. if they want to keep playing this version they can, while everyone else can move on to expansion 2, then the pattern repeats with expansion 3.

25 Replies 103,125 Views