Scorpiana

[quote]What is the targeted duration for building a legion of 1000 armored fabio when training 1 requires between 11 and 14 turns?[/quote] Remember that the build time for a unit is also dependant on the city / village you're building the unit in. For all we know Brad is trying to build this unit in a small outpost... By the time we can build legions, I'd guess / hope that the build time for one unit in a sizeable city would be a lot less then 11-14 turns.

Nice one [e digicons]:frogboy:[/e]

I don't think there is a specific date planned yet for beta 2, let them get beta 1G ready first... If I had to make a guess, I would think you'll have to wait somewhere between two weeks and a month after they release 1G.

Next beta is 1G, I think beta 2 is were new people can join in... So, I'm afraid you'll have to wait a bit more.

Yes, but I wouldn't mind an option...

On the GalCiv2 boards for me as well...

Great idea... [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

[quote]They should never give anything more than bragging rights. Anything else and you have complainers, cheaters...[/quote] Well, I don't know if you would call this 'bragging rights' but I wouldn't mind if achievements would give some extra cosmetic options like a different look for a building or unit...

My favourite at the moment is Deadhouse Gates... I really liked the whole Chain of Dogs story. Midnight Tides is a close second because it stands mostly separate (or seems to...) from the rest of the serie and gives us a whole backstory to Trull Sengar. Still so much to read, so little time... There are so many great writers out there, it sometimes gets a bit overwhelming.

[quote]A few months back, Scorpiana shared a screenshot find that looked to me like it might be possible to build and garrison something like Hardian's Wall.[/quote] When I read the original post, I was immeditaly reminded of that picture as well... Thanks for sparing me the trouble of searching for it... [e digicons]:grin:[/e]

[quote]Dear lord, I just defended TBSGAMER![/quote] Shame on you... [e digicons]:grin:[/e] [quote]Like scorpiana says, I think player should be able to decide how to appoint males or females to functions without restrictions, even though I think it could be nice to introduce cultural differences about it amongst the playable civs (some could have daughters wield sword, and others could forbid magic for males for instance ^^).[/quote] Thanks for the support, and off co

An arbitrary constriction on what a female unit can do compared to a male unit (or the other way around) should be avoided at all costs I think. If I want to play with female warriors and male mages, it should be possible. If I want to play with a female channeler, it should be possible... If I want to keep daughters around and send the sons out to get married for a diplomatic relation with a neighbour, it should be possible...

I'm reading them, halfway part 6 at the moment... I really like them, a bit hard to get into (maybe because English isn't my primary language but also because at the start of the serie you don't really get all that much background), but very well written and fun to read. Part 7 and 8 are already waiting on my shelf...

[quote]And, more to the point, if anyone has an XBox I highly suggest checking out this little gem on the Indie channel... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-R_w8UYB_A&feature=related Amazingly fun little title that basically has no animation but keeps you hooked. A nice example of how gameplay trumps produciton values (though the simple music certainly has a nice calming effect).[/quote] So, any chance of a PC version coming to Impulse?

Well, I don't think he was banned (as he still has the same profile...) but this certainly is the same kind off post that made him so universally loved on these forums last year. [e digicons]O:)[/e] Guess he just retreated under his bridge for a few months... As long as he doesn't start insulting us again, I guess he can keep posting these things although I don't think he will get anymore support compared to last year.

If I remember correctly, Brad said somewhere that the story was one major part in why they only have two races, but he also said that every faction will play very differently compared to the others To be honest, I don't understand this complaining about 'Only two races' when we have 12 different factions. The important part is that every faction plays differently, who cares if they look the same? If we have a faction which is very close to nature and another faction that lives mostly

I don't have any consoles at all, so I can't really relate to the differences between them, but I can understand the sentiment... As long as the games are great, and you're having fun with them, who cares how you play them PC or console... It's the fun that counts. Just one little nitpick, how could you forget Starcraft II as a 'big name exclusive' on PC?

Ooooh.... Shiny... [e digicons]:grin:[/e] On a more serious note, have a look at this . Why not let the game do something similar and generate a new currency every game?

[quote]3. Meta-game - Collect all five cards for visiting five named grandmaster leatherworkers and gain 'Inlaid' leather armor tech or have a Risk-style turn in system (pairs or triples of similar cards for gold and resources).[/quote] To me, this sounds more like an achievement system and I don't think achievements should offer technology / gold because it would put players who don't like to do achievements at a disadvantage. Besides that, I really like your proposal, the mo

Instead of just dropping the excess items, an option to sell / convert to gold would also be nice...

I had the same thing happening to me in the latest version 0.264. I was researching magic and had only 4 red techs available and it seems none got selected.

I had the same problem, but I was able to solve it, I still had some fallen factions selected as opponents. After removing these, the problem seems to be resolved. I've been able to create a few games now where I could end a turn normally.

Sounds good to me... The more custimization options we have, the better... [quote]I would STRONGLY recommend staying away from unique tech/resources/weapons for leaders. It is very very difficult to balance versus stat bonuses (will the resource be useless in late game? overpowered in early game?). Plus it can just be frustrating (Umm, so their leader lets them build long pikes and we're doggedly stuck with short spears?) and not very fun.[/quote] Well, as the focus off the ga

[quote]Ah, sounds good and logical! [/quote] Thanks, I try to be... [e digicons]:grin:[/e]

Thanks for the clarification... Part of it does make sense in that it isn't really mine unless my opponnent agrees to his loss, on the other hand, if I conquered a territory / city, why should I be limited in what I can do with it? [quote]Giving the AI even a slight bias against invading based on economic strength would remove the risk of being a boomer, while adding risk to the more prudent strategy of building up a moderate defensive force before developing your economy.[/quote]