Well the wipe of my hardrive didn't solve my problems it just replaced them with different ones HOWEVER after I turned anti aliasing off I can play again. Not without slip ups along the way but it's stable enough to get an hour or two in.
I was having similar problems. I haven't been able to test since 1a. I had problems in 1a too but I could still manage to play for awhile normally. I cannot remember if I was having the first turn issue in 1b but I've had the issue for awhile now. I've formatted my hard drive and will try again fresh. If it works I'll update my post here.
Firstly regarding flanking. If the mounted units or any units for that matter (mounted would be easier with better speed) manage to get in behind the enemy and attack from the side or rear than they should get a bonus. Even if you don't implement some kind of facing direction for the units it could still work with the units defaulting in a forwards facing direction. An attack from behind would automatically change the units facing though otherwise the recipent of the attack would get the same
When moving my soveriegn (haven't tested other units) out of a city directly onto a tile where there is a hostile unit the battle will not initiate.
[quote who="Allegiance86" reply="401" id="2391958"]where did we fabricate claims? i love this argument cause people bought the medias coverage of the war and thought we found nothing. WE DID FIND WMD, BE IT THE CIA DIDNT HAVE IT RIGHT BUT LIKE USUAL THEY NEVER DO. And as far as Im concerned, sometimes you need to tell everyone to get f'd. Most of the world prefer to think by turning a blind eye to everything wrong with whats going on in it that itll settle itself and normalcy will
Just for the record I love the sound of the hide option for the way it is planned but would also prefer a dynasty system.
[quote who="SnallTrippin" reply="1" id="2391584"]I think it would need some drawbacks, like not being able to destroy it, only able to build one, and if an enemy captured it they could steal some of your essence. [/quote] I don't think you'd need much more drawbacks than an appropriate upkeep cost.
[quote who="SnallTrippin" reply="15" id="2391587"]Also I said "I fail to see how the organization has to do with the reduction in #'s," anyway I need to actually work a bit now. [/quote] Okay but I didn't say it would reduce the numbers I just added that to support quanity over quality. It's much easier to start running if 3k others are but if it's only 20 men v 2 I don't imagine the peer pressure/fear to have the same impact.
I like the idea! especially the concept of having buildings like mage towers, watch towers and other buildings built outside your cities. +1
Organisation has alot to do with it. If they were in a formation it'd be harder for the aforementioned 10k peasants to overwhelm them. Even if it was on a large plain there would no doubt be exploitable terrain in a battle that size and you'd need organisation to utlize it. Now if they were all mounted knights with platemail and warhorses that's changing what I was thinking but still I wouldn't rule out 20 peasants depending if they stood there ground and what they were armed with ofcourse.</
[quote who="Allegiance86" reply="398" id="2391531"] And anyone who thinks we dont provide anything more then "technology" you need to recheck your information, The U.S. is one of the biggest suppliers of food to third world countries that cant produce enough food to provide for their own people. Be it mostly rice, atleast its more then alot of countries are doing. I dont think Ive ever heard of Russia or China doing HUGE humanitarian missions. I have heard about them invading other
Well as long as we are being picky I'd agree in so far as the knights were fighting as an organised army and the peasants weren't but reduce the numbers to something like 2 knights versus 20 peasants, my money is on the peasants.
I'm skepitical about X-Com successors due to no one really out doing the first two in my books. Anyways, how about a spirtual successor to lords of the realm 2 and don't say they made lords of the realm 3 if you know what's good for you [e digicons];)[/e]
[quote]h And it will be only a last resort option like that because game over is a too high stake in most cases and whenever it actually matters that you use the sovereign, there will be a certain amount of risk (otherwise why even use your sovereign). [/quote] Because it'll help level your sovereign up and make him/her stronger. EDIT I'd be trying to use my sovereign in all low risk circumstances not just when I need him for a last resort</
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="9" id="2391514"]Well, they should be adding an expert on game balance of some kind to the elemental team soon, I'd wager so we can blame him if it isn't perfect.[/quote] I don't doubt there current ability to balance it even though I do recognise it'll be difficult, just a good point of conversation in my books. EDIT Also I'm impressed with the fanbase for elemental so far.
[quote who="FuzzySilk" reply="13" id="2391509"]Hi. I would like to pre-order and get into the beta, but I am currently out of work and need to know if you are charged now or later when the game is shipped. If it's is now I guess I will have to wait, but if it is later I would love to join. It'll give me something to do when i am not looking for a job. I know today is the last day. Will there be a chance to get into the other betas ie beta2 etc?[/quote] It
[quote who="Raven X" reply="7" id="2391497"] Quoting ozmono, reply 6 If there outnumbered 10-20 to 1 than the lesser quality units should win. Well in that situation yes, the lesser quality troops would win. The lesser would always win with a massive advantage in numbers. I left my post vague. I meant as a general rule with more equal numbers.1000 Knights verses 3000 peasants and I'd go with the Knights. 1000 knights verses 10,000 peasants and I'd go with the peasants.[/q
Banned for blaming the weather on me.
Banned for mistaking a howl for a bark.
[quote who="Raven X" reply="4" id="2391484"]A better equipped army should always stomp a mud hole in a bunch of untrained peasants.[/quote] I disagree although that might better suit such a game. EDIT If there outnumbered 10-20 to 1 than the lesser quality units should win.
I think your both right. It'll be a complicated thing to balance in such a game due to the many factors. Base units, magical powers , magic resistance, different equipment and the composition of troops for tactical battles to name some factors. Trippin you said "As long as upkeep costs are balanced things should work out." which brings me back to my original question(well statement anyway). I hope to see it viable to have large numbers overcome a few higher quality units to a certain
[quote who="Nivad_Blue" reply="2" id="1714915"]Russia fell from economic power and it was still considered a superpower. Cheers Everybody[/quote] Well technically it shouldn't be considered a superpower as a superpower is supposed to describe a clear leader in terms of diplomatic, economic and military strength.
banned for reporting a reporter
I'm just wondering and hoping to incite discussion regarding the balance of troop quality versus quanity. Personally I hope to see both strategies as being viable. However that said I have reservations. If having a large amount of troops can equal high quality troops with good equipment than that might undermine a very exciting part of the game (that part of the game being resource management and unit customization). Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Just thought I'd add a link to the original post as it has been discussed in there. Original Post regarding duel wielding with some discussion