[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="1" id="2351545"]You missed my preferred option for #1. This should be subject to negotiation between players. [/quote] Good idea... wish I would have included the option.
Interesting topic... I just recently created a poll where the community can vote on what happens with the children from a vassal marriage. https://forums.elementalgame.com/362345
From Kotaku review of Elemental: He (Brad from Stardock) did say that you could research potions in the game to make vassal family members more attractive so they’d be easier to marry off—but he wasn’t quite sure yet how the succession of children from a vassal marriage would work . So what's the opinion of the community on what to do with t
One thing I remember about the Space Empires diplomacy was the delay of turns. For example I send a peace agreement, they send a counter agreement, I accept the counter agreement, then they read my acceptance of the counter agreement. The problem here was only after "they read my acceptance of the counter aggreement" would space violence stop between the two players.... they'd be attacking my ships and vise versa. Several times they would accept the peace term
[quote who="Fuzzy Logic" reply="38" id="2341923"]That's one of the reasons I don't use Maxtor drives. I've had four fail on me and that's too many. Now I use Hitachi and have not had a single problem (yet... they all go eventually ) [/quote] I've had excellent luck with Seagate drives
3pm in Arizona... guess we'll have to wait until tomorrow for the new stuff.
As far as I've read in the journals the AI personalities can be modded so we'll see multiple AI personalitiy types become available. As long as we can disable existing AI personalities then with time any player can include whatever personalitiy types they desire for their game. Thus providing games which match the interests of each individual who's willing to hunt the community mods for their favorite personality types.
I covered a related topic regarding water vessels : https://forums.elementalgame.com/336953 I definitely hope water terrain and water activity will have great game depth.
[quote who="Sammual" reply="16" id="2345653"]I'm a big fan of the auto upgrade from Bronze Sword I to Bronze Sword II and the change from Short Sword to Long sword being manual. Sammual [/quote] Agreed Thanks for the info BoggieBac!
[quote quoting="post"]We know there will be dragons, and we know there will be oceans, so I think it'd be neat to have sea dragons, sea serpents, and other aquatic creatures that are sometimes recruitable. Like their land-based counterparts, they would likely be rare and powerful, but could add some variety to the oceans. I'm a little worried oceans will just end up "dead space" on the map, and not really have any part in the gameplay. This happens in a lot of games, though,
For an RTS game I would suggest Stronghold:Crusader For an RPG game I would suggest Neverwinter Nights For a TBS game I would suggest AgeofWonders:ShadowMagic
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="18" id="2342795"]I think I'd want to see more of what kind of strategy is available before I go about promoting change. I mean what does a "bonus" give in a tactical combat? You really have to discuss how units would use these features or how they would appear on the tactical map for them to be functional in Elemental. They'd be great as its written for Civilization, but it requires a lot more consideration for a tactic
Stardock may already have a few of these places, but may find new ideas in this topic to improve existing ones. It should be possible for players to build some of the building types listed… such as Towers. <span style="color: #000000; font-family: "Verdana",&qu
[quote who="Jmandarwin" reply="4" id="2341040"]I think it's a very good idea, but I would prefer a system with benefits/penalties. For example: +10% defense, -5% training, -5% attack. This way the player would have to think about the tradeoff, and think a little more about making decisions and plan for the future in the game. [/quote] [quote who="psychoak" reply="9" id="2341516"]I'd love to be able to build customized defenses that got used on the battle map. Different pres
[quote who="Lomion Agarwaen" reply="13" id="2341783"]What about building towers, forts, etc. outside of cities? I was hoping that you could build one in the pass through which enemies might easily come. That way you have the bonuses the tower grants? I guess this is similar to Starbases in GC2. Additionally, maybe walls could combined with towers as well. Think great wall of China. Not cheap to build, but it would give you a great tactical advantage or protect your small peac
[quote who="Tamren" reply="12" id="2341767"]I still don't quite get what you mean. Are you saying that we could upgrade the center "home" tile in a variety of ways? [/quote] The city evolution would be separate from the optional fort types, thus if someone wanted a specific type of fort for specific advantages it would be the choice of the sovereign. This allows for more strategic combinations such as a village with a citadel, a city with a wizards tower, etc., etc., . 
[quote who="Josef086" reply="22" id="2341190"] EvilTesla-RG writes: Healthcare may need reform, but the government shouldn't be the ones doing the reforming. I think that about sums it up. [/quote] This is very true... the government has a huge list of departments with&n
[quote who="Tamren" reply="10" id="2341528"]Sounds too limited to me. I don't want to decide between a wizards tower and a giant castle. Whats to stop me from building a giant castle and adding a wizards tower to it? [/quote] That removes not only the visual variations since by mid_game all major players will be using the wizards tower and giant castle combo, but it also sends us back to using a linear path where one or two types are superior. Each type of fort shou
[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="1" id="2340963"]Why restrict it to one type? I always thought of forts as being to some degree modular, with different things that you can put on in edifferent combinations. [/quote] In my example each of the fort types can be upgraded further, but a wizards tower would never match the defense of a castle. The player can improve each structure as long as time and resources allow the upgrades. I'll definitely add the upgraded
One idea would be allowing the sovereign to choose a type of fort for each city. Each Fort Type can provide a specific set of advantages each with its own building cost and building timeframe for game balance as well as deeper strategy. [FortOption1] 1 - Default {Nothing No advantages or changes} [b]EXAMPLES (in random order):[/b] [FortOption2] 2 - Rampart {5% Defense Bonus; 5% Archery Bonus} [FortOption3] 3 - Garrison {5% 
[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="45" id="2339548"] Pidgeon Pidgeon Writes: Although I would argue that including less-common fantasy creatures (ala Rakshasas) is hardly more work than including classical ones. NTJedi Writes: As seen above I wrote new fantasy creatures are more difficult and you wrote a response disagreeing Rakshasas are not more work. I never e
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="6" id="2334715"] I also hope we see not only a variety of terrains, but unique strategies and uses with those terrains. Here's a list of terrain ideas I posted earlier this year: https://forums.elementalgame.com/345423 lol. I'm the last post in that thread already. (other than you) [/quote] I know you've seen the thread already, lol, si
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="2" id="2331331"] I'm hoping to see a variety of terrain features by the final release. [/quote] I also hope we see not only a variety of terrains, but unique strategies and uses with those terrains. Here's a list of terrain ideas I posted earlier this year: https://forums.elementalgame.com/345423
Just a reminder to everyone to be checking all email sources.... that's all I can say. [e digicons]:grin:[/e] [e digicons]\o/[/e]
[quote] You're sort of contradicting yourself. If you didn't catch it, I was exaggerating (or.. I guess the opposite of exaggerating) when I said "a few sentences." I simply wanted to get across that it appeared to me that you were suggesting that familiar creatures should have less comprehensive in-game descriptions and histories behind them. And I couldn't disagree me. Whatever the creature, however common or rare, should receive the same treatment in this area; anything else wou