NTJedi

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="3" id="2100383"]The few hints we've had about essence so far leave me with the impression that it will have just a few uses and probably no direct spell-like effects. Essence retained means a 'stronger' channeler unit (my guess is the strength is in how much mana you can handle at once--more essence means more mana flow). Essence 'invested' means either restored/cleansed lands or an enhanced champion. Maybe combining an essence investment w

I agree with Silicor... there are several ways to play multiplayer as well which won't leave any one individual feeling bad. For example all humans can play against allied AI opponents. Another method is the game can be setup where it's three humans against one human player, thus the one human player already knows he's probably going to lose so there's no shame or embarrassment when it occurs as its almost expected.

[quote who="lwarmonger" reply="1" id="2100224"] I don't know. I'd always envisioned more of an investment in certain areas that counteract the inherant weaknesses that every channeller starts off with at the beginning of the game. Some (not all), but some of what you mentioned seems better suited to a game where magic is supposed to be more common than it would seem Stardock wants here (i.e. teleportation, and I hope they don't do imbuing land that way... it sounds

I recall reading we will have the choice of evolving our Channeller into a powerful force such as Sauron or we may choose to imbue or essence into other parts of the game. I have listed ideas for different ways essence can be distributed. Each choice can have an associated essence cost determined by developers. 1) Terraforming = <span style="colo

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="10" id="2089009"] Also, NTJedi, based on that same post, it looks like you're missing: Housing, Barracks, Mine, Mine Training (?), Mana Generator (probably temporary name), and Keep (although I think that's the one building you start with when you settle a new city). [/quote] [quote who="igoraki" reply="21" id="2096487"] So i guess we will have basic military training facility - train soldiers t

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="11" id="2090940"] Seems like our discussion is more or less coming to a close, NTJedi Quoting NTJedi, reply 9 Awesome, if you're using a system with an 8GB setup you're probably running a 64-bit system as well. Hopefully there's more beta testers also equipped with 64-bit systems using 6+ GBs of RAM. Yes, I am running a 64-bit system, but sadly I'm not . I'm a mac guy. OS X is 64 bit

[quote who="mrakomo" reply="24" id="2096645"]I hope the the content will be moderated. Otherwise it will turn to the chaos. [/quote] I'm sure the community will be communicating and reading the forums to minimize conflicts for new creations. The most popular creations will naturally evolve to be the most user friendly for implementation and compatibility due to communications amongst the community.

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="8" id="2089682"] If they decide to work on a sophisticated trade system at the expense of depth in a feature that I think is more important, then I can only trust that Stardock believes that their time is better spent on the trade system. And I would withhold judgement until I play the game they create. If you feel otherwise, then by all means refrain from suggesting your own ideas - we will just have to accept that we have totally diffe

Perhaps anytime a champion or channeller strikes an unusually very effective blow during combat the game could capture a screenshot (JPG) which is later used as one of the random loading screens. This strike might be from melee combat, ranged combat or spells used during combat. Gamers could then remove undesired screenshots and/or possibly add their own as well.

1. Yes, definitely multiplayer. 2. Multiplayer would hopefully allow: LAN games, Online games, Hotseat Mode and PBEM Mode (Each of these would bring in a group of customers which might play only one type) 3. My impression of this quote is that once you've won a game you can choose to have your the game map &nbs

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="6" id="2089045"] The whole point of making suggestions is to get Stardock to lean towards them. My point still stands - we have to know that Stardock knows when to stop leaning and fall over, and when to stand up straight again. I am most definitely not going to refrain from making a suggestion for fear that Stardock might like it. I hope you make all the suggestions you'd want to see in the game, too. Quoting NTJedi, reply 5 Su

<font style="font-size: small; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Tim

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="1" id="2088336"] And I love how you're focusing only on the ways that a sophisticated trade system could make your starting position more difficult and completely and totally ignoring how it could make it better. Being in a good trade location might be the one thing that makes your otherwise horrible starting location passable. I've never played Dominions 3, but I have played AoW:SM and Civ 4, and your use of them, while understandable, kind of

[quote who="Fenhiro" reply="6" id="2086527"]Lol, does anyone remember Empire Earth's Manuel? that was a mix between a novel and a paper weight. i had text books smaller then that thing. [/quote] You should check out the 300+ page manual from Dominions_3 (Fantasy TBS)! This games graphics are from the early 90s, but it's a game with lots of depth and strategic options.

Added the Stables/Ranches into the list. Setup Marketplace as the first economy structure and then the bank is an upgrade which appears as an extra building next to the marketplace. I like the idea of race specific buildings where several can include upgrade paths via gold, resources, magic, quests and/or time. I didn't add any into the list otherwise I'd need to create a general section, the empire section and the kingdom section.&nbsp

Here are some ideas for Stardock on the types of buildings which can be placed/built inside a town. Anything listed can have a balanced cost associated such as gold, magic, resources and/or time: <span style="font-size

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="24" id="2086732"] But my point is that I don't think it's possible to balance teleportation costs if teleportation is used for foreign trade and you want unrestricted and unlimited trade from early on. Let's say I send a quick flying unit to explore early on and discover a distant nation. To be able to really trade with that player, especially so early in the game, the costs of teleporting resources across the map would have to be very manageable. A

Hello MichaelCook ... I recommend trying the Dominions_3 demo while you're waiting: http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/DOM3/DOM3_page.html I recommend your first game be played on a large map with only a few p

I think we can all agree that we'll have a more clear picture on the game once the full beta arrives. Someone may be worried the game will be too complex now, but once you play the full beta you may feel the game is too shallow. One area which has me slightly surprised was hearing the technology trees were relatively small, but being optomistic I'm thinking gamers can expand on the technology trees and other areas using the Integrated Modding Environment mentio

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="17" id="2083344"] Oh there should definitely be teleportation, hopefully several methods of it. However, if they'll be cheap enough to be used for large amounts of trade, and available to everyone from the very beginning of the game, then teleportation would not only be cheapened but way too cheap! It means from very early on I'd be able to teleport troops and all huge distances for small mana costs. I'd much rather teleportation of anything more than a l

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="10" id="2083222"] Do you expect someone to actually edit all the living units and provide each of them an attribute for one spell ? no, we expect them to edit all undead so that they are not healed by that spell. [/quote] That could eventually be 100+ undead units... and three spells of this type would triple the effort. Much easier for assigning a single tag when a unit is created and then once the spel

[quote who="Netaddict45" reply="8" id="2082990"]Types.. Types.. Types.. I don't see it. You've got a man, you give him stuff, you train him to use it, what would a "type" have to do with it? It would just be some kind of sub-classification of this. There's more variety without limiting units like that. Any special feature of a certain kind of troop would then be some kind of attribute. [/quote] Without Tag Types... how would someone create

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="15" id="2082804"] Quote from pigeonpigeon: I'll say it again that the possibility that an exploit may or may not be discovered after release is a terrible reason to not even bother developing a feature. Seriously, worst reason ever. And I'll also say again that for me, the ability to have instant foreign trade across arbitrary distances, and yet having to wait 3 turns for my swords t

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="11" id="2082035"] I already covered the bit about bad starting locations - nice of you to completely ignore reasonable arguments just because you can't find a flaws in them. And quite frankly, a sophisticated system needn't have more bugs, exploits or cheating involved than a simpler one - it would only have more of such problems if it weren't tested and developed sufficiently. [/quote] I didn't ignore your comments on bad starting loca

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="9" id="2081389"] I said there should be as few options as possible in the beta. .... ... The final product should have lots of options (but I think keystone features that are at all fundamental to gameplay should remain set in stone). [/quote] Well if the beta will only be having as few options as possible than we should stick with the simple, secure, stable traditional trading system... details later. [qu