Darkodinplus

What I'm suggesting isn't a new alignment system but just a way to give a Channeler's alignment a legal context and base of operation. Thus expanding the potential for game-play / lore in the elemental world. As I said i've never personally seen or played a game where you actually got to establish a rule of law for a nation. Most games just let you pick good / evil and maybe a form of government but nothing directly relating to laws, courts, and enforcement.

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="7" id="2151099"]I definitely want mechanics like this of some sort. I don't think they need to be a replacement for 'alignment,' but I do think the Machiavelli loved-feared dialectic is worth considering. [/quote] Did he suggest this should replace alignment? If so I agree 100% this shouldn't replace the tired but true good, neutral, evil alignment system. As I understood it he was just proposing a fame / reputation system for elemental that wo

Rather than have two linear systems that occasionally interact like you suggested above I think a triangular system of fame or reputation would be better suited for Elemental. This would be an example of the system where every Channeler would start at the top

The triangle death post is a nice touch and yes there are a lot of MOM fans in this place.

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="1" id="2141067"] I notice your level 2 seems to have all enforcers, what about systems where the point is that things were not enforced, or enforced very loosly by no single group in particular?[/quote] No, no I didn't mainly because it seemed counter-intuitive to me . You could have a level 1 option of anarchist system where the strong survive and the weak die and pretty much anything goes if you have the power to pull it off. Then you

You know what I just realized? That I’ve never played a game where law or some formal system of legislation, judiciary action, or enforcement has been available for the player to manipulate and affect the game world. Obviously, a system of law could easily get complicated and I wouldn’t want the player to actually have to meet with congress, propose a new law, sign the law, enforce the law, interpret the meaning of the law, etc, etc that wouldn&rsq

Well, if the suffix in Elemental holds any weight you might avoid putting any unreasonably large hopes on a reduced emphasis on military victories.

[quote who="NTJedi" reply="19" id="2137390"] otherwise not naturally available to humans. [/quote] This is the inherent flaw in your argument which is we are exclusively discussing events, species, and organisms that aren’t natural by their very nature and whose origins are largely subjective. The fact that all traits, abilities, and attributes of which you speak could easily be recreated in humanity alone in a fantasy game util

[quote who="NTJedi" reply="14" id="2136578"] Since magic would have to be used to allow units to walk thru walls than it would not be a natural characteristic. Heck on your theory why not have all game units as human where "magic" can be used to make them more unique. A magic spell gives one human unit fire breath, another human has a magic spell which gives flying, another human unit has a spell giving horns to be a min

I personally don’t understand the logic behind the whole “if all the factions are human they aren’t as diverse as classic fantasy races.” I do understand the frequently used example of a wraith or ghost passing through a wall which is impossible for a “normal” human but this is really just a context argument it lacks true weight especially in a world with magic. <p class="MsoNo

Reply 21 in Thread however the simultaneous is implied rather than explicit so that is still sketchy.

The time line would potentially be a problem if the Channeler can get married and have children and the children themselves could pose a problem. I can see a way around this given Elemental’s sketchy plot but some assumptions would need to be made. Assumptions: Channelers can only have one child. Channelers can die of old age. Effectiveness of a Chan

Caravans hold a unique opportunity for elemental depending on the level of interaction they can have on the game world. I would suspect that like GalCiv2 you will have a number of statistics for cities/villages. So the urgency of a particular caravan would largely be dependent on a city's past and the current situation. Caravans also open up the possibility of devious actions if you can interact with them directly. For example lets say Me and Mr.X go to war but it becomes to costly an

[quote who="ubernaught" reply="3" id="2133507"] I'd always thought when multiplaying HOMM3, that if you could just ditz around in your kingdom when it wasn't your turn, planning your moves in advance, then the game as a whole would get a healthy kick. [/quote] Unlimited actions in a limited scope during other players' turns? That has possibilities I think and I do believe that some where Brad said Elemental would have simultaneous continuos turns similar to the cor

As I recall GW Swicord mentioned something similar to this in another thread but there is currently no official news confirming or denying a lineage systems existence in Elemental. That is one feature I always kind of liked in Total War although I hated how wives didn't really have major stats of their own. If Elemental does have a lineage system I would like to see a serious amount of thought go into it. So a channeler's child could potentially have a mix of strengths and weaknesses not only

Beware speaking of elemental in any such fashion as to explicitly or implicitly refer to game-play in any way, shape, or form relating to a "Real time strategy" will invoke the ire of the TBS masses. That being said I had similar such ideas but Brad's response seemed to suggest to me that the game will have no true "real-time" tactical combat which can be found in page 1 of the thread Concerns I'm starting to have .

Very nice to have a rough idea of how and when events are going to occur.

[quote who="b0rsuk" reply="25" id="2125722"] Darkodinplus: If you see no differences (rather than not admitting them), then my opinion is you're not perceptive enough and wouldn't make a good game developer. I don't think it's worthwile responding to you, as you tend to ignore points I make.[/quote] I don't care about your opinion I'm more concerned with facts which are scarce to say the least in everything you've said so far. Not that I really care because I don't thi

The only option in Diablo II was save/continue. Hardcore mode only meant if you died you were dead permanently and would have to make a new character. Diablo did use a save/load system however. The psychological argument has little to no validity in a game unless it is suppose to be a psychological thriller and definitely no connection to the type of save system implemented. None of you have offered a tangible example of any difference created by save/continue that would increase the val

Massive maps + intelligent automation for management + magic + war = epic win (the equation of champions)

I understand that you will be able to include different units in the larger groupings that would be completely insane if you couldn't. All I'm saying is I would like to have the ability to include multiple types of units in a squad I created. So for example I could have a squad of 9 spearmen and one dismounted Hodarian Knight to make a 10 man squad.

[quote who="b0rsuk" reply="16" id="2122833"] Consider for a moment that not necessarily all you disagree with is a waste of time, people have other views, and may have tried both design schools unlike you. Just because you don't see sense in something doesn't mean there is no sense in it. You try to portay your opinion as an absolute fact. [/quote] I've played games with save/load and save/continue obviously, you shouldn't make assumptions as to what type of games some

What doesn't make sense about the save/continue argument is you can do the exact same thing with save/load as pointed out by Zubaz and others. However if you have save/continue only there is no easy way to adapt it to save/load (unless you fool around with game files which is a pain). So by having save/load Stardock would be including an option for save/continue and everything in between. Suggesting that Stardock waste time making two separate save systems when one of the two options (save/lo

[quote who="Zubaz" reply="12" id="2122245"]If the save/load is implemented doesn't that satisfiy both parties? The player can set an internal rule not to load anything but the last save. Isn't the point to have the game be fun for the most number of players?[/quote] I believe this is what's called " Sage Advice ", well done Mr.Zubaz well done indeed.

I really don't see a difference in challenge between save/load and save/continue. I like save/load better because I like saving before epic battles or before accomplishing something of major importance to me so I can later go back and load that specific event whenever I feel like it. You can't do that with save/continue which in my opinion only takes away from a game with out adding anything of value.