lwarmonger

I've been thinking. Part of the quest victory condition should have a progress chart, or someway for other nations to know how far along a nation is on the path of the final quest. Or perhaps just the occasional quest should open up where a player nation gets the opportunity to send heroes or forces to impede the progress of a nation pursuing the victory quest. It is just that I could see this as a "nasty surprise" victory condition, and part of this victory condit

Personally I don't see having a player surrounded by another player only being able to trade through that territory as a problem. That is what happens in such situations, today just as much as in the past. And insofar as trade, I was recommending a situation where trade largely happens on its own between centers of production and population. As a ruler of an empire your contribution to anything other than specific interstate trade (ie I will ship you 500 tons of grain in e

There are easier ways to solve that problem. First is morale. If all of the units in an army fight to the death regardless of quality then your large armies will always have an advantage over smaller armies. However if morale is a factor then your small, well trained armies will have the opportunity to defeat a much larger army by punching through and creating disorder and panic among the enemy ranks. Second is terrain. If a defending army can pick where it is go

Personally I think that not just different ways to win, but different ways to fight are pretty important. Lets look at Dominions 3. A huge army that doesn't employ magic well can be defeated quite handily by a small army that does employ magic effectively. However even then there are multiple ways to fight. You can outfit heroes with large numbers of magical items that turn them into supercombatants (in Elemental it sounds like imbuing them with essence should also wor

[QUOTE who="NTJedi" reply="9" id="2077038"] If trading is only available via trade routes the weakest players will suffer as the greatest as one or more stronger empires can more frequently cripple their trading abilities. And the weaker player struggles to protect shipments while the stronger player grows and harrasses the weaker player. All the GREAT fantasy TBS games have allowed the trading of goods via

I have to agree that trade routes should be the way to go. Possibly not even set up by the player (trade tended to go where the infrastructure and terms were best). So if you tax the trade coming through your territory too heavily you will find it elsewhere. Or if pirates stick around outside your ports looting ships and you do nothing about it, merchants will cease to come. Trade, for the most part, should be independent from the nation state. Something to influ

[quote who="Nathaniel Richter" reply="3" id="2075958"] I beg to disagree. Auctions can be traced back past 400 BCE so there is plenty of historic suport for this feature. Also, due to the presence of magic we could assume the existance of magical means of fast comunication at least as efficient as the telegraph. This technology kickstarted the emergance of exchanges that would be recognizable to the modern person so this feature is also feasable. [/qu

I think these are good ideas, but somewhat outside the age depicted (which doesn't mean that I couldn't live with them being in the game). Commodities markets are all well and good, however market information, transportation and communications weren't really sufficient to enable anything other than direct bilateral trading between nations, or the wandering trader/independent seafaring merchant. A "commodity market" would be a bit impractical at the medieval/ancient

Well, I guess when talking about revolutions and rebellions it is first important to distinguish between the different types, then how to implement them. First (and most common) is peasant rebellions. A group of poor people who just can't take any more oppression/taxation decide to rise up and kill the local authority figures. These generally don't have much of a goal or organization, and historically were almost always stamped out. These should probably be represent

It would be difficult not to make this unbalancing though. Since some of the main choices are how much of your essence you should invest in your heroes, your nation, your mana pool for superspells, and your own channelers advancement this option would have to be very carefully implemented in order to prevent giving an uber channeller who invests only in himself an overwhelming advantage as he goes around dueling all of his enemies who have invested their essence differently.

Perhaps including Civil War or revolutions as a "Mega-Event" that can be switched off at the startup screen (the only reason I am for it being an option in this case is because Stardock has handled such things that way with Galciv 2). However such a mechanic would greatly increase gameplaye and replayability if done correctly. As for StowMobile's original post, I would recommend that you download the Revolutions Mod from Civfanatic.com for Civ 4: Beyond the Sword. That mod

Such constructed breeding grounds should require food commensurate to the amount of horses or other animals in them though, as that is the usual cost of and limitation of animal breeding.

How about simply representing the fact that cities can't feed themselves... they rely on the surrounding countryside and imports. Cut a city off from those and eventually you will starve them out.

Very, very few medieval battles were like that. At the moment I can't think of any (outside of sieges... Manzikert perhaps, but I think even that battle was resolved in a single day as the Byzantines were routed trying what you suggest), however I do know that the number of Medieval battles that started at sunrise, went on till dark, then had both sides retire to fight again the next day were insignificant when compared to the medieval battles that were resolved by one side breaking wit

Personally I hope they integrate in a Galciv 2 style of production simulation where gold and production are integrated but not synonomous with one another.

They will if you force them dangnabbit!

Hey, magic skyscrapers... although don't sue when your children grow three heads that turn you to stone if you gaze on them. Actually, come to think of it that is a problem that solves itself.

There are so many ways to make those unobtrusive I am not too concerned. If anything else they can just take a lesson from the Medieval TW Campaign map. I thought that trade links were very well and unobtrusively represented there in a way that both added to the game and was graphically pleasing.

[quote who="Rhishisikk" reply="23" id="1958313"]I like the idea of a stables where your domesticated animals are grown (not just horses); I CAN, however, easily see the problem if your worgen riders are stabled at the same place as your Chickens of Doom. [/quote] Hey, those animals will do exactly what nature intended... fight it out for our amusement. The revenue you can gain from selling seats means you can buy your enemies off!

When you are starting out you will probably have very few people, simply because you are rebuilding from scratch. However your world will remain post apocalyptic only until you and the other channellers rebuild it (or cause another apocalypse).

Personally I would prefer for resources to be scarce (or at least have the option to have them scarce in much the same way one controls the galactic makeup at the start of Galciv) because 1) it makes things more realistic (the traditional limitations on the amount of cavalry fielded is the number of horses you can feed or armor you can make) and 2) it causes you to value the units you do manage to field. You are going to treasure those heavily armored knights because their horses, armor

Yeah, and how would the world destroying spells figure into this? At some point the world is going to end, and how could you continue then?

I have complete confidence that Stardock will not sacrifice any singleplayer quality in order to make room for multiplayer.

Honestly the whole time scale doesn't really matter a whole lot to me. As long as I can grow my empire within a reasonable amount of (playing) time I'll be happy

Such promises are easily broken once you have.... BEAR CAVALRY!