I like the sound of that. Maybe that could be a character trait that a sovereign has a twin. Two weaker sovereigns with a linked essence pool. You may not be able to field as much firepower, but you'd be able to cast spells at the frontline without leaving your capital unguarded.
If you mean a kind of long-term politics sim like Victoria or Crusader Kingdoms and the like, then yeah, I could actually see that working out pretty well. Maybe a later stage of the game taking focus away from constructing cities and exploring, and more focus on diplomacy and global warfare. But I think it's better to avoid the spore trap and just focus on one stage of gameplay. Also, dwarf fortress is more a s
Whenever a unit that has been recruited as a company sustains casualties, all companies are reduced by that number of casualties, and the amount of units trained per company is also reduced. For example, a company of eight (bug had already occurred once before) footsoldiers lost three units taking a city. Every company in my army was reduced to five units, and companies can only train groups of five units. I'm not sure if company strength is reduced as a res
Bear in mind that this is the beta. They've mentioned in the update schedule that some things, like art assets, aren't going into the game until release, and they aren't done sticking everything into the game yet. Some techs, for example, have no effect right now (I'm looking at you, katanas), and the tactical battle system isn't in the game yet, and neither are spells. Just give it some time.
Yes, no doubt there will be extensive modding done to the game, but I for one am completely ignorant when it comes to modding items. It'd just be a nice little touch out of the box, even if it was just there to hold us over until modders go nuts on it.
I know that, at the current stage in the beta, not all weapons are integrated. That's not what this is about. I have this idea for further customizing troops. Rather than giving us an iron longsword, give us some cosmetic variations. No stat differences, just something for us to keep troops differentiated from one another for the sake of customization. For example, said iron longsword. Give us a scimitar, rapier, big murder
Hell yes for paradox-style nobility all complaining up in my grill So long as "set them on fire" is a viable option, of course.
Okay, anyone else get this problem? Elemental won't let me install it. It just keeps getting hung up on the EULA screen, won't actually load the EULA or let me check the box to continue. Edit: Nevermind, working now. I guess Impulse has some kind of problem connecting to whatever it needs to connect to on my computer.
Well, here's hoping we get some kind of ritual dance magic in Elemental, if only so it can be the Dirty Dancing game I always dreamed of having. But seriously. Beta 2 needs to come out. I kinda made a few bets and sacrificed a goat.
[quote who="Servius" reply="7" id="2640867"]My second best was to just make volcanoes everywhere and kill everyone off including me.[/quote] Very Dwarven, good sir. I approve.
So, how long until the AI does cheesy things like making a mountain wall or its own island?
So long as it doesn't have lunatic ai like in Starcraft 1 (automatically send units at your base, cheats in resources, targets units based off of grouping) or in Dawn of War (the difficulty was literally just a modifier to the resource gain rate of the AI, always knew exactly where infiltrated units were located), I'll be happy.
WEGO sounds a lot like Ogre Battle to me. That means I am behind it 100% all the super fun happy time. I'm sure it will result in endless instances of me shouting Zap Brannigan quotes at my poor army as they try to carry out my impossible orders ("INFANTRY, ATTACK FROM THE SKY"), but hot damn would it be worth it.
[quote who="Simsum" reply="27" id="2629773"] I really, really, really think you should introduce some logical objectives for the attackers & defenders in each battle[/quote] Objectives would be fantastic to have in tactical battles, and maybe we could even take it to affecting armies on the map. Like, say there is an army inbound on your city, and you know you can't take them in a fair fight. You send a raiding party with the objective
Ooh, also, in the spirit of X-COM, would there be destructible terrain? I don't want to stop my war on trees for anything. NOT EVEN A REAL WAR
The way the total war series has managed to allow retreats without it becoming a runfest is to allow units to only choose to run once, the second time they have to stand and fight. I'm very much in favor of a system like that, but would also like to speak against winner-take-all style of armies being utterly annihilated at a loss. I'd hate to lose a general without seeing how he dies, and having some say in the matter, you know?
Well, yeah, not completely random. I meant random as in you can't be sure of every game playing out the same way. Sure, some events tied to triggers like "YOUR PEOPLE ARE STARVING" or "YOU IGNORE YOUR ADVISERS" or "YOU CAN'T CUT BACK ON FUNDING! YOU'LL REGRET THIS!! YOU'LL DOOM US ALL!" kind of stuf, but also some things that you can't predict as much. Stuff like "holy crap trolls eating my grain" or "a new cult worshiping the fallen has sprung up" or "a
What this sounds like to me is like in King Arthur, where you periodically have the opportunity to embark on little text-adventures for fun and profit. They came with rewards like special generals, artifacts, spells, and the like, and were kind of the only thing keeping me playing the game. They really helped to breathe life into the game, and make it feel like more of a living world, and helped you to think of your generals and leader as having distinct personalities. Lik
I would like to say that I'm uncomfortable with this. The idea of not being able to join together with a nearby player so we can fight off a threat from another player. We may both be untrustworthy amoral bastards, but by gum we're untrustworthy amoral bastards from the northlands, not like those snakes down south. I'm basically opposed to anything that forces me to run my nation a particular way. If I want to trust Baron Von Backstab, that should be my mistake mista
Here's a thought: Give Warlike races a boost to military research for successful military actions, the idea being that they are constantly testing new strategies and equipment, then refining them after the results. That way, warlike races have something to encourage warlike behavior, and won't get completely left in the lurch by tech races.
Maybe the more warlike races could have some kind of morale boost, making them less likely to retreat? Or maybe they could be partially immune to the negative effects of a long war (in civ terms, no citizen unhappiness from prolonged fighting)?
I have a few ideas how Empires could pull off cultural domination. 1) Propaganda. It's not how much higher your standard of living is, or how enlightened your society is, or even how liberated your citizens are; it's the perception the target civilization has of those levels. You spread rumors about how happy your people are, send out trained actors to bring carefully constructed "classical works" to the foreigners, and put on grand displays of wealth.