Brainsucker

Love this proposal. why not just make a mod of it. I'll surely play. Seriously, it should be done like that rather than the sovereign that we have now in the game

[quote who="Kadrium" reply="3" id="2774915"]I was just told in the IRC channel by one of the stardock employees that I should simply pretend they don't exist for now. 9:36 PM In the unit desinger, GreenReaper 9:36 PM in single player 9:36 PM equpping units with longbows costs 4 9:36 PM So . . . don't? 9:37 PM Nobody is forcing you to use s

Yes, now I realize the core of Elemental Problem. It is not the game mechanic or something, but the portion of the community who play this game. Not everyone consider Elemental as a strategy game with RPG elemental; some of them consider this game as RPG with Strategy element. That's why, Stardock should "BALANCE" the need of their gamers. My suggestion for the next expansion / Elemental Game, just make two mode. The strategy game with RPG element and RPG game with Strategy element. T

[quote who="Raven X" reply="114" id="2773940"]Frogster, I see there are two parts relating to "Combat" in the poll, so I imagine both those parts may have their own journals asking for input. As I'm sure you're aware, the two topics for combat are: The general Combat System & Tactical Battles What I want to bring up are the threads going on about "Epic Scale", meaning Higher Unit Counts on screen, and I'm wondering if I should bring that up in this thread about "Gene

@Jingseng : That it is. What I mean is that the AI can only explore the things that thinkable by it's creator. Honestly, I'm a gamer, and not a coder. So I don't know about the logic of AI from the point of view of AI Creators. But, I say that from the view of a gamer. My point of view is simple, good players have their own play style. I will use the 4x Game Space Empire V (the Balance Mod). When I play the early version, i can always stick on some weaponary and design. and that style

[quote who="UmbralAngel" reply="1" id="2773796"]I think that having to many features/options isn't a problem for a well written AI. I am writing an AI for a hybrid RTS/TBS right now and my game is fairly complex, its very similar to the layout of Elemental's combat system. The key to writing a good AI for a game where the AI behaves like a player, is to write the AI as if it is a human being, instead of a machine. Personalities, impulses, desires, strategies, all of these should be the core o

Yes, if the AI faction is destroyed by another AI faction, it is good. But if the AI Faction destroyed by the monster MOB, then there is something wrong about it.

That's because they wrong about how to handle the campaign map. With Dinasty, Sovereign and quest feature, we can..., in fact make a good campaign of it. But rather than make it like Relias, we should make it a 4x Strategy with story My idea for campaign is called "DINASTY" DINASTY Chapter 1 You play the first game as a hero named Relias. He is an adventure who has travel far beyond the continent and find the power of shard. By that power he has become a channe

[quote who="MrManNo1" reply="2" id="2773642"] quoting post(some might consider it an exploit) I don't understand how you could not see this as an exploit. Perhaps the Ring should only work on those with essence, or it should give a small % increase to essence.[/quote] I don't see that as an exploit. If only the AI can exploit it, too, the game will be more exciting.

[quote who="JSJ101" reply="7" id="2773430"]"You just want your adventurer go to the next level of dungeon. Honestly, I hate Adventure Tech and hope it would changed." Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm saying. I think the adventuring component is a fun aspect of the game. I'm not sure I understand what your point is, I'm sorry. I'm guessing that English is a second language for you (and I apologize if that's incorrect), so I really don't want to argue about it.[/quote] &nbsp

[quote who="JSJ101" reply="5" id="2773323"]What GV said. I love this tree, and certainly don't think it should be removed. Look at it this way: they're researching the locations of forgotten notable places, resources, and leads on important people wandering the wastes. Imo, there could be more quest types (and more involved) and notable locations, but I would be sad if it got the axe...[/quote] You just want your adventurer go to the next level of dungeon. Ho

[quote who="DKL" reply="2" id="2768704"] What are these people doing, and why are they willing to drop everything to join you, and once they do why are they infinitely loyal? Well, world is barren and destroyed, so I believe they have nothing to 'drop' anyway. Since channelers are the only source of life and progress, its natural for people to gather around them. It would be natural for such champions to request wages or fiefs for their service, but fiefs concept would no

I love this AAR, but it has been discontinued. The problem is, that there is no other long & exciting AAR in the forum. All of them are short and just discontinued quickly

I don't mind with Monster Economy, really. But, Evil Faction Economy as well? It just happen to my game where I get hundreds of gildar by destroying enemy (other Faction) party.

[quote who="DarthJalapeno" reply="69" id="2772609"] Quoting weller1980, reply 68On most other forums this thread would of been frowned upon and closed. However on the Stardock forum we get the top man Mr. Frogboy anwser our questions with honesty and integrity, keeping us updated every step of the way. Ive never experienced such good customer service from game developers, this is my first game with Stardock and although its been well documented it was a rocky start, I think the cust

You won't believe this, my grandaughter marry my grandson that's because I married all my children to Pariden, so we have mutual grand children LOL

The problem of the current Tech concept is that you can focus on warfare tech and forget the other techs to win the game. So rather than you split the civic, warfare, magic, matter that way, I have a suggestion a new tech concept that balance the purpose of every tech tree. With my concept, you can win even if you focus on Civic tech alone So why should focus on civic tech? As I need to go war with other faction? The answer is simple, that the tech is not a practical tech that give yo

Lita can become a good magic user if you imbue her with essense, as she has already good INT from the start. But I agree with NorseDude as I, myself feel that it's funny for someone learn magic while he / she can't really cast magic. Not only that, their (lore master) history mentioned that they could do some magic trick from the beginning. As long as I know, the combat mechanic is work like this : The Attacker Att against the defender's Def. It give some random calculation, but not t

What if... we make magic expertise to the sovereign creation window? For example, there are 4 school of magic. Fire, Earth, Water, and Air. Then there are five level of mastery. With level 5, you can learn the highest of level of the spell, but because of the point you spend, you won't be able to learn the other. So, if you want to master all the existing spell, you should sacrifice the highest spell that the school to offer and trade it with versatility.

I think the global mana pool is the answer to prevent the high level Summon spam on the map, as you have only limited mana to support them. For the sovereign to stay at home (for safety), I can't give any good idea except to steal the AOW Wizard Tower idea. It is too damn good so there is nothing that prevent people use the same method like it.

What if you put the elemental robes and staves to mid game magic tech? As give them to my champion early will make the players able to create a lot of caster early on (make the imbue essense magic wasted)

[quote who="Werewindlefr" reply="44" id="2771009"] Quoting Brainsucker, reply 22 Quoting Fenrirw0lf, reply 19I don't think I've ever heard HOMM battles referred to as grand. Its pretty much just like 5 v 5. with the stacks having a huge number of units. The stack is the reason why people feel so grand about the battle. Even if you just consider it as a cavalry unit with 89 point is just a cavalry with 89 HP, but it still 89 cavalry march together in a battlefi

After reread Mr. Frogboy post again, I realize that General Combat system is different than the Tactical Combat. In tactical Combat Idea, you can say about adding a lot of skills, make the weapon do dice roll, etc. But the General Combat System means that they want to overhaul the whole Elemental Stat Concept, if not the whole gameplay concept. is it true Mr. Frogboy? So... instead of talking about the tactical combat, we should to talk about how should the general combat should work.

Just few things If you want to make Heroes more important on tactical battle, just avoid HOMM Style battle, as they always make the heroes chickened and hide on the back of other units. Plus, if they died, just make a system that allow them to ressurected. But of course, level 1 heroes will always died and can't be called back, as they are not heroes, but wannable heroes. I think that adding more statistic on unit is not a wise idea. Why not just use the current statistic that

[quote who="Fenrirw0lf" reply="19" id="2770833"]I don't think I've ever heard HOMM battles referred to as grand. Its pretty much just like 5 v 5. with the stacks having a huge number of units.[/quote] The stack is the reason why people feel so grand about the battle. Even if you just consider it as a cavalry unit with 89 point is just a cavalry with 89 HP, but it still 89 cavalry march together in a battlefield board.