Austinvn

[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="32" id="2994869"]I agree with the idea of a separate training queue. At least in theory I would like a system most where you had a building queue with flexible build time based on population, and a training queue with *fixed* build time, based on what kind of unit you build (and possibly time bonuses from city improvements). To balance this so that you can have similar output levels regardless of number of cities, I would agree with Larienna's ide

[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="34" id="2984965"]As I see it, memory would only be a problem in TC if they are keeping the world map data in memory in order to reduce loading times when switching.[/quote] I could be remembering this incorrectly, but I seem to recall 32-bit memory limitations being brought up when scale of tactical battles was being discussed. Like they could have given us huge numbers of units (i.e. Total War-style, hundreds or thousands) being displayed at once, or custo

Finally upgraded, now I have a 64-bit machine.. full of 32-bit programs. It also has 8GB of RAM, which is at least 4GB more than it ever uses. At least I can join the club of 64-bitters hating on the 32-bitters for holding us back? [quote who="Campaigner" reply="30" id="2984037"]Because the older machines are slow you mean? Would 64-bit Windows help with any of that on older hardware? You make it sound like it. And I thought 64-bit was only for big

[quote who="Cruxador" reply="5" id="2984493"]Making Kenata's weapons mod a core part of the game.[/quote] But that would be easy , where did the $1M go? I'm pretty sure Kenata can't charge royalties for a mod :P

Yeah I'm also aware that those of us who'd try multiplayer at all are a niche of a niche, but I may as well contribute too: please include MP with as many SP features as possible, preferably all of them. FE is never going to be Starcraft, don't worry about tweaking the balance or toning down randomness for multiplayer; some of us just want to share the SP experience with friends, whether it's AI-killing co-op, or friendly/fun/entirely imbalanced competitive games.

[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="16" id="2981303"]I believe this is now the longest we've gone without a Dev Journal update since the release of WoM.[/quote] Either they're hard at work on FE, or else ... well, we're all thinking it, I may as well be the one to say it. Else the Zombie Apocalypse has broken out in Michigan, and the survivors are barricaded in the top floor of Stardock HQ, wishing they were in a rural farmhouse or a shopping mall instead.

[quote who="seanw3" reply="2" id="2981039"]All these things seem to be hard to get the AI to do. If we could absolutely know that the AI is not going to be able to use most of these features for a few months after launch, would you still want them? Keep in mind that multiplayer will not have tac battles. [/quote] I wouldn't want any feature to be left out because the AI can't handle it "yet" - if a feature isn't in 1.0 because of AI, we'll never see it,

Well, it depends on genre. For say a classic RPG, I have no problem with a sequel that is very similar gameplay-wise, mainly a new story transplanted onto an existing engine and game mechanics. For a TBS, where any story is the one you make yourself, one has to expect more drastic changes for a true 'sequel' or there's no point to it, you could just keep playing the original. Elemental tends more towards the TBS side of the equation, especially since its content is newly generated

Well.. again this is just speculation, but I wouldn't call it WoM 2, more like WoM 1.5. It's not like they're remaking the entire game from scratch, which is what I'd expect from a true sequel, but they're not just adding on some extra features/content without changing the core gameplay, which is what I'd expect from an expansion pack. Somewhere in between; a stand alone expansion. .. Of course, I look at some "sequels" in the game industry, particular

Yes, it's stand alone. Those that bought WoM can get FE at a discount or for free, but you don't need to have WoM to buy FE. Anything more than that is speculation at this point, but from what we hear it should be very different from WoM. Based on WoM, using the same game engine, but many systems completely redone (particularly the three focuses of FE: the entire magic system, tactical combat, and the 'world', i.e. all the wild critters and quests and special locations

[quote who="Cruxador" reply="11" id="2975786"] In all honesty, I'm expecting FE to be a decent game, but not some paragon of perfection. Just a game that will be worth playing. Additional patches and expansions may bring Elemental up to cat-ass levels of fun, but I don't think FE will be any more than pretty good.[/quote] My thoughts are somewhat similar - I'm not expecting FE to be the end all of fantasy gaming, but I do hope for it to have solid core gameplay which

[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="7" id="2969006"] Quoting Campaigner, reply 4 It says gamer IQ = IQ of the gamers, right? That's how I read it atleast. If they mean something else then they should make it clear. I don't know how you can make it any more clearer than having the definition of 'game IQ' in the sentence just before the one that gave you a headache. If you really can't ge

I'm curious what players can do to affect stats (strength, dex, etc.). Many of you disagree with having traits that merely add a bit of strength, and I can see why special abilities or more circumstantial bonuses would be more interesting - but if traits don't affect stats, will players have any way to change a unit's strength? Will there be equipment, magic rings or some such, or 'elite training', that can boost a unit's dex? Because if the only way to change stats is

[quote who="Tridus" reply="84" id="2953075"] Except that's not really true. AoW also had the skills you could pick up to improve your empire in addition to spells, so you had two things to research. WoM's research isn't particularly more complicated except you pick an area to go into (but after that just pick the best of whatever comes up from it). And I don't find city development any more complicated except that you have to spam studies and houses in one game and in the

[quote who="Bellack" reply="81" id="2952600"] Well I guess different strokes for different folks. For me and several of my friends AOW:SM is the best fantasy 4x game to date which sadly WOM does not yet hold a candle to. And is more fun than MOM. But then we habe modded a lot of units and maps for that game.[/quote] Thing is, AOW:SM is not a 4x - it's more of a 2-3x, so to speak. It has no technology research (spell research doesn't really count), city founding and d

[quote who="jecjackal" reply="59" id="2945104"]Right now I almost feel timid about using my sovereign because of the risk of loosing the entire game upon their death. If I had the option to essentially keep playing as my successor, I wouldn't mind charging into battle.[/quote] I think that's the whole point - a real sovereign would be timid about charging into battle and anything else that risks his own life, knowing that the 'game' is over if he dies, success

[quote who="Umbranoth" reply="15" id="2940485"]I actually like the Watchtower idea. In fact, I am astounded we can't build any field fortifications, watchtowers, camps or whatnot, and are completely limited to founding a new city, which then takes a whole 15 seasons to build just one hedge wall. How about a much smaller army camp you can surround with stockade within a few months? I want my border forts![/quote] Thing is, what will hedge walls and watchtowers <em

[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="13" id="2940624"]From what I can tell of the AI, it just rolls a random number for buildings deciding what type to build, then builds something with that tag. It appears to be purely random after set numbers and turns, not necessity-driven. For example, the default AI will almost never build a level 5 city because the odds of building population buildings in a level 4 city are extremely low.[/quote] Interesting. So I just need to keep play

[quote who="jshores" reply="6" id="2935392"]I'm very curious about this as well. When it comes to TBS games I am normally a prolific modder, but with Elemental I am afraid to dive right in for a couple of reasons. 1. I have no idea what kind of support for modding we are going to see in the future. We were promised a lot of things in the "official" beta, but I have a feeling we may not see those things. 2. How will FE break our mods? Will FE be so different fro

Be serious guys, they wouldn't alienate the fan base by taking FE into an entirely new genre like FPS or MMORPG. FE will obviously be returning to the roots of the Fantasy TBS genre: a combination strategy board game and pen-and-paper RPG.

Perhaps this has been mentioned before, but in this interview is the first time I've seen it: [quote]We also separated movement from combat speed [in Fallen Enchantress]. In the old system if a unit had 6 combat speed he could move 6 spaces, attack 6 times or a combination of the two. That made combat speed a god stat, since allowing more attacks multiplys a units damage. Now we can have high movement units without making them killing machines (or make really slow killing machines

[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="28" id="2928077"] Quoting kenata, reply 27In my eyes, the killing blow should be the logical conclusion of a tactical maneuver and the shifting of battle momentum. By making the killing blow equate to strengthening units for the long term, the player must gamble units instead of focusing on solid tactical play. And that is why it is interesting. There is risk, cost, and reward involved to make the desicion situational and not something

[quote who="Infantes" reply="11" id="2927382"]Ok, sure, a simple list of names could be pretty easy to implement. But even though that would perhaps be something between 4 and 15+ hours of work, depending on how thoroughly that would be thought through. If you really dug into the matter, did research on citynames in different languages for all of the factions, and if there perhaps also some problem with integrating these schemes would arise, than this could well amount to a day of w

[quote who="Lord Cobol" reply="5" id="2927036"]They are often ok if you just chop a syllable or two off the end.[/quote] This is my solution - there's often a decent name buried in there, somewhere, it's just padded with unpronounceable syllables. I know that much better random name generators are possible, but I prefer FfH2's approach: no random name generator but just fixed lists of city names for each civilization. You really felt a connection to cities like Val

Yeah, definitely agreed, this is an old problem. The game really doesn't need more incentives to group everyone up all the time, particularly not unintuitive incentives like free xp for everyone near a battle, regardless if they actually did anything during it, with no reason not to include them. At the very least the xp needs to be split, so players have to consider whether they really want all possible units in every battle, and ideally (not necessary, but it'd be nice) the