Spitz

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="11" id="2692009"]Great post! Re City Building always the same. We are thinking of introducing a maint cost on these things to discourage mass building of pointlessness. "In GC2 there was limited terrain and this provided thinking opportunities. In betas past, there was a limit at each city stage on tiles. While a bit annoying, now city building is just going through the motions. Its dull." This is indeed a cha

Still an issue with 3C.

When do you expect we'll get to try out some of the new goodness. I'm a bit put-off from testing 3c since I'm not sure how much of the feedback I'd provide would be useful at this point and how much of it would simply be: "You're worried about that? We completely revamped that two days ago!"

I seem to recall the latest patch notes saying chance of having a child is now 1/250 per turn, so it's pretty rare thing now.

If you've invaded a city and wish to destroy it rather than develop it, how do you do so? I can destroy all the city improvements by razing them, but how do you complete the process and destroy the city center?

Champion units: I'd like to see more differentiation between champion units, with some of them coming with special abilities like increased damage against a particular creature type, increased movement or defense on a specific terrain type, immunity from attack by certain creature types, resistance against damage from a particular damage or magic type. I'd also like to see some Fallen and magical champions. It would be nice if the above champion specializations were linked wit

Well, I have it on good sources that ice elementals usually get bartending jobs. My citizens may be enslaved by marauding armies of demons, but at least they'll never lack for properly chilled mixed drinks.

I exited normally from the main menu, but got an error message about an invalid DX call. The . zip crash file can be found on dropbox.

Each successive tactical combat loaded more slowly than the last. It finally crashed to desktop, but left no crash .zip file. The debug.err can be found at dropbox.

Maybe this is intended, but really? Gold? Mana I could see, or immortal souls or something, but Gildar? What's my familiar/dog gonna do with Gildar? Also, this is off-topic, but that is the ugliest, scariest, most solid incarnation of a wisp I've ever seen. Aren't they supposed to be, I dunno, wispy?

The storekeeper in town calls Lady Porcipinee "m'Lord" instead of "m'Lady". Maybe that's what she wants to be called, but being the most powerful magic user in the world and going by the name Lady Porcipinee, I think he's asking for a beatdown.

So I tried to kill the first opposing sovereign I met. I declared war and nuked him in the tactical battle. He wouldn't go lower than 1 HP no matter how many times I hit him, then he ran away from the tactical battlefield, teleporting back to his only city. I then attacked that city, killing the defending hero. Strangely, although the enemy sovereign was in the city, he didn't participate in the battle. Now the city is mine, but he's still sitting in it. I can't attack him, he

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="18" id="2689592"] In terms of what to expect in beta 4 in terms of documentation, etc., the modders will be pretty much on their own at first since we'll be focusing on going gold. Modders that need hand holding will need to wait until after release. [/quote] I'd like to applaud your priorities there. I think it's well-known that Stardock will do right by modders long-term. I'd certainly like to cheer for continued re

[quote who="Raven X" reply="208" id="2689307"] Your Whole Post is Excellent, Spitz, as is your idea in reply 84. As I pointed out above though, the Team may or may not run into time limitations here. Frogboy stated a while ago that at this point major engine changes won't be possible. Granted, tweaking values and variables is by no means what I would call a "major engine change", how-ever, when you add up the Sheer Amount of All the things that would need changing, well, that's a w

I think the current system of a single tactical action resource (combat speed/action points) is workable, it just needs tweaked by introducing variable costs and percent modifiers to those costs based on the previously existing stats. This is a restatement of the ideas I presented in post #84, with emphasis on tweaking the current system and how those tweaks effect the problems presented. Tweaks to current system : All units with the ability to move (so anythin

The spellbook does not give any indication of how much arcane knowledge it will take to learn a spell that is not currently learned. The arcane knowledge research bar do not give any indication of how many turns it will take to learn the next spell. Also, the spellbook gives information about how the effect of some spells is calculated (damage, for instance), but not for others.

The current spellbook UI queues spells to be learned in the order they appear in the spellbook, rather than the order they were selected. More properly, spells should be queued to be researched in the order they were selected by the user. Currently: User selects to learn Fireball -> Firebolt -> Spell level 2 User learns Spell level 2 -> Firebolt -> Fireball S

[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="86" id="2686513"]Having different attack costs for different weapons and having each stat modify AP cost feels like things would get really complicated really fast and it would be difficult to remember how many attacks you can make for each. It's not good to need a spreadsheet just to figure out what kind of a get up is good for a unit and it would be a pain to balance. The system needs to be relatively simple so that any player can understand how muc

Oh, three other things I forgot. Horses or wargs or other cavalry would increase a unit's movement rate and thus their modifier on AP cost of movement in tactical combat. Flying units would have a flat AP cost of movement into any square, no matter the terrain. An additional interesting wrinkle would be that controlling multiple shards of the same type would act as a % modifier on the AP cost of casting associated spell types. So, if icebolt costs 10 AP to cast at base

I'd like to suggest a system that incorporates some of what's already been suggested in this thread, while also incorporating some changes to make weapon type matter more and deal with some of the issues that have been raised regarding the usefulness of essence to melee sovereigns. Action Points - Each unit gets a set number of action points to spend during their turn. The number is species-dependent, but unrelated to training or armor. I'll put base numbe

Still an active issue as of 3B.

I'm glad to see spouse-killing has a diplomatic penalty. Will we be able to remarry, after a suitable period of mourning, if our spouse dies, or will early spouse-hunting to end your opponents' dynasties be a minigame?

Without proposing a specific solution, I'll certainly add my vote to the idea that it's more important to me that the developers spend time making tactical combat varied, challenging and balanced than making it pretty.

From the hints I've seen about how magic will operate in 3B, it seems shards will only be required for the big, end-game classes of spells. I'd like to suggest that those spells have several levels of power, with the higher level accessible to those who control multiple shards of the same type. Currently, control of multiple shards of the same elemental type confers no benefit, other than the city improvements dependent on them.

[quote who="Raven X" reply="6" id="2680934"]I recommend using a program called Ultra Edit. Best scripting tool I've ever used. It's awesome. Do a Google search on it and I'm sure you'll find a free-ware version or trial version that will do the trick as long as you can complete your work before the 30 day trial runs out. If not, then edit your registry, take all the entries for it Out of your Registry, then it will re-install with a new 30 days of trial time. Is doing that Illegal? No, it's a