#3 is an issue Devs has to address, probably by the use of some clever UI e.g. InfoCard. At a glance on the battlefield, it might be difficult to distingish btw one carrying the "Almighty bow of dragon slaying" vs a clappy toy bow. #3 is a good question indeed. #2; I am sure there are pre-designed units comes with each fraction anyway. They can be as complex as the Devs want.
"Having the Dragon and troops just stand there, with troops randomly dying around it?" Similar to that, but of course NOT randomly dying around. The game will probably show a really quick 0.5 sec animation for each confrontation, & shows what damage is done to the target. It'll look just like your typical turn based TC in AOWSM when you pause (& have enabled the Skip TC animation option). If you don't, the game AI will make the move on behalf of you in
[quote who="AIAndy" reply="126" id="2417380"] Quoting Tormy-, reply 125 Quoting Mandelik, reply 124 Of course, if we're talking multiplayer with a system requiring pause everytime someone wants to give orders or choose between the 15 spells his sovereign can cast, it could end either a click-fest without pauses or a nightmare of stop-go-stop-go-stop-go... Yeah, it won't work in MP games. [Well it works, but it will be extremely annoying...] Maybe pressing the pa
I am not in the beta... but I do want to test the game economy in Beta 1B. I was in the long long economy debate a while back & will definitely need to see what will be included. Quite frustrating... Oh well, what can I do to get the Beta?
B } Hm... maybe my mind was sleeping & haven't say it well. I meant I don't like multiple melee damage types like slashing damage, crashing damage etc. I Like fire, ice damage etc, magical damage type.
[quote]I'm worried the game Elemental is having too many fantasy features being pulled away. I'm worried the game will become another version of Civilization, but with a few fantasy features instead of being a 'Fantasy Game'. [/quote] I've the same worry. I don't care much about man-vs-man focused TBS. This is not the kind of game I want to play. A} This is a great observation. The game need this. B} I don't think damage ty
I do hv the impression that units are designed unit by unit. If that is the case, I am not sure if there is a squad at all.
How you would like Tactical Combat (TC) to work - Make TC easy to understand, hard to master - All TC should be finished in 12 turns, keep it somewhat short - Keep the total number of stats minimal; I suggest only ATT, DEF, HP, DAM, SPEED, MOVE, Weapon Reach, Cover%, Luck%, (and maybe Morale) - Allow dozens of effects that modi
A) A simple Zone of Control ( ZOC ) mechanism will be definitely fun. Your enemy cannot bypass your surrounding 1 hex ZOC unless their SPEED is way higher than yours. However, if you only have a few units in your stack, your enemy can bypass your ZOC if they are way more numerous (e.g. they have total HP of 10,000 vs 500HP of yours). The Mongols will have a very high SPEED so they usually can bypass opponent ZOC. The Mongols
Lord Cobol, pls tell me why that hate rgds to aging in TW. I've never played them. Tasunke, why victory cannot be acheived without the Sov? Afterall there are a lot of forumers that does not want "Sov Dying = Game over". If SD ≠ GO, what should the game do next? To me a heir system is most fun/natural. But what is the best option really?
Nice try, Frogboy, but I don't think this 'Hide the Sov' idea is ideal. AI routine is needed to be implemented on when to hide. A) Assuming this AI routine is 'prefect' so the AI Sov never dies in an ambush by hiding whenever there is danger nearby; it means the AI player will never lose a game until the AI has lost all its cities. Essentially this means a total conquest of all cities is the ultimate game goal, unless other conditions like "Quest Victory, Diplomatic Vic
According to http://elementalbeta.wikidot.com/starting-a-game, there is an only "Difficulty" option avaliable now. Looking at all the replies, looks like IDEALLY at the 3rd screen, it should have following 4 options: 1. Number of Opponents 2. AI Player Skill level (assuming more difficult AI require more time, I hope so! Something like, 10sec, 20sec, 30sec at different AI level) 3. AI Player Resource Utilization Bonus/Handicap level - I meant for the same
What kind of limitation/feature you think to put in the “Hard” game mode? Let me start. I’ll like that in Hard mode, 1) there will not be a save option . When you ‘quit’ playing the game, it automatically saves. A random seed is also recorded in the game save. So player cannot cheat by ‘quit’ and ‘continue’ multiple times to improve an undesirable random result. (There sh
I don't have the beta. Does beta has anything like what I've mentioned in OP. OR if Elemental is still using the traditional Load/Save?
There was huge thread about trying to persuade getting more Races in April 2009 or earlier. "Arriving at distinct descriptions for the Factions seem to be challenging in the beta." I do not have the beta, how do you know it is challenging?
I’ve leave the forum for a while & not so sure what feature has already been implemented to the Sovereign. I am happy that “sovereign dying is a non-negotiable”. I just need to make sure “sovereign dying is NOT Game Over”. Whether a game is over or should not ONLY depends on the sovereign’s life. “Sovereign dying = Game Over&rd
[quote who="Jonny5446" reply="3" id="2307857"] Quoting Cauldyth, reply 2 In this UI, the player has researched the ability to research 3 things at once (no penalty). It seems to me like it should be the other way around. There should be penalties for focusing on only one research item. It makes sense from a logical perspective - adding more people to a project has diminishing returns. If a nation put all of its resources into researching a single thing then ye
I agree with Post #9 to 11. Robbie, your idea is at one higher level of the micromanagement spectrum. The lowest form of the spectrum starts at micro everything, aka traditional TBS. Mine is the next higher one, automate everything possible without the use of AI, the AI never make any decision on behalf of you. Yours is a version of AI governor. Then the highest level of the spectrum is AI play the game (basically) without gamers’ input, a
Great update! The artistic styling looks great even at this early stage. To me, the bluish discs at bottom do not fit into the rest of the gfx. I don't much care if I can zoom to see my population at work. Probably I check out that once and say cool, and this is it. Gameplay (& its innovation) is way more important once the graphics reaches an acceptable level. The tactical combat screen tells quite a bit. (I’ve not played XCOM, some on
I am all for Simultaneous Turn (ST), even in SP, got to use up all my multi-core power! I hate wasting time waiting all other players; ST is the only way to go. Of course, there are concerns with ST. Denryu’s solution maybe a feasible improvement. However, when a turn is broken to different subturns, time is wasted when waiting for the next subturn when you are done with the current subturn. This issue deteriorates when there are more players.<br
Probably ‘quest’ is the wrong word for this, ‘Order’ maybe more appropriate. Robbie, my approach is different to yours. All orders do not involve AI’s speculation at all. Even if there are a few pre-requisites for the Stable building, the game will queue up the pre-req in a sequence determined by its building cost (or some other quantifiable criteria). The game UI explicitly tells how it is prioritized. The UI
I like to micro everything when my empire is small. Is there a way to micro everything for a huge empire AND without the repetition by clever use of UI? I am proposing a questing/queuing system for hero/city that might allow exactly that. I’ve written a crude from of this in this post For example, Gamer quests a city concerned to build 10 Bear Calvary units. The game will automatically calculate what buildings will be
[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="9" id="2280979"] Quoting Darkodinplus, reply 7Just out of curiosity how do you think the "physics calculations" for spreading fire or creating a hill / mountain would affect game-play? I can see what they represent affecting game-play but not the physics calculations themselves for this sort of game. Umm... If physics calculations are used to spread fire, then how fire spreads will be determined by physics calculations. And how fire spreads is defini
In general, I am against the idea in OP and reasons are similar to other posters said. I am against micro, I am against AI governor type automation. I am more interested macro-management. I like to micro everything when my empire is small. Is there a way to micro everything when my empire is huge by clever use of UI? I am proposing a questing system for city (or it is also a demand based econ/production) that might allow exactly that.
EWOM has various Victory point, it is imperative that the AI knows how to achieve that Strategically. I will even say every move of the AI should try achieving this strategic goal. Basically you said to achieve Victory, the AI should define various subgoals and try achieving them. I agree. It will be nice if the AI can pick one of the goals available and take multi-turn actions to achieve it, instead of shifting goals every turn.&nbs