+1 to single build queue for more meaningful choice (may not be realistic, but it's always been a good, clean mechanic). +1 more to the ability to pause a single item in the queue for emergency defender / more immediately useful building that was just unlocked.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="10" id="2991056"]It is an issue because I can't click the train button unless I have materials for 4, even if it just costs for 1. The bug remains in 1.39 beta, as do the rest of these bugs.[/quote] More fundamentally, a UI that displays something other than what happens is broken.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="4" id="2990589"]Awesome. I'm feeling pretty good about the new beta that should be live for you guys tomorrow. [/quote] Awesome! Rock on, Froggy:-)
Aha. Thanks, Heavenfall:-) Hopefully they'll call that out better in FE.
Thanks:-) Btw, was there any graphical marker to indicate the special-ness of the capital? Because I'm still drawing a blank.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="1" id="2989782"] and this is an example of turning the number of repeatable buildings you can build in the capital city of empires, at level 2 only, into 4 instead of 2. [/quote] Interesting! How does the system determine the capital? Is it just the first city built? The one with the palace? What if the original capital is captured or razed? You've roused my interest, as I don't remember any sort o
[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="12" id="2989180"]I really don't feel like hexes / squares is that big of a deal. And I kind of agree that hexes always give a more hardcore vibe to any game. Whenever I see a board game with hexes I immediately get the feeling that this is ultra strategic with the expense of approachability. I don't mind that, but I don't mind squares either. And I used to like being able to move with a numpad. Nowdays I only have laptops so I don't ha
[quote who="flymar" reply="56" id="2989215"]What about autopilot lines or showing path at issuing a move command? [/quote] Slam dunk requirement, which pretty much everyone on the Elemental forums has requested at some point, with no response that I've ever seen. We'll see.
[quote who="Lord Xia" reply="7" id="2986881"]Oh, and the above was complete and utter bullshit, please disregard all of it, posted in good fun.[/quote] Clearly. But, um... is it wrong that to me your description sounds like it could be a really fun game? :-)
Yeah, I always thought that was odd. I don't know that it rises to the level of woes, though, just strangeness. [e digicons]:grin:[/e]
[quote who="Jam3" reply="22" id="2984802"] a map that your able to expand you empire into but still retains uninhabitable areas. An end game map that doesn't look like a full cultural border encompassed inudstrial era civ map [/quote] That would be awesome. Interestingly, you could have the caravans / roads create a thin ribbon if influence between cities that would somewhat repel spawned monsters; if you wanted a stronger presence, you could create
[quote quoting="post"] When recruited heroes are indeed different from each other. But they all can get the same weapons, they all can be imbued with magic... after a while they are all the same. My suggestion is to limit heroes in what they can do. That is a big mistake in a gameplay which in fact repeatedly has been described as one that tries to "do too much". Heroes IMO should be specialized in the kind of weapon/armor they can carry. Maybe some of them are una
[quote who="kryo" reply="29" id="2983063"] Quoting harpo99999, reply 20I was IN the wom beta from beta 2 It was available during the first four or five months from start of the public beta. We installed a shortcut to the tracker site with the game and everything.[/quote] So was the spam from beta users, or was it a problem that it was publicly available and those not in the beta were spamming it? If the 2nd, could you have limited access to the bet
[quote who="stevelamperti" reply="259" id="2980289"]Speaking from a make the game interesting point of view, I quite like the idea of specializing in different elements. For example, as in a previous post, you've been researching fire magic, have a couple of heroes who specialize and then you get a few air shards. Great! This will make you have to adapt to the conditions of the world. The player will have to consider changing tactics to deal with a new situation.&n
[quote who="cammagno74" reply="7" id="2978719"]ill, I think that the counterattack should do less damage in general, and when it is the "counterattack of a dead" it should do even less damage...[/quote] The point is that it's not a counterattack, but rather a fight (simultaneous attack). That actually makes the most sense, really - groups of warriors don't just stand there and politely wait their turn when you run up and start bashing them with your weapon
[quote who="TorinReborn" reply="56" id="2977141"]If we must have customization then factions need to have access to different special abilities for units as well as different physical look. Of course some abilities can be common, but many need to be faction exclusive.[/quote] This. If you design your own units (and we do), then they will (of course!) all end up playing the same (which is boring) unless there are unique, desirable options for different factions. No
[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="70" id="2978377"] The whiteboard also says: - Rare/Uncommon/Common/Unique/Set Item Types - Skill Trees for Champions - Better Quest System (i.e. quantity, quality, UI) - Improve the Minimap [/quote] Yay skill trees! That said, I have the horrible impression that we'll actually get a simple semi-randomized list of traits to choose from. A step forward, but still depr
[quote who="Winnihym" reply="71" id="2978434"]From where I stand, interesting combat starts at interesting choices for unit design. And interesting choices for unit design starts at interesting choices of city planning, which arise from interesting, flexible choices in economy planning, which arises from interesting, diverse, unique technical and magical research trees. ...[/quote] Well said. Your post does a good job of showing the benefits, importanc
[quote]So to the devs what do you intend to offer loyal customers of WOM as any kind of incentive to continue to be a customer of Stardock? [/quote] All posing about customer loyalty aside, they plan to offer the only thing that ever gets anyone to continue being a customer of any (non-service-based) company: a product that people want. In this case, a good game. Frankly, most of the people who bought WoM and were disappointed would have bought Fallen E
[quote who="seanw3" reply="2" id="2977920"]Magic the gathering could potentially provide some really interesting spellbooks if you imagine each deck style as a spellbook and each land card as a shard. I wouldn't mind a few destroy all creatures spells. [/quote] Absolutely; as I've pointed out elsewhere , using M:tG as the source inspiration is a big part of what made Master of
It's odd to me that no one ever realizes the most sinister use of air magic - denying it to your enemies. Most land species die pretty quickly without breath, and exertion (say, trying to attack the person preventing air from entering your lungs) only hastens that demise. Utterly brutal, and probably pretty easy (you know, if magic were real and based along classical-element lines).
It's good to see you back, Brad :-)
[quote who="seanw3" reply="52" id="2976761"]That was more so a comment about release dates being absurd estimations. [/quote] Ah. Still, I stand by my statements:-)
[quote who="seanw3" reply="50" id="2976550"]I have begun to realize the fundamental flaw with forums is that we all respond faster and in greater number than it is realistic to expect from the developers of the game. We may all come to a consensus here about quality and hopes and the vitality of the game, but no one is going to change anything. I think it is time to just wait till January 2012 to see if the game is any good. I am assuming that is when the
Do you still think you'll have a chance to dig into the tactical AI in WoM?