Ynglaur

Cari - What if you just set an auto-destination, but allowed the player to override it? Doing so would harm relations (perhaps declare war?), but it would simultaneously remove the micro-management of making the player do it, and open up options for "what happens if I ignore this turn of events". I guess I just don't like the game mechanic of moving other players' pieces around just by expanding my territory. I'd rather the territory push result in a diplomatic push, rathe

In the 2d world, compare Baldur's Gate with, say, Panzer General. The sprites have a few more animations is all. In 3d, it's a bit different, but as Cari says: if you're not going for 1st person (which is more the Action-RPG genre, really), it should be doable.

[quote who="BoogieBac" reply="5" id="2440967"] Intel integrated graphic cards are crap, they say they support things when they don't Even worse is when thei API's return that they support somethign that they don't. Makes it RALLY hard to program a graphics engine when you have DoesCardSupportFeatureX() returning TRUE when it's not really supported. ...[/quote] Which is why Intel should stick with CPUs, and just go buy nVidia or S3 or someone if they want to be

I like the idea that tracks are automatically created over time, but that roads require some investment.

[quote who="CariElf" reply="20" id="2444620"] One thing that bothers me is that SD seems to be proceeding as if the current border-relations system is the final system, i.e. speding a lot of extra time and effort making sure that it works well. As one of the main ajitators for a more reasonable border system, this has me concerned. Actually, the code that I did doesn't require the existing border system. All I did was make it so that you have to be at war with the other player

Baldur's Gate, or possibly Ultima V. I haven't played through Ultima IV or VII, both of which many prefer to V, or Baldur's Gate 2, which many say is better than the first. I haven't played KOTOR, either, which may make my opinion less valid: I've read more than a few reviews that has that pegged as one of the best storylines ever.

I like the idea a lot, actually. It should be an ability, though probably trainable, and should be a nudge to movement. Using "Forced March" repeatedly should slowly whittle away your forces from fatigue and desertion (lessened by training, experience, discipline, etc.). In other words, if players are constantly using it, it's probably too generous. If they're using it to occasionally sieze key terrain from enemies, it's probably better-balanced. The "seizing c

They added such a clock to GalCiv2, for much the same reason... The text size idea is a good one.

She's about to pistol-whip that monstrosity, that's what.

Perhaps it could be implemented if cities were allowed to be closer together? Influence already merges...the city then just becomes an abstract concept, if any given tile can be built upon by multiple "cities".

[quote who="Thoumsin" reply="3" id="2349013"] quoting postThe beta is due out this Fall with the general release Winter 2010. What part of winter ? These begin 2010 or these end 2010 ? Knowing the usual delay for release, i bet on Christmas 2010...[/quote] Software devs got tired of customers flying off the handle every time a project was late by a day, so the industry as a whole is moving towards "seasonal" release timeframes.

Way too much software is too U.S.-centric, and not just in the consumer space. i'm going through a tremendous amount of pain right now trying to demonstrate a Chinese-translated UI, even though the UI's lables are just UTF16 characters.

I think it was Joseph Stalin who once said, "Quantity has a quality all its own."

[e digicons]:frogboy:[/e]

Neat idea, but may add complexity without changing behavior. If players want to take the most advantage of it, they'd need to micromanage. It may be more effective for dynamic experience to apply to heroes, or perhaps the whole nation. If the latter, a timer is probaby in order. Over time the lessons are lost. Just my 2 cents of course.

...but your avatar reminds me of the French flag.

Vad_M - What's the dock/gadget at the bottom of your screen?

I think the the formula to determine the bonus should be moddable, if only in a simple fashion. Linear is nice, but some of us micro-manager simultation-lovers might prefer logarithmic or some other type of diminishing returns.

[quote who="Tourresh" reply="11" id="2404076"]One thing that really determines how much you see custom maps and mods is how easy players can automatically get the files. I look at games like Warcraft 3 and Starcraft where custom maps are automatically downloaded on joining the server and see that they have a plethora of custom maps and people playing them. Most other games don't have this feature and even if the maps are readily available in some official archive it still means that no one pl

[quote who="wknowles9876" reply="6" id="2403454"]I like the idea of having a more "cluttered" map. A pre-industrial world should have defensible hills and river fords, and at least sketch that the rural areas are important. An empty void between cities is just "Galciv with swords", I want it to have depth and reality as itself. [/quote] I agree. Terrain is of huge important to land warfare, and I want that to be shown. It's in

RavenX - Take a look at the Unit Types XML file. %PROGRAMFILES%\Stardock Games\Elemental\data\%locale%\CoreUnitGroupingType.xml. It currently goes up to 1000. There may be some engine limitation, but if so it's probably not an even thousand. Now that I think of it, it has a tag. If the engine can accept a tab, or accept a faction name in the tag, it would at least be moddable to have unit types by faction. I g

Re: scrolling: that's a great idea. Post it as a suggestion. Re: WinXP booting: the closest you could do would be to manipulate the starting order of startup apps. I can't recall how to do it at the moment, but Google can probably find something. It won't be perfect though. In general, Windows likes displaying its desktop long before it's actually useable by anything.

It's mostly useful if you end up with lots of icons on your desktop. You can use it as a poor man's replacement, I guess, though you'd need to reduce to desktop to get at the icons. I generally don't use my desktop to launch apps, but I use it as a holding tank for work in progress.

I don't like the idea of the Sovereign always escaping, but I do like the idea of the Sovereign often escaping, especially if s/he's not in the thick of battle. Likewise for heroes who are similarly, ah, "conservative" during battles. The goal, I think, is to avoid turning sovereigns into permanent bull's eyes to the detriment of other strategies. If players have a variety of ways to conceal them, protect them from assassination, protect them in battles, that shou

I really don't want cities (or anything else, for that matter) generating "free" resources. It does a couple things: 1. It allows large numbers of cities to make up for not controlling resources. Thus, in time, bigger factions will always have a resource advantage over small ones. 2. It makes it far less likely that factions will go to war over key resources. If everyone can have access to "Faery-wrough Adamantium", if only in small quantities, what's the pus