vieuxchat

[quote who="RisingLegend" reply="169" id="2584222"] I want simplicity, yet depth. As I ramble, this is what I really want. This is what dwarf fortress lacks. It has complexity and depth. If we get to a place where things are simple, yet there is great depth then this game will be great. Its extremely hard for simplicity and depth to coexist. What we can agree on is that we want depth in this game. As soon as you focus on making the game "simple enough" you ar

EDIT: Pigeons *sigh*

The problem with caravans is that if they become so dramatically important, then we need ways to defend them. And choosing WHERE they are built would be an absolute must-have feature.

At the moment you can train "veteran" units or "elite" units that get just more hp. I also think they should get more "skill slots". For instance a barely trained peasant has no skill, a regular unit has 1 skill, a veteran 2 skills and an elite 3 skills. And if some skills need 1 or 2 prerequisite, then they automatically are reserved for veteran or elite units.

Yep it's a bug. Each game I play, I research civilization first to be able to build farms on turn 4 (or 5, I don't remember), and I always can build them the turn I get the tech.

And you can always ask on the forums. We always answer as fast as we can :) The community here is really good.

[quote who="wickedmurph" reply="42" id="2579730"]I'm a little curious about why all the rock/paper/scissors bashing is going on here? It's obvious that the game is going to be considerably more complex than: infantry better than archers better than cavalry better than infantry. But some weapons and armor DO have advantages in some situations. They MUST, or why build anything except the cheap knives and leather armor? Managing trade-offs is what makes games

How will be handled perishable resources ? A max/turn ? (I mean you have for instance 10 food. Each turn you can only use 10 food because any amount over that number would be lost) What about caravans killed ? Does it only lessens the resources income ? EDIT: and I hope there will be bear cavalry instead of space pony :P

The real question is : what will be the use of caravans ? What would happen to a city whose caravan has been destroyed ? Does it have still access to "global" resources ? City A has iron, City B has horses. There's no caravans between them (maybe it has been destroyed, or there's no road). What are the consequences ?

[quote who="imbiginjapan" reply="20" id="2579263"]Frogboy, you said that you want to allow as many damage types/resistances as available to be stacked on an item but I don't care for that and hopefully I can explain my case a bit. Some will likely disagree with me there but I don't want to have to sort through 7 different modifiers when I'm being attacked to figure out what this new weapon that the enemy is fielding will do, and then again to figure out if I can hurt

[quote who="Greyclouds40" reply="12" id="2578969"]I like the combat speed modifier concept! Makes it so that there is a hierarchy of weapons: daggers attack faster than axes; axes attack faster than bastard swords; bastard swords attack faster than great swords, etc. That is a very good idea, and I think it would balance out weapons in terms of damage vs speed. Like, a melee unit gets a 2handed spear with a -5 speed modifier and a 2 tile range. He faces a dagger wielding melee unit

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="64" id="2578389"] Now are we screwed like in civ 4 : "Need horses ? Too bad ! You can just build warriors and archers" ? Not quite. In Civ IV, they had the concept of strategic resources that you either had or you didn't. What we are discussing here are resources that go into a pool. You don't control your own horses? Then you'll need to buy some. The key difference being that there isn't that much abstraction here. If yo

@Rising Legend. And what about clever implementation like in FFH ? It's not a war of "realism/gameplay". It's about what a player can do. Some options should always be available, even in a less efficient way to player. What I'd liek is that every resource could have a rarity level, and that with a low level of rarity can be find everywhere with some "work".No iron mine ? You can stil get some in your city if you build some unit that will find some for you. Or ma

" Yes I intend to test under Beta 2" -vieuxchat

No, nothing like that : your cities need to be at level 4 if I remember right.

@frogboy: oh ! ok :) I didn't know that (maybe you said it in the video, but my english skills aren't high enough to completly understand spoken english) One other thing I hope that will be enhanced : the look of rivers. At the moment they just seem like some thing thrown upon the map, not blending with it.

An on/off switch in "unfun" because you get ripped of from options. And I always hate when I have less options to get with. If I need some cavalry for my units, even a few I want to be able to get some. And if a "horse resource" is the only way, then that's too bad. What I mean is that we need options to get things done. A horse resource shouldn't be the only way to get cavalry. And even some bear cavalry isn't acceptable, because the problem is still the same. Like tiavals said, in F

Can't wait :( A little thing I don't like : the "un-smoothness" of the zoom/unzoom. Things I like : it remembers me the time when I mapped for starcraft. All those triggers to create a story ... And last but not least : the transition with the cloth map. It's just excellent. The more I play the game, I more I say to myself that I will probably play the game in "only cloth-map" for some time. I find it to be more informative than with flashy graphics (even if I like the

More realistic yes. Unfun, too. You got the resource for 50 turns, lose it and then you can't build a unit you've cranking for 50 turns ? Noone got the idea to make some breeders or else ? That is unfun, truly unfun. And even more unrealistic. Iron mine should give a huge value, and there should always be some ways to get at least a minimum in the wilderness.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="42" id="2578170"]Re: Unit construction. Metal being a global resource, players decide how much metal they want their units to use when they design them. When they go to train one, it consumes the metal when it's built. Metal is infinitely stored globally. I don't know how many other history buffs there are here but those that are know what I mean when I say that metal is a big deal. When you see an enemy unit with plate armor showi

Couldn't it be a feature of impulse::reactor ?

Is the system where any resource lacking is replaced by a "labor" resource ? (so a 15 lumber/5 labor would take 20 turns if you don't have any lumber) is still in place ? It really is a brilliant and simple system.

To get appartment, you need a tech in civilization (don't remember the name). And I'm not sure the apartments are shown on the list iof available buildings in the tech (but you still get the buildings to build) To get enough food you need one or two cities devoted to it. Find good places, build roads and a lot of advanced farming.

It would be easy to AI if you set the damage with some "stance". You need slaves ? Use blunt damage. You need kills ? Use slash and piercing (piercing being the most effective way to kill someone).

[quote who="Raven X" reply="79" id="2576713"] @Frogboy: Thank you for the reply, Brad. That does clear some things up for some people I'm sure. A question if I may. Is there any word on the changes to how capturing resources will work? I.E. Being able to grab a resource that's close to a city but not adjacent. Scott mentioned it a little while ago in one of his posts. Will that be in beta 1z?[/quote] Isn't already working like that ? I can tap resources that are in the city zone of in