[quote who="Tridus" reply="61" id="2549858"] Quoting Sarudak, reply 57Can I play the beta on a computer without internet access??? No.[/quote] Is that going to be all the way through the beta process? :(
I haven't played since the first beta... But I imagine it's more like a 'game concept simulator' than an actual game at this point...
Can I play the beta on a computer without internet access???
Beta today?? Can we play the beta without internet access?
I like it but I think if they toned it down a bit that would keep the atmosphere and have the silly easter eggs be more special... Like I fell off my chair laughing when I had the Pokemon event occus in GalCiv2...
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="7" id="2548625"]Prestige will suck people away from other cities so if you have a bunch of crummy cities you are vulnerable to migration.[/quote] This is good... Especially if the number of people available is limited and so people have to compete for them. If people are a vital resource and hard to come by it would make city spamming pointless because you wouldn't have the people to make your cities productive and would encourage the construction of many s
Biggest feedback... Fix cities! If only people could agree on how... [e digicons]>_>[/e]
[quote who="SolarBall" reply="212" id="2548198"]A few thoughts here: The most blindingly obvious solution to me is to require essence to found all cities, not just cities on barren land. It's quite simple to understand, and would limit city spam quite effectively tghanks ot the hard limit from essence. The cost on rejuvenated land might be less than barren land, and would need balancing, but would still be there. As others have said, the other us
Food limiting sounds great. However one needs to consider the crippling effects of getting the short stick of the random fertile land distribution.
I like this.... ^
Honestly I think this is a bad idea. It doesn't address the fundamental problem which is city-spam = good. Also it's arbitrary. It takes away the choice from the player rather than making the choice of not spamming cities strategically viable. If you want people to build RPG-esque kingdoms then you need to make RPG-esque kingdoms MORE strategically advantageous than spammin large cities.
Ok... But what's the advantage of not turning that mining outpost into a huge city?
What!? Brad you're such a fanboy.... :P
I don't think Elemental has anything to worry about from Civ... But that's just me I suppose...
This needs to replace the lore link up top...
I like this idea... Although I guess that's only natural since it seems to take some inspiration from the ideas I presented here and here .... Ok yeah that's a shamless plug but I think stardock should look at some different innovative ideas. Also I like the idea of investing portions of your cities development to be able to get certain buildings. Sounds fun to me. Also. Total le
I think it'd be awesome if my empire consisted of just one or maybe two huge cities and then dozens of smaller settlements...
Huh... Those cities aren't really that big then... With the absolute largest taking up only 9 tiles on the map and having at most 40 buildings including housing. It seems like we should get the opportunity for some end game metroplii larger than that...
When you say 8 tiles do you mean 8 full tiles per city level or 8 quarter tiles?
I'm partial to hexes myself also... However... It seems we're already heavily invested in squares sadly...
The original majesty had a skirmish/sandbox mode and I remember there being a ridiculous amount of settings...
While I don't know that I would like Demiansky's idea in practice I have to see that it's in no way 'random' the results of committing and when you can give them orders would be deterministic (ie in any given situation in would be possible for the player to determine if a unit could be given orders without the invoking of any kind of random number generator). I think it might be a very interesting idea to try out and see how it works in practice. It would also tend to reduce the burden of mic
Under the current system essence does not truly limit cities because it only costs essence to bring life back to the ground and the patch of life spread continually eventuall allowing you to cover the entire map in cities.
Another area in which I think games like civilization have boxed in game concepts far too much is in the idea of cities. In civilization all strategy and tactics and development is 'city-centric' most everything is built in cities and cities are the determiner of who owns land and who can work it. They tried to fudge the concepts of non-urban development and infrastructure with improvements and by having the cities 'work' the surrounding land. In case anyone didn't realize cities don't really
[quote who="Dr Franknfurter" reply="7" id="2508966"]Just want to add encouragement. I'd love for the characteristics of a city to be varied and not all set on founding. Also, having base and derived stats, or other seperations could be interesting. I suppose you could make it as complicated as you want for calculating population growth or production as long as you don't add new things. Say if you had your races default values for health/education/craftsmanship/magical aptitude/beli