Sole Soul

Edit your first post...you should be able to edit the title from there.

I was unaware that AMD was making any 32-bit Athlons...or that Intel was making any 32-bit Xeons. I wouldn't call the Atom a "real" processor, though, so it doesn't conflict with my post. In any case, the situation is still much the same.

Has been here and growing. The last real CPU Intel or AMD made that wasn't 64-bit was the Core Duo ( not to be confused with the Core 2 Duo, mind you), which for all intents and purposes was merely a rebranded Pentium M. This is not to say that the Core Duo was useless, as it was essentially a necessary stepping stone for Intel at that point in time, but the point still stands. Not only is 64-bit the future, but it is here

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="11" id="1950322"]Hell no. I want an entire civilization based around the underhanded, assassinations, shady trade deals, cloaked units, and lots, lots, lots of daggers.[/quote] Bears wielding daggers? ;)

Especially if it's a laptop, I'd hold out not only for 7, but for the next round of CPU/GPUs after it...if not for the extra performance, for the extra price drop. But that's just me.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="3" id="1949406"]Hence why we want to have such a long beta.[/quote] Okay. :)

[quote who="Tenebrion-" reply="1" id="1949008"]I like the idea of a game ending if your Channeler dies. It places much more importance on your nation's leader, and makes the player really think hard before sending their Channeler out into the battlefield.[/quote] If someone gets the drop on your leader, you're dead. I'm not necessarily opposed to the game ending if your channeler dies, I just feel that it may be too easy to accomplish that.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="9" id="1948838"]? Of course we'll have multiplayer save and resume. I'm not sure how the two are related to what is being discussed.[/quote] Because multiplayer save and resume is a "persistent" game across multiple "sessions". Thank you for letting me know I was reading into it too much, though, and confirming that it will exist. :)

So...does this mean we won't have multiplayer save and resume capability (as I, and I believe others, initially thought would be the case)? Or is this just an extension of the whole persistence idea? Not to say that this isn't great-it is. I'm just feeling a little confused.

[quote who="Ninakatarina" reply="5" id="1948274"]That's one of the fun things to do with any variation of Civilization (did Civ1 have it? don't recall) - after you finish a game you play the cinematic that shows your cities as they're born, flourish, and die. It's to you see big sweeping color changes across the world map in a short time, especially when those wars took so long (relatively) to play through.[/quote] +1 to this. Feature request please?

@LDiCesare I was speaking merely from the suffocation point of view that Tamren referenced.

[quote who="whismerhill" reply="4" id="1948093"]also a wizard could have cast a destructive global enchantment with makes everyone on the battlefield die ...[/quote] A wizard did it!

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="7" id="1947980"]At least not without some pretty big magic. With the right spells, though, it could look really neat to have bear cavalry riding over undersea plains while shark cavalry swoops down on them. I missed the talk from Frogboy about no tactical water combat. Was aerial combat mentioned as well? Seems like if underwater fights are too much code bother, flying cavalry would be also. Maybe when we're near to seeing

10, yes. 4, no, not really. See: (American) Football, rugby, etc. (For football at least, everyone's pretty much "armored", so take that into account when comparing it to x amount of untrained guys vs. someone wearing "impenetrable" armor.) Sand in the eyes point is relevant, though. What I think I'm proposing is to have defense depreciate/deteriorate as more sources of firepower are focused on it, but this would have to be done in such a way that 2x1 attac

Canon.

Yes, the elite soldier should be overwhelmed by multiple scrub grunts. But he shouldn't go down to just one, even if he is exhausted and unable to fight, assuming he's wearing decent armor. I have to say I wouldn't care for an open D10 either.

[quote who="Spartan" reply="6" id="1945749"]Maybe soemone who uses IRC should get on the Sd channel and report this. [/quote] I did two hours ago... *tries again*

[quote who="Ron Lugge" reply="20" id="1944129"]I think that perhaps there was more than one game by the name of populus, 'cause that don't sound nothing like what I was thinking of...[/quote] Indeed. My bad. Populous: The Beginning. Better?

Oooh! Oooh! Ele-Mental, Had to do it.

[quote who="Zubaz" reply="8" id="1943412"]I like that I can be a no-karma jerk on one site and a mega-karma hero on another. [/quote] You would. :P

[quote who="Zubaz" reply="1" id="1943151"]Ummm . . this post crossed-posted to forums.impulsdriven.net (where I am reading it.) Where did you post from? [/quote] Yet another reason why the cross forumed system doesn't work so well. :( Sorry, should have pointed that out initially. Yeah, Annatar, it's okay for normal posts, but when things get TL;DR it's just horrible. Though this [b]may[/b] have something to do with the fact that I need to sleep

Is this pissing anyone else off? It's not offensive, per se, but it's exactly the wrong shade. Neither white nor black text shows up comfortably on it, and smaller black text can even blur into unreadability, while smaller white text is just plain awful. Do we need to start using colors in all our posts here, or will there perhaps be some kind of change? Per GW's excuse, we don't appear to have a forum issues section here-or at the very least it's not visible.

1) You don't actually have to kill the baby to forcibly shut it up. You should be able to gag it (not healthy exactly but it'll do the job) and/or induce unconsciousness without doing too much damage. For reference: "The use of choking to induce unconsciousness is a temporary incapacitating technique of short duration whose proper execution is quite harmless." Admittedly, this is not going to be easy if you're trying it on a baby, but worst case scenario you kill it (which y

I would generally agree with/support this as well. I'm curious as to how you're able to see Spartan's new avatar in older posts, as at last check older posts did not use the current avatar, but the avatar that the person had at the time (very confusing and I have no idea why, especially as this means it must already save multiple avatars in the system, most of which are not even wanted to be used any longer), but to be honest I haven't looked into this in more than a week so I suppose

I'm in, although I haven't pre-ordered yet. Oh come on, can't you let a guy finish reading the forums first? ;)