Wizard1200

[quote quoting="post"] Attack (which is damage) = Weapon Attack + ((Strength - 10)/2) Defense (which is damage absorb) = Armor Defense Accuracy = 15 + (Level * 2) Dodge = Dexterity / 2 Hit Points = 10 + ( (Constitution / 5) * (2 * Level) ) Spell Resistance = Intelligence / 2 Prestige Boost in City = Charisma / 5 [/quote] I think it is a mistake that Accuracy scales with the level and Dodge scales not with the level, because with every level Dex

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="8" id="2816278"]Current update is for the v1.1 beta to be made available to the public in the next week or so. Right now, with Kael having just started, we're working on transitioning day to day management from myself to him.[/quote] Oh, that is sad. What is the reason for the delay? I ask because you said that Kael would begin to work on Elemental after version 1.1 ...

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="29" id="2815924"] I'm still hoping that the devs will make Essence important again by making it the per-turn mana spending cap for a given caster on the main map and per-battle cap in tactical mode. Without something along those lines, I don't really see a path to making the magic-focused 'tank' sovereigns that were part of the original plan. It looks like stuff is going to boil down to maxing arcane research and mana production, which for me mak

[quote who="Chancelor" reply="13" id="2815149"]Can you tell us some info on the rule change,so we can read about it before the patch[/quote] Yep, a preview of the changes would be really nice.

[quote who="Tridus" reply="117" id="2814230"] How it fits together with everything else is more important then how fancy it is... unless the goal really is to create a highly complex empire builder. In that case it fits together because everything else is secondary to the economic part and will be simple. But if this is intended to be a MoM style game, then the economy isn't the focus. Magical warfare is. Slapping a super complicated and time-consuming economy onto MoM wouldn't have made

[quote quoting="post"] Today we’re talking about different ways we can streamline the creation of resources. A long time ago, we wanted to put in a system where I could mine ore which could be turned into ingots and so on. Basically, one resource being turned into another resource. [/quote] I think if a player has only the option to turn one resource into one other resource such system makes a game only more complicated, but not more interesting. If a player cou

I think the RPG part of Elemental is great and should be improved in version 1.1: STR and DEX are very good balanced CON should increase the base HP and a character should get CON / 5 HP per level after the first INT should change the damage of spells (base damage x INT x 0.1) WIS should change the spell resistance (base spell resistance x WIS x 0.1) CHA should change the damage of standard units that fight with the character (base damage x CHA x 0.1)</

[quote who="onomastikon" reply="42" id="2810104"] I'd much rather see charisma yield a decent leadership bonus in combat (as its primary function); something along the lines of +1 to hit for every point above 10, and +x to damage for every point above 12, for all troops on the field for which the unit with the highest charisma is the leader, where x is probably a big question of balance.[/quote] I think that is a great idea. CHA should change the damage of all standard units that

[quote quoting="post"] And yet, v1.1 continues apace as Toby mentioned earlier. A lot of the underlying systems are in place, it’s now a matter of content. The new user interface got in this week which should vastly improve the ease of getting around with your units (and making it a lot more friendly to new players). The new economic system got in this past week as well. People generate income (and modders can tweak how much or how little you get). This gives players a

[quote who="BoogieBac" reply="3" id="2798325"] Yeah, when it's done the 64bit version won't have an upcharge. We're still hammering out basic performance and enjoyment issues, but once more players are happier with their purchase we'll officially tackle 64x Elemental.[/quote] Does this mean, that if i install a 64bit OS i can not play Elemental or is Elemental less stable on a 64bit OS?

[quote quoting="post"] When the reviews came out, I thought, What are they complaining about? It isn't that bad. Meanwhile I haven't played the game even once. I don't count messing around with it a few times during beta. I just don't feel any compulsion to play the game.[/quote] That is my situation, too. I wait until 1.1 or 1.2 and hope the game will be polished and fun.

[quote who="KingHobbit" reply="11" id="2793348"]Almost no matter what strategy you plan on doing, it starts with a rush of city making. I know I have mentioned this in a couple other threads but I truly think it should be addressed.[/quote] I think the city rush is not needed, because i have won multiple times with only 2 well placed cities. The cities are very easy to defend, because the AI players have only two points where they can attack and as soon an AI player attacks with

The AI is weak, because it is too easy to lure it into traps (build no armies and collect gildar > the AI will declare war and move the Sovereign into your territory > purchase equipment and kill the enemy Sovereign).

[quote who="Kalin" reply="83" id="2789889"]The easiest way to make the three different is to start giving negatives on the appropriate item instead of just having all bonuses. Something like this: Range Weapons: +ATK, -DEF, -MOV(ASPD) Melee Weapons: +ATK, -MOV(ASPD) Mounts: +MOV(ASPD), -ATK Thus, archers are innately vulnerable, they do their damage at range, but if anything touches them (including other archers), it's over.<

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="62" id="2789523"] The unit design has definitely been a challenge because realistically, there should be 3 basic paths: 1. Melee 2. Ranged 3. Calvalry How do we make all 3 distinct and meaningful? Unit design tends to encourage users to create single glombed mega units that are expensive and largely unsupportable leaving the player to complain about "balance".[/quote] As suggested multiple times in the forum:

[quote quoting="post"] So v1.09 is still mostly about bug fixing, memory optimization, etc. A broken API got fixed that made the AI considerably better but it’s still way way too unaggressive. Having a non-cheating AI kind of stinks sometimes because the AI doesn’t usually know how weak your cities are. In GalCiv, the AI could come up near your planets and see how poorly defended. But the same technique fails in Elemental because they don’t get close

[quote quoting="post"] v1.1 New Magic System based on a shared mana pool. Refresh of all magical spells Major AI Update New global resource: Specialist Slots (allows more choices between guns and butter for players) Refreshed User Interface Due: October v1.A (Expansion 1) New Combat System (To Hit stat with damage being rolled separately, lots of other changes) New Tactical Battle System (removal of action points, comba

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="15" id="2780414"] First, let me say that in Elemental: War of Magic, the game mechanics of v1.1 are pretty much the set game mechanics for the game. The reason is that Elemental: War of Magic needs to rise or fall based on its basic design. That said, my general reaction at this point is that after v1.1 we move to Elemental: Expansion 1 (which will be free to all Elemental players) where we can start making some changes, particularly to the co

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="1" id="2778171"] Your sovereign is the powerful Channeler who generates +1 mana per turn. Each time you capture a shard (which in v1.1 willl have 1 seeded near where you start) it will provide +1 mana also as well as amplify certain spells. When you imbue a champion, it costs -1 mana to maintain. When you summon a creature, it will cost -1 mana to maintain. Thus, if you want an army of spell casters, it comes at the cost of having your sovereign be

[quote who="Raven X" reply="126" id="2774222"] Look, brother, when I said "We" and "Us" in my reply here, I was STILL talking about All the Other People in the Other threads, which would still, by your own choice not include you. So when I'm talking about more people than just me, how would You like me to denote a plural meaning? Maybe I should have said "Those other people and Me but not Lantros"? I know what I ment to say and Who I was talking about, and when Frogboy reads the reply h

[quote who="Robert Hentschke" reply="76" id="2775479"] If a sword costs say 3 metal and assorted other things to produce and I get nothing but "a sword" in the shop, then why should I have to pay outrageous sums to get the same sword for the sovereign? If the shop sword was noticeable better, maybe, but even a branch, crudely chopped off a tree costs more than building an entire city. Hello? If the city can produce troops with metal weapons then it should be able to

I think the new weapon damage values are a step in the right direction, but currently the difference between the weapons is too small. Early weapons start with a damage of around 4 and late weapons have only a damage of around 12, but the armors still have the same defense and this makes weapons currently too weak. The late weapons should have damage values of around 16 and special abilities like ignoring the enemies armor or reducing the enemies Combat Speed and the gildar cost of la

Thank you very much for your fast reply. The problem is solved.

I cant see all parts of the UI on my screen (Win XP, GeForce GT 8800 with latest drivers): [IMG]http://i999.photobucket.com/albums/af120/Wizard1200/Elemental.jpg[/IMG]

[quote who="Gene1966" reply="2" id="2772377"]Increase the penalty for focusing on one tech even more than it is today, this would be a simple and yet effective tool to persuade folks to level their research across each of the tech areas. just my 2 cents...[/quote] I think it would be better if all tech trees are useful. Currently only Warfare and Civilization are really powerful and Adventuring, Diplomacy and Magic are less powerful.