LightofAbraxas

I can't say that I agree with the OP. I think that build and training times are a bit quick to begin with, and this is only exacerbated by various spells and buildings. It takes the same amount of time to build a major building as it does for many units to walk a screen away to the next town over. Granted, I generally play on a modified Epic setting... Problem for me is, with a very quick training time, who cares if you lose an army? By the time your enemy marches to a city, you

This reminds me of old the "Choose your own Adventure" books of my childhood. I love it.

Yep. If you don't like this mechanic, just change the 1 to a 0 in the following line of the ElementalDefs.xml: 1

[quote who="Javaslinger" reply="5" id="2852469"] Does that make INT a useless stat for Sov's? [/quote] Still increases damage that use it in their calculations.

Or a manual.

A more specific version of the general requests for modding changes to developers. 1)Allow substitution of models. This would allow a variety of transformation spells. 2)Allow Calculate to reference resource values. This would allow for adding custom shard type power increases. If I understand the code currently, the influence of shard posession on damage is hard coded. A big limitation for those of us who want to expand the magic system. 3)Allow a spell effect that ta

What impinc said. If you don't like this mechanic, just change the 1 to a 0 in the following line of the ElementalDefs.xml: 1

Fantastic. Thoughtful and extensive. Are you planning to mod any of these up? If not, would you mind if I grabbed a couple of these ideas for my mod? I'll give you credit, of course. Just let me know!

Yeah, I think that this would be nice, but there are other things that could be done to add more depth. Like charge for mounts. Like a counter in spearmen. Like dissociating attack speed vs. movement speed. Like having armor modify movement speed. I don't know, I think that even a cursory look at history would provide tons of ideas for depth. Simple. Except for the coding.

*Update* Due to coding limitations and in the interest of making the mod as of general interest as possible, I've decided to release a canon lore version first. The biggest changes are that all flavor text will stick to the current game lore, and spell affinity is out, for now. On a related note, if anyone knows how to reference resource levels in the Calculate tag of the CoreSpell xmls, I'd be very interested to figure this out.

I'm guessing that you would use that to multiply the damage against groups, companies, etc.? Does anyone know if you can use current resource levels inside Calculate?

Inside Calculate, primarily. But, I thought that there might be some other interesting things that could be used as effects, too.

Hey all. In an attempt to collect info related to the creation of a wider variety of spells, I'd like to get a list going of things that can be used to derive values for spell effects as well as what these values can effect. What I know, personally, is limited to what is included in the spell code currently. But, I'm hoping that others can share their knowledge as well. Inputs: 1) Unit Stats 2) Number of shards (total or of a specific type- I think that this is hard-co

New request. Allow the Calculate function to reference resources for spells. Right now, shard posession can influence damage in only a hard-coded manner. If you allowed calculate to work with more tags, I could add more mana types to the game. [e digicons]:D[/e]

Thanks guys. A man can dream.... a man can dream.

I've noticed an uptick in modding since the release of 1.1. A quick bump for those who haven't seen it. It's pretty helpful.

[quote]I would totally agree with you (I kinda do) except for the fact that I played the campaign. If I had heard beforehand how bad it was, I would have skipped it and played the single player skirmishes. But I had to start on the campaign, and I can honestly say that is the worst campaign/story/presentation I have seen since the early Nintendo days. Boy, some of those Nintendo games were bad. I could go on forever about the story mode, but I won't. So, I only really care about lore and stor

[quote]So should you get it now? Well, really that depends on whether you believe we (Stardock) will get our act together over the next half year because if you buy it now, you'll get the first expansion pack for free which is now expected to go out this Spring or early Summer.[/quote] A few points, which aren't new, but... if you want another data point, here goes. 1) SD has a strong committment to improving and maintaining their games. 2) The magic system is easily m

No problem. If I'm not mistaken, I think I remember a mod that was going to expand the functionality and scope of minor factions. You may want to search the Mods Forums if you're not happy with the limited role they currently play in the game. Granted, I'm just getting back from some drinks... this might be wishful thinking on my part.

So... we have demon models in the game. Have any modellers gotten their hands on any decent angel wings?

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="52" id="2851801"]I was running the spell design finalists by the programmers (who loved all the ideas and think we should put them all in). They were commenting at how cool and creative they are, and asking if they were all this good. After having red 330 spell submissions I said that no, there were spell ides that were bad nd there were spell ides that were bd, but funny to red. My favorite example of the latter was the Summon Dinosaur spell, whose text was s

So, I think that one thing that would make exploration significantly more interesting is if there were a series of resource locations that spawn only once on each map. It would make for some interesting territorial conflict dynamics, too. You know, like FfH2. Kael knows what I'm talking about!

For my early city defenders, pre weapon tech: "My staff is bigger than yours"

Yep. In this version, minor faction towns are limited in growth. I'm not saying that this is a good mechanic, but that's the way it is (for now).

[quote]Given what we know regarding the laws of thermodynamics, and taking causality into account, you cannot get around it.[/quote] A discussion of Laplace on a gaming forum. Now I've seen everything. [e digicons]:grin:[/e]