Demiansky

[quote]I really, Really, don't think everyone should get Every tech. This severely limits the usefulness of Tech Trading and other tech related options that could be a big part of diplomacy. Part of the draw of these games is the feeling you get when you're doing good and slaughtering your opponents. This is partly done with Technological Superiority.[/quote] Well, I agree that every tech shouldn't be gainable through sheer research, but I'm concerned about tech trading being too powe

Interesting wealth method. I'm curious though whether it grows continually as your citizens accumulate more and more belongings or if it just grows in relation to what new buildings/ access that it has. For instance, if you build X number buildings, does it continue to grow based on a certain value that the buildings have or does the city simply immediately gain a flat wealth bonus after the buildings are built?

Very good post actually, Cephalo. I think rivers should play a very important role in considering city construction, as well as commerce. With that in mind, I think rivers between tiles would add a lot more access to them.

Lol, will post more when I'm not working 16 hour shifts :-)

[quote]I enjoy those kinds of decisions. I do not foresee myself enjoying deliberately trying not to use my resources in order to get a favorable balance of equipment types and quality - and similarly not using my barracks in order to keep my peasant caliber as high as possible. That just seems like it'd be a boring game of min/maxing, made especially difficult due to the somewhat nebulous nature of these numbers...[/quote] To address this specific question, I think it's a case of put

Pidgeon, it's a matter of what parts of the game you are controlling. No one is recommending giving absolute control or strip away any and all control. Like I mentioned in my last post, it's a matter of asking the general gamer populace what happy medium gives people the amount of control that doesn't become tedious and unfun. I think I misunderstood you on the peasant point. I was lead to believe your primary issue was being able to level up peasant armies, which ma

[quote]First of all I'd like to point out that medieval Europe is not the only time or place in the history of the world. Sure, the world of Elemental is loosely based off of medieval Europe, but not entirely. There wasn't magic in the Medieval ages, despite some people's belief. Also, whether or not something was prominent is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not it's believable and fun. Training troops is believable. [/quote] This is a bit beside the point, but one thing th

[quote who="cleflar" reply="2" id="2430031"]I like the wealth idea. A prosperous city generates more taxes, research, fame &tc than a poor one, and an empire made of several prosperous cities certainly would be at an advantage against an impoverished one. [/quote] Yeah, I would like to see some other factor involved with city strength other than population number. Wealth opens up some other interesting city varieties too. Think of a desert, oasis c

[quote]Likewise I would like to field a vast army of peasantry and still get to use whatever experience system they put into the game. In your system, I wouldn't be able to - except for the odd hero or professional soldier here and there. Realistic or not, upgrading units with experience, giving them perks and all that is fun and I would hate for that to be taken away from me for the sake of some realism.[/quote] I still see professionals being the other side of the coin in warfare.&n

[quote]Remember what happened to Masters of Orion 3. It attempted to create a new approach/paradigm to the space empire game. It failed miserably because it not only failed to draw in new fans to the genre, it also alienated the existing fans of the genre. Eventually, literally, nobody wanted to play the game.[/quote] While your other points were all good, this one here seems to be making an argument against innovation. For instance, this argument would be reason too also n

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="35" id="2429296"] I remain unconvinced. I mean for most of the problems I've brought up, the solution involves adding complexity, adding sliders, etc. I still think people will be really confused as to what goes into their equipment score, and then having sliders that affect priorities on a system that is vaguely defined and hard to keep track of just makes that problem even worse. Also, you are treating this as if everything is going to

I was wondering whether there would be any plans to represent the wealth of a city in Elemental. I mean, sure, there is going to be representation of the empire's coffers, but I was thinking more along the lines of the wealth of your citizens. It might be interesting if each city had a simple wealth score that was influenced by a variety of factors. The wealth score would act as a positive modifier to taxes as well as possibly resea

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="32" id="2429250"]Yep ... I would like for the Prestige level to perhaps effect militia number or perhaps militia morale ... while the rest of the numbers would be peasant rabble ... although High prestige cities would more naturally have large populations anyways. [/quote] Well, I wouldn't want citizen soldiers to necessarily just be peasant rabble or nobles. I imagine there would be regiment of middle class clerks, craftsmen, or artisans wh

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="30" id="2429231"]well, as far as untried, living lairs and actually meaningful quests will be a pretty big plus to pull of in a sophisticated 4x game on the level of the Civilization series. things like Call-to-Arms are nice, organic, and still under control of the player. It should probably be considered more of a last ditch effort, except for nations which specialize in having extremely large populations and adept peasant armies (adeptly led that is ..

I would not add any new stats, but would instead add "traits," of which there could be a multitude. Traits would be present below the main stats on the unit card and each one would have a unique icon to identify it. Traits would work to modify main stats in specific ways under specific circumstances.

Yep, I'll definately sign this petition too. I think there should be a better term for "rummage score," too. Perhaps it could be referred to as simply being more economical with the few resources available. For instance, if you have an overstock of wood, you would be able to make spears very quickly by choosing the naturally choice pieces of wood available, which cuts down on time. If you don't have much wood, though, you can still make plenty of spears, but you have t

[quote who="Valiant_Turtle" reply="28" id="2429082"]Wow! This is a fascinating idea. If done well it could really help re-define the genre. I definitely think it could be done exceptionally well. More importantly it gives more options. You could focus on making your professsional soldiers total death machines, or on having a large and reasonably well trained and equipped militia available. You could also have some heroes who function primarily as Generals t

One thing that Frogboy has really stressed is that the game environment will appear alive or, in other words, that a lot of interesting things will be going on in your empire that isn't necessarily directed by your sovereign. One of the most notable examples was adventurers stirring up trouble in nearby dungeons. My big question though is where are these adventurers coming from. What's more, when a hero shoes up at your doorstep, where are they coming from, too?

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="24" id="2428638"]Of course ... atlhough such high-industry cities will need food for such a population ... I would see Prestige as dimenishing returns, where food-shortages would begin to lower the prestige value at a geometric rate ... so to upkeep a large city you will need to influx food in-order to keep the prestige high. I think more than a drop in prestige, food-shortages should increase happiness and instability. A city with vast food shortages, u

[quote]I would prefer to go extra-simple, with equipment divided among the peasants based upon resource availability, wether pure addition or, my preferred, upon Probabilty ... if say you had Iron, Copper, Steel, Mithril, Glass, and Wood, and lets say you were making weapons out of all of these, well, A couple peasants might have mithril, while some more would have Steel and Glass weapons. Even more would have Iron, and Plenty would have Copper. The rest would be equipped with wooden weapons

[quote]The inability to affect the kinds of weapons contributing to your equipment score (besides building many more of a certain type of building than perhaps you'd ever need for any other reason...) is also a problem. If I know that I am going to be facing armies consisting largely of mounted units for the foreseeable future, I would really like to be able to steer my equipment score towards being mostly pikes, followed by bows. Swords, maces and axes would be pretty much worthless. Without

Pidgeon, a lot of text so I'll try to address points one by one :-) First off, this is our idea so I guess we can say it works however we want it to. However, my vision is that the sovereign is not the Totalitarian ruler of his society. He is the curator, the guardian, and an administrator that collects taxes. He does not own the people, but has certain rights as a monarch figure among nobles. Minor nobles and peasants have day

[quote]Also... ancient red dragon?! You intend to turn regular people into an Ancient Red Dragon?! I don't understand. We will not be training dragons (and if we were I doubt they would be made out of people...). If you are playing a human faction, you will only train human soldiers and likewise for Fallen. Magical creatures will be recruitable via unannounced means, but they will not be trainable. [/quote] Come now, use your imagination. When downtrodden villagers sacrifice vir

[quote who="Malsqueek" reply="19" id="2428410"]Seems to me that there should be a difference between "city" and "settlement". Have settlements be built by settlers, created at cities (much like traditional TBS games), and cap their development at 2 large squares. That gives you enough room for one resource and some stuff or two resources. Settlements do not reclaim land the way cities no, nor are they are versatile or productive. If a sovereign feels so inclined,

[quote]Food consumption and overcrowding? Personally I'd still like to see troops require food upkeep. And demobilized troops wouldn't count towards city population for things like city size, etc.[/quote] Definately right on the food point, but it's reasonable to assume that they won't be spending gold on Inns or fast food while they are on the road if they are simply housed in a city's abundant barracks buildings :-). Perhaps that will be an advantage of barracks buildings that