SwerydAss

[quote who="Tridus" reply="11" id="2960656"]Multiplayer is to me what Dynasties and Essence are to you: [/quote] I actually got the game cause I thought dynasties, essence and the multiplayer were part of what was going to set this game apart from other 4x games. Seems like the game which already tastes like a vanilla wafer is going to taste like cardboard after losing even more features from what is already a fairly featureless game. At least the dynasties gave an illusio

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="4" id="2956555"]Oi. Mr. Martin definitely deserves a fat retirement portfolio, but RTS for Game of Thrones? That's a serious round-peg, square-hole mess.[/quote] Dont think it will be since it is supposed to cover 1000 years of story which makes me think it would be more like Europa Universalis or Total War than say Starcraft. But even if it is more like starcraft there hasnt been a good fantasy rts since the last Kohan game so I'd st

Well lucky for us there is a Game of Thrones game but it will be an RTS ... It might be slow paced however. There are some pics and a video on gamespot.

Almost sounds like your video card is overheating and causing the crashes. I would check to see if the fan is working on the card. Also update the drivers of course.

[quote]I havnt done any programming with it, but I thought that was directx was for.[/quote] my thoughts exactly. 15 years ago they didnt have these standards. Hell you had to deal with ISA cards PCI and AGP plus many other factors that werent standardized yet. Should be much easier now.

yes

There is a preview in PC Gamer about fallen enchantress but not many details there.....

[quote], Diablo II is still the best Hack 'n Slash money can buy.[/quote] have to disagree with you there. Titan Quest blows it out of the water with the much larger selection of classes and dual classing capabilities. Was hoping Diablo III would follow suit but only getting 5 classes again.

Every idea here is definitely worth putting in the game...

[quote]maybe some battle bonus its always better if you have a charismatic leader [/quote] [quote]c) Charisma could help with illusion/charming spells?[/quote] I would do that for battles also I would have it maybe give a bonus to moral..

Right now I'm sure everyone is lowering their charisma to the lowest it can go to use the points elsewhere since it only effects cost of NPC recruitment.. To make it more useful it needs to be tied to more things. 1. The cost of equipment for champions/heroes would be lowered by a high charisma score of your sovereign. 2. Chances of marriage should also be effected. 3. Maybe a percentage bonus of prestige per turn based on charisma.

[quote]First of all, this would mean an overhaul of the shop and troopdesigner UI - [/quote] You wouldn't need a new UI. The description would just have to say cannot use with heavy armor etc... Even though not being able to see the inventory and current equipment while in the shop already needs to be changed anyway.

It would be nice if charisma would also effect the price of equipment making it worthwhile to invest in.

[quote]Um, actually I thunk you got all dem bwains by swapping them for a tasty banker wiv a zombie. [/quote] Does that mean he is a zombie alien????

[quote] The review you've mentioned is not the first time I've seen a reviewer write something like: not fit for consumption but then give it a pretty good score[/quote] This is because devs pay for the score but usually don't bother to look at the actual review so the reviewer gets away with saying that the game isn't good without losing the advertising dollars from the devs.

I think this is another place where stardock messed up since most of my game boxes list recommended total system ram not available ram.They should have put it at 1.5 gb system ram on the box. That's why most boxes also show different ram requirements for xp and vista since vista used more ram and the amount listed on the box would be "system" not "available".

[quote]LMAO at having to dig through 800 pages of fanboi crap to find out which of the features advertised on the box are supposed to work "out of the box."[/quote] I don't see anybody having to do much digging since there is always one or 2 topics about the subject in the recent post section. I do want to say that I am in the same boat too since I bought it on gold release day expecting to play it multiplayer myself. And he did say he looked here first before reading the

[quote]Well, the problem is not about using impulse. If you read his post correctly, it's about what have been advertise and what was delivered. With the game "ou of the box", it was advertise that he could play the game in multiplayer and on LAN without activating the product.[/quote] The problem I still see with his post was that he said he's been reading the forums and the stardock's posts(before purchasing) on the game in which case I don't know how he didn't see that MP wouldn't

[quote]And why was another version of the game created, rather than simply port the Singleplayer experience to Multiplayer?[/quote] I wonder this myself since the single player(sandbox) portion of this game is really just multiplayer against the AI anyway.

Ya I was just trying to show that you are less mobile in full armor. Also it showed how archers didn't wear much armor and near the end of the battle went through the mud using knives to finish off the knights. However crossbowmen did where heavy armor since they only had to crank the crossbow then point to aim in which case the armor didn't interfere with aiming. Plus crossbows were mostly used in garrisons and not on the field of battle until they were

[quote]Urban myth. Medieval knights were pretty good at warfare and they didn't make dumb mistakes like that. =P[/quote] Guess you guys havne heard of the battle of agincourt http://www.aginc.net/battle/ops.html The english bated the french cavalry to charge through mud with disastrous results fro the french.... The french then dismounted the knights and tried on foot and they all got stuck in t

I'm surprised they even changed that. It's the way I would expect it to be from the lore. But i have to say the reason for not using settlers is because in the lore you needed magic to make life spring back up from the land.having not much essence is the point of not spamming cities and making a city full of life out of rubble is by no means a mundane task. It could easily be reimplemented now that you can make outposts and city spamming isn't needed to grab every reso

[quote]Basically it's a warning system to alert the player that a enemy has been spotted at a certain location.[/quote] I support this. [quote]ince this 'notice' of an impending raid is going to 'central' for empire wide mobilization - would require time to communicate across the vast stretches of the SOV's holdings, perhaps:[/quote] In real life yes. but iin a game like this the AI always knows when you are entering their territory so why shouldn't we be notified as w

If there is something this week it would probably be 1.9xx

[quote]I have a little work around for this. When I name a settlement I put a G' in front of a gildar producing settlement, A' for arcane knolwedge, T' for tech knowledge. That way you can tell by the name what to upgrade on the city level up screen.[/quote] I actually have been doing this as well but getting tired of naming my villages goldville goldville2 metalville metalville2 etc. Kinda lame.