SwerydAss

[quote]Lower mounted units 'combat speed' (that = inatitive) Leave MPs same. Yes? What do you think?[/quote] yes this is what I was suggesting...

[quote]*Still cant move the City level up pop-up menu so I can see the HUD of the city or the resources it controls. Granted it centers on the city but it covers it up. (would be nice to postpone the level up indefinitely, could make it a (!) next to the city name on the city management screen for a reminder a LVL up bonus is ready)[/quote] this would be a good way to do it

[quote]Initiative = units current ‘combat speed’ (as in current code)[/quote] The reason i don't want this and instead everyone has an equal base initiative(before modifiers) is because basing it off combat speed would make mounts and archers godlike. They would always get to go first and get more attacks which would be devastating to balance. [quote]Initiative per unit – not side.[/quote] This is good and I guess I assumed that it would be that w

One thing I would say is that initiative should not be based on movement/combat speed. ... Instead everyone should have an equal base initiative number...then the modifiers would be applied. Those units that have the same initiative after the modifiers would randomly be chosen who goes first for them. Some thoughts on modifiers.... Archers and spearmen would get a bonus to initiative if on the defending army. Calvary and catapults would get a bonus if

I would just have plate armor have a slight weakness against piercing weapons. Of course more weapons is always cool too.

The only thing I would add is instead of having #1 resource just have a listing of all the resources each city is producing. It would be nice to see this report page come up when choosing the bonus for a city when it is going up levels. An improved resource bonus tile slot needs to be added as well.

The problem is really just with bows and armor... Heavy armor should have a larger penalty when using ranged weapons. I don't see why it would give a penalty when on a mount since IRL knights had heavy armor even on horses. Either that or make it so that ranged weapons forbid you to use any armor heavier than chain mail. I don't see how anyone IRL would be able to pull back a bow and fire it in an effective way in a full suit of armor.

[quote]Better: interrogate them. You get to interrogate captured champions in Lords of Magic, letting you see where then enemy is that turn (though it was buggy as I recall and after the first time in the game it would say that the prisoner has already told you everything and you get penalized for mistreating them).[/quote] Can't believe I forgot about that in my little LOM rant earlier......Was hoping this game would be similar to that one so was saddened when I heard the real time b

I like the way Lords of Magic handled scouting and espionage. There was a low level scout unit with high movement points that could be seen by anybody... There was also thief champions that could cloak themselves on the world map and in battle. They were detectable with a thief of equal or higher power or through a spell that revealed cloaked units in an area. The system worked well since you could only cast spells on enemy cities that could be seen. If spells were bei

[quote]Being able to buy equipment from anywhere in your territory is one thing that bugs me.[/quote] Funny enough in the campaign it tells you that you have to buy form the shop in the city.... Because of that I was always bringing people back to the city to buy equipment.. At least I know I don't have to now.... Of course if movement was increased for all units which it should be then going back to the city to buy stuff wouldnt be too bad anyway.

[quote]How much of the profit was due to the anti-trust money from Intel?[/quote] http://www.guru3d.com/news/amd-makes-profit-again/

[quote]but dated gameplay.[/quote] Ironic someone calling that gameplay dated on a forum for a game that uses a battle system similar to games that came out 17 years ago.\ Whoops didnt look at the fact is was in the general forums area and not elemental. [e digicons]:blush:[/e]

[quote]Not true. You can click the archer even if it has no movement points left and alter it's destination - or reset the path to it's current location.[/quote] This doesnt work for me.. I get stuck with that movement until it ends even through multiple turns. [quote]2 highighting target before clicking to attack[/quote] Can't believe this isn't even in the game. Its been in every combat system for at least 15 years

I think the amount of cities should be tied to your channeler's level... Your supposed to have to channel energy to bring life back to the land to make cities in the lore so why not make them connected in the game...This would also make adventuring more worthwhile so you can level up to make new cities to grab resources. You would get your starting city and then be able to create another one every 3 levels. You could have a trait of city planner that would let a channeler in

[quote]Against a player, with the current mechanic that I lose the game if my sovereign dies in hostile territory - YES, I would NEVER put foot in enemy territory![/quote] This does need to be changed. Maybe just give a bigger essence penalty and only lose the game if you run out of essence.

[quote]has AMD had a profitable quarter yet? [/quote] They have been profitable all year actually

[quote]That's a bit hilarious when you win the 10 or more hours struggle and all you get is static picture with 'Victory, 45 points' info:( [/quote] Yes it was depressing getting that at the end of along Sins game. [quote]I guess I am still in shock over the 4th one... god damn you to hell foul EA![/quote] Hear Hear!! I don't see why cut scenes should cost so much either.. A lot of the times you don't even have to use the engine to make them. No AI to put i

[quote]his is definitely one of the game's most challenging missions, particularly if you attempt it too early.[/quote] Maybe I'll quit out on it and go the other route first then get back to it later. [quote]tarcraft II is a great game, but it doesn't break new ground. There's still plenty of time for Blizzard to patch, refine, and expand on the game, but currently I'd say Warcraft III is the better title.[/quote] Didn't play that one. Warcraft 2

Didn't even think of using those..... Was using mostly merauders and goliaths. Good way to get that achievement too I presume. It's definitely the best campaign in a RTS though.

[quote]I mean, come on, everyone knows that 3 is OP.[/quote] you can even kill demons with the power of 3

Just took a break from it to check out the forums here actually.....Damn terrazine level is impossible on brutal....Beat all the other ones on that difficulty though.

I;v actually noticed the AI researching the adventuring tree too much and getting killed by the creatures around them.

[quote]Bastion should say my name.[/quote]\ could we also get falcor as a mount???

The worst thing about this is if you try to unlock the other parts of the processor a couple years later and it is defective then you probably won't be able to return it under warranty.

Thats good news. Now I can buy the games I was planning to get from there.... I only found out about the site 2 days before this happened.