[quote who="Spartan" reply="2" id="1968217"]Aloha! Welcome to the community. Please make yourself at home - as long as it is a nice home that is. Feel free to partake of the offerings and contribute where you think you can. Oh yeah remember... All hail the Frog! [/quote] oh yeah, and bears are awesome (unless you are among the few that don't like bears. Which is ok. Its the thought that c
[quote]Not saying your idea is bad but its a bit too far fetched for me[/quote] Well, that is just how Master of Magic does it. And as far as I know, its the only game that does it, which is why we need a sequal. Like its part of the Master of Magic hi-concept, so its not my idea... its the game idea. It just hasn't been announced yet. I'm really not sure how anything could be considered a brain-child of master of magic without at least n
I know its not much info, but I like in Fire Emblem how there are 2 options for viewing combat statistics. A 'simple view" that shows only chance to hit, damage that will be dealt, and critical chance. There there is also a 'complex view" that shows many statistics so you can do the math yourself as well as see what might effect special abilities and such.
Well, this game is said to be closer to Master of Magic. HoMM took a bit from master of magic in terms of 'is a turned based strategy game with (the first HoMM came 2 years after MoM) however it was based a bit more on specific factions or city types. They both stem from the same core idea though. I imagine this game would be closer to Age of Wonders which was about a middle ground between HoMM and MoM.
[quote]All of your scenarios you've been coming up with have been a lot of fun to read, and would be cool to see in a game - but would be an absolute nightmare to control[/quote] what is hard to control about a treeman with archers in its treehouse hat. It wouldn't be much different then any other archer platform, except I imagine it would be stronger and slower than even an elephant, possibly having better archer options (like mounted balista or even more archers)</p
because he isn't pumped up on adam and gene splicings. Andrew Ryan was a normal guy.
nevermind, pheonix said it for me.
yeah, I had that too and thought I got my preorder for demigod beta. But I didn't, it was just my card responding to the fact that it was swiped. It should both still be in pending, and if you have bank of america it won't be deducted from the overall account.
The game isn't out yet.... how much can we really put on a wiki? Not to be a spoil sport, but nothing is yet official, and won't cleaning up the un official content create tons of trouble later?
[quote]If there are flying units in the game they probly will be limited as to prevent abuse.[/quote] lol... MoM had a choosable race that ONLY had flying units with the exception of the dragon turtle fantastic mount (which was actually rather high-tier) so I doubt they will be limited at all in any way. Since this is the spiritual sequel
This is where I think some of that user-created units streamed through impulse would shine. I mean if you build a few new units, but don't have the time to create a whole race and such, you could throw it into a skirmish battle and BOOM! instant use from units. What more, it would help with battle balancing and such. No having to build through crazy (possibly custom) tech trees to test out anything. No anything else. Just plop in the units
[quote]I refuse to use such noble animals as the bear for plows, carts or chariots! Are you insane?![/quote] plows are something not for noble animals. Chariots though? Not the same as a plow or measly cart. No, chariots being lead by bears is a force to fear! The only thing worse then a guy riding on a bear could be a guy riding 2 meters behind a pair of bears in an armored vehicle! edit: Pics for refrence <img src="http://dylan.tweney.
[quote]I actually like the idea of having a tunneling system that can connect your cities at great cost however.(to allow supplies and commerce during a seige.) And this needs its own thread.[/quote] Now, speaking of tunneling systems. Way gates through other worlds is another option. I mean just as it is possible to burrow through the ground under a city (I can't help but think of the giant drills from cave wars) it could be a super project to open a g
does EA not do much DRM? I remember being frustrated when I lost a Sims expansion CD at some point in my life, and so I turned to alternate ways of getting it (since I still had my CD key) and I found it to be quite frustrating to get around the CD check (it was the most up-to-date expansion, so I couldn't start on the older discs). Though, that may just be because it was Sims... which has its own problems with CDs.
I think I talked about mount powers somewher in a different thread. Spider mounts could give poisoned attacks and allow better terrain handling (spider climb after all) Giant bird mounts could actually have a second person hanging from the feet dropping bombs on people Boars could get massive hit point bonuses Bulls could get a bonus on turns they move and attack (charge!) snake mounts could constrict enemies preventing movement.
[quote]As a weedy whimp on the back of a bear doesn't make the whimp anymore powerful, but the bear can still throw a tantrum and rip some people apart (as long as someone is pointing it in the right direction.[/quote] Thats true, but a weedy whimp isn't going to survive on the back of a bear. I mean, honestly... you'd have to be pretty tough to tame and control a bear. If you are a weedy whimp, you might as well not be on a bear at all. [quote]IIRC, 'flying'
[quote]Please watch out for a problem I've noticed with expanding maps - automatic flanking. On a set map, you can hold an 'edge' and have one side secured. If the enemy appears, fully developed, on your 'secure' border, you're going to get pwned before you can re-allocate your army[/quote] see thats why I want to support opening new worlds rather than expanding maps. Because that could be a problem for sure. (on the other hand, you don't exactly build very secure boarde
[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="10" id="1966178"] That seems to assume that cities can only produce one thing at a time, which I doubt will be the case for Elemental. GC2 supports 3-part production, and I'm hoping that the tile-based approach to city building in Elemental means that no two cities need be equal in terms of what they can produce.[/quote] I do make that assumtion. Mainly because I don't see much of a separation from MoM, AoW other than you could buiid som
Mounts would be a much more significant part of the game if they got their own attacks. However, if mounts include things like dragons and such then it may be the only option to perserve the power of the mounts. That being said, you could also have mounts that just grant aesthetic bonuses beyond movement... for example a boar might be +attack or charge. Bear might be a HUGE bonus to attack. Flying disc might add bonuses to magic. Fire hellsteeds might
[quote who="bleeba" reply="8" id="1965944"]I like the idea of fleshing out seiges. Any enemy army standing adjacent to the outside walls of a walled city should lower or stop food, material, and trade going into the city. This there seems (by reading some of the descriptions for how materials like metal will be distributed from city to city) a mechanism in place already for a city to store materials and food. Cities prone to seiges could try to expand these capasity (larger
[quote]Riding (originally Equestrian, but defeats the point): The ability to make a saddle specific to a movement type. For example, bears are large. The same saddle tech that grants bear riders grants rhino riders. So, you need: 1) mount resource of animal 2) ability to train it as a mount 3) proper tech for the rider to stay on: easy for a horse, not so much for a skyshark. And YES, I know I'm probably missing and/or over-generalizing
[quote]The 'sticky' and 'global' talk is because you have to hit the toggle every time you start GC2 if you want to see turns, and the change is only visible in that little box at the top of the main map. [/quote] YES! They should be able to make the talk thing much less of a hastle to always access.
I think this should be an option. And I think there should be duel-screen options (like 1 screen = 1 player, other = other player) and have some actualy fun cinematic views for the 2nd player to watch durring battles and stuff ^_^ Also, there should be hotseat online play. thats my 2 cents
I voted for him!
So whats going to happen to me (the player) if we get disconnected from the AI Bot servers? [quote]we're still quite a ways from being able to program such an artificial intelligence.[/quote] that may be true. But you can get a lot closer than most strategy games do. Even just with a crazy long series of if statements (if this then that logic for programs) [quote] And the AI work won't just be in how they play the g