Scoutdog

It's not absolutely perfect, but I imagine that the devs could rig something up with font, stacking selectors, and floating labels.

[quote]The player can be just as evil using high taxes to bring the same amount of gold. Citizens are going to be more likely to stay in a realm of high taxes compared to a realm of moderate taxes with very bad crime because losing family heirlooms and priceless antiques will hurt more than a sack of gold.[/quote] I wouldn't say that. People are actually going to be less likely to leave an area of high crime that you can protect against and hire private security and wards to protect t

[quote]I disagree with chopping off fingers to feed the body... hence stealing from ones own kingdom when other sources exist.[/quote] You think that, and I think that, but the channeler might be a biiiiit less responsible. I think players should have the option to be evil if need be.

The plausible-deniability point makes sense, but what I am saying is if this guy is loyal to the CHANNELER above all else (and he would have to be), he could be trusted to work within the kingdom.

Why bother with naming rights at all? Just have everybody assign names, and have all the names show up on the map. For example, if I name a mountain "G'Nost Peak", and you name it "NT_Jedi_Is_Cool", both names would show up on the map pointing to the same thing. No confusion, no unfair naming rights, just the possible most obvious system.

I diagree with some of what you have said, namely that you would need a 3rd party thieves guild to steal from your own people. The way I see it, the sort of person you would have as a master thief could be TRUSTED to steal from your own people because the channeler is NOT a citizen. Just because they happen to pay taxes to you doesn't mean you can't collect some fees that aren't on the books.

Banned for having an illegal act as a nickname.

No, he doesn't Wait, that didn't work. I guess he does.

Banned for saying he doesn't make sense during the only period in which he DOES make sense.

I think we should go a step further and have odd terrein features be an indicator of large and/or powerful dungeons. That is, of course, if dungeons are not immediately visible from the moment you see the title, which is also a good idea.

You're forgetting defensive spells and wards. It night be easy for a mage to dissolve a stone wall, but he's going to have a LOT more trouble destroying a 20-foot tall ring of magical fire that surrounds a city.

Banned for thinking that is outrageous. I sit near two jocks in my public speaking class, and trust me, our friend here is nowhere NEAR outrageous.

Good point. Banned for making a fart joke.

Banned for making a ninja joke.

The various "leaks" are actually a great way to keep up interest and increase purchases, as people are much more curious if you give them teasers. I just wish more devs would realise this... Of course, it helps to have a relatively small fan base, as Stardock does, otherwise you get besieged with requests. It also helps (IMHO) if you make players "work" to get the juicier bits like with the runes and terrein names hidden in the tooltip/url's of the medallions. Makes peopke feel like they

Judging by the medallions, the types of terrein we will be getting in the original game will be: Evil (?), Deasert, Plains, Swamp, and Snow. Evil LOOKS somewhat volcanic, and I suppose impassible nterreins would not be included, but I doubt that the devs will add more so soon. Good idea, though.

True, but if you put the emphasis too much on territory defense, you gwt trench warfare similar to the situation in WW1. I think we can all agree that WW1 was not that enjoyable or even that strategic.

Banned for banning a serial-banner.

Lemme guess: Right Picture: Basic human ranch. Left Picture(clockwise from upper right): Watchtower/fortress, potter, basic & advanced market, (farm?)houses, military tents, store-houses.

If by "technology" you mean spells, most definately! A lot of the GalCiv2 people (myself included) have been compaining about the complacency of minors basically ever since the game came out!

Banned for no period .

Wouldn't hurt.

Banned for watching too much Family Guy.

Ok, NOW you're scaring me!

I am not sure about the dungeon livability thing. From a realism (well, as realistic as fantasy can get, anyway) point of view, it makes perfecdt sense, but I have no idea how having ready-to-use (or nearly so) settlements spread out across the map would affect strategy. Also, I believe it is "wight" not "wright".