pigeonpigeon

IMO, there are only three other aspects of the game that I think should be even remotely as central to the game as economy: magic, diplomacy, and combat. One of my biggest reasons for this is that having an economy that takes into account location, distances, etc is about the only way to make location actually matter! In 4X games, location tends not to really matter all that much. Defensibility is somewhat important in games like Civ IV but ultimately it's very minor (you can cross an

[quote]These types of games typically only let you bring in a set number of groups of units. My only concern with being able to make customizable units is that it would exacerbate some of the unbalancing problems that occurred in MOM. For instance, magic immune, first strike flying paladins were basically unstoppable in large numbers. Add the trolls regeneration ability and they would be unstoppable. No force could elimiate them completely given the unit number limitat

[quote]Now a water elemental would not catch on fire only because it has a natural dousing effect, but it would definitely take more damage from a fire sword.[/quote] Or it could put out the fire :P Joking aside, it seems most of us in this thread are largely in agreement. The only topic of disagreement is how these affects should be implemented technically . I think I see what you're saying, though, and how it could be useful. If fire resistance were to affect all fire spells

[quote]Lets assume that when we found the first city, we get the first hero. He is relatively weak, so we have to be careful what do we fight against. Sovereign should be allowed to fight wondering monsters (he is a super unit after all), but players should be aware that the death of sovereign = game over. In other words: better to leave sovereign at home, and make him wonder around the world when we want to: kill some strong foe (ie. we gamble the sovereign's life), raise a magic tower or fo

[quote]If you aren't meeting food production your citizens get angry and there's some sort of consequences. If you overproduce any resource it can simply become gold. Gold can then be used (In large amounts) to speed along production times.[/quote] No amount of gold in the world is going to let me build houses if there is no one to buy wood from. No amount of gold in the world is going to let me build more swords than I have iron for if there is no one to sell me iron. I <

[quote]And if each element damage only does damage then as Frogboy wrote these other types of damage would be boring. These secondary effects are not only realistic for each element, but also make the battles more interesting.[/quote] But if I cast a fireball, with the 2ndary effect of reducing target armor and fire DoT against a fire elemental, the fire elemental will resist the fireball, and thus also resist the associated secondary affects. The secondary affects would on

[quote] The main reason is because the game will be more difficult to program the AI opponents which will have to calculate all the devious traps/tricks human players will be using on them. I don't want to be creating an AI personality and spend hours just coding all the different assassination methods to avoid. Human players will have a HUGE advantage taking down very powerful AI nations by one assassination. While Stardock believes this will make

Another good reason to at least try out resource storage and such is that we don't really know how it'd work. We do, on the other hand, know how the simplified version would work because that's been done a dozen times before (probably a lot more than that, really). Even with some creative and innovative tweaks here and there, it is still a fairly well-known quantity. A simple economy system, with no storage and global access (even if access is diminished with distance or something) will be cl

[quote]"Having the Dragon and troops just stand there, with troops randomly dying around it?" Similar to that, but of course NOT randomly dying around. The game will probably show a really quick 0.5 sec animation for each confrontation, & shows what damage is done to the target. It'll look just like your typical turn based TC in AOWSM when you pause (& have enabled the Skip TC animation option). If you don't, the game AI will make the move on behalf of

[quote]I think I agree with you guys. Resource storing = bad idea. Let me talk to the team.[/quote] I'm still skeptical about not having resource storing. If you are going to treat natural and/or manufactured resources as finite, integer quantities, then I just don't see it working. If I mine iron on one side of the map and can use it in my city on the other side of the map that same turn, it will be a "WTF" moment - every time. It will snap me out of whatever immersion there

[quote]Finally, there must be an option to remove TC combat animation. I hate watching the same fighting animation repeatly when my Dragon is toasting enemy the 100th times. TW animation has great visual for sure, but I lost interest to the game quickly because I am forced to watch the animation. Maybe the better option is "Only watch the same TC combat animation X times", so I can see the great work the artists have done but do not bore me with it.[/quote] What woul

[quote who="psychoak" reply="107" id="2416776"]I'm hoping for even more complex combat. No shooting targets with units that can't see them. I'd prefer a volley fire method, complete with reduced accuracy, for archer blocks, won't mind not having individual LOS within the group. Charges, facing, penalties for disengaging. Think Warhammer. If you were in a regiment, fighting another regiment, you couldn't just turn around and move to attack anoth

[quote]in terms of city count, cities I feel are much to close together in the current form of the game. Being that your city physically expands, I would say t hat no less than 5 tiles between cities should be the standard (rather than 3, which is the current) Possibly 6-8 would actually still be fair (though 8 would be a pretty massive block. That might be pushing it f

Reading some of these posts, it looks like many of you basically want each individual unit to have as many or more stats than are typically found in actual RPGs... I want to be able to look at the infocard of a unit and be able to gauge its potential right from there (with the exception of special abilities and such, I suppose). If said infocard is packed with dozens of numbers and %s and god-knows-what, it will be a little overwhelming. If units were going to be pre-built, it wouldn't be so

I'm happy you're planning on making height and cover factors in tactical combat, that is good news! :) Although it's all been said before: Doing away with different types of physical damage - good thing! The only caveat is that something should be done to differentiate different types of weapons. It could be as simple as having them all be very similar in effect but vary their resource costs/production time. But some weapons could have effects/abilities attached to them. Sharp

[quote]The info convention from Sins was useful in large part because the information wasn't available in the same way anywhere else, but right now the information in the info card is exactly the same as the info you'd get from clicking on the unit. It seems redundant to do both.[/quote] The point of infocards is to make information available without requiring you to actually select the object of interest. If you have something selected already and you are considering performing

[quote]Beta has to make the right balance, sure; but I doubt if it is possible from the feature info we receive from them so far. The game will then always evolve to hunt/defend the channeler every time; this is boring yet the most effective way to play the game.[/quote] That's narrow-minded. Neither you nor I nor even the devs really know how the game will turn out, let alone that it will always evolve to hunt/defend the channeler every time. If done well, cha

Nature is awesome.

[quote]i thought for Matlab, you can deactivate and reactivate pretty easily compare with say mathematica.[/quote] Nope. Well, yes - if the install you'd like to deactivate is still accessible. If you recycled your computer, reformatted your harddrive, if your computer died, etc, then there is no way to deactivate a previous install. At least there wasn't 2 years ago. I had reformatted and given away my old computer, and didn't think about having to manually (and locally!) deactivate

[quote]I would say that the difference is that your frinds don't go home with their very own copies of your boardgame after they come over to play it.[/quote] If they're all my computers, no one is going home with anything... Granted not many people (and definitely not me) have enough personal computers for such a thing, but my point is that if I have 8 personal computers, and I buy software, I should be able to install it on all of them. Thankfully Stardock doesn't use dracon

[quote]It's over 5 times the area of a Civ 4 map! I don't know how much bigger you were thinking, but it's 35840 tiles. Just to put it into more perspective...Even if half the map is water, half of the land is mountains, and there's 32 factions, that still leaves enough land for each faction to have control of 280 tiles. So if each city takes an average of 10 tiles then that's 28 cities per faction even with only a quater of the map colonizable. To me, it seems rediculously large already.[/qu

On the topic of ridiculous patents, this is hilarious . They filed it as a joke, and lo and behold! The US patent office showed its quality :P

So if I have 3 computers, I'm not allowed to have impulse installed on all three at once? ...:-\ Obviously that's an extreme situation, but I don't understand why companies care how many computers I install a game on as long as they're all my personal computers, and I am not giving them to other people to play on. The only reason for it that I can see is to prevent someone from hosting a LAN party or something (not that it's enforced) with friends, using just once license...</

[quote] I am in agreement with previous posters that my hero's survival if things go wrong should be up to me setting up the apprpriate back-up plan and infrastructure. Never should it be frustrating random chance.[/quote] Yeah I completely agree. Although personally I'd rather see backup plans based on magic, or maybe items, rather than on building a wizard tower or whatnot (although I have nothing against having a construction project as one possible back-up plan). <

[quote]If you've played Civ 4 here 's a comparison of the largest map sizes.[/quote] That's the largest default map size in the 32 bit version... The end of that very post says that if Intel ever gets them a 64 bit version of havoc, map sizes could even bigger.