pigeonpigeon

[quote]MoM has 5 elements. I definitely want that.[/quote] There are already 5 elements. Fire, Air, Earth, Water and Life/Death.

[quote]Personally I'd like to see the combat system provide battles where multiple players can fight on the same battlefield. This allows allies to fight side by side during battle and offers more strategies. Three different enemies could all be fighting each other on the same battlefield. This feature currently exists within AgeofWonders:SM .[/quote] I'd love to see this as well. I'm also hopeful that it will be in, because one of the examples of things he'd like to

[quote]Well, if it's something like units or spells or whatnot, then no, you can get by without any alteration to the game itself (unless you want to do something REALLY drastic like add a fifth element or make poisoned arrows).[/quote] That's the point. In Civ IV you have access to the actual source code, and so you can do all sorts of crazy things not even dreamed of by its developers. No matter how good the built-in editors and python accessibility may be, there will still be thing

[quote]Well, my concept of this is that there are three terrein "pallettes" (life, death, and unrevived), that contain many different terrein "types" like forest, plain, mountain, river, and so on. Investing essence in a land area turns its "pallette" from unrevived to either life ordeath depending on your alignment, but a mountain stays a mountain, and just gets a different "look".[/quote] Yeah, that's what I was trying to say, albeit not so eloquently... Sometimes I have trouble tra

[quote]This is actually a really crappy setup to show map generation with...Tiny maps with Single Continents aren't that much fun [e digicons]:([/e] But yeah, rives, lakes, and islands really show themselves as you maess with the settings (but, since there'll be no boats in beta0, we can't really have islands be a part of the game)[/quote] Oh, phew. That is very good news BoogieBac, don't be sad :P Watching these videos was a lot of fun - and it was really interesting to s

[quote]I want ice and snow. "Seasons: War of Faeries" presents Faery Queen Spring versus Faery Empress Winter! [e digicons]:omg:[/e] [/quote] Yeah, I'd love for there to be a whole list of terrain types that you could choose. I'd also like for your terrain choice to only be one factor in what the land becomes as you revive it. Having all your terrain be just grasslands, or just lava lands, or just snow would be a bit boring. As you revive the land, you should get some mix of ever

[quote]The Kingdoms=life/empires=death is confirmed. It's the Humans=Kingdoms/Fallen=Empires that I never heard any dev confirmation of.[/quote] The confirmation was made in this dev post : [quote]The Factions There are 12 named factions (races) in Elemental. In addition, players will be able to create and submit their own factions to be shared by other users. Each of the 12 named factions will have its own history and back story. Tho

Are we going to get inland seas/lakes? Based on the current method of map generation it doesn't look like we'll get any inland bodies of water... Another question is, will it be possible for this algorithm to generate worlds with wide, arcing land-masses? Currently it looks like it will generate a big blob and cut out small pieces from the shoreline to make it more irregular, but I see nothing happening that could result in long, sweeping, curving and bending land-masses. Also, will t

[quote]Actually the majority of fantasy creatures have not originated thru movies, television, or games... but based on myths from human history. The games, television and movies have only made them different such as zombies eating brains. Games include the well known types of creatures to lure individuals which may have always carried an interest for werewolves, dwarves, vampires, dragons, etc., . Upon reviewing all the games which have introduced new crea

[quote]I am assuming that, considering the low essence levels, essence-sucking spells are out by this point. Did I assume correctly?[/quote] Not necessarily. "Low essence levels" relative to what? The only important comparison is how much things will cost - and maybe there will be spells with fractional essence upkeep. Not to mention there could still be some powerful spells that can be kept up for more than one turn at relatively high essence cost. If someone cast armageddon, a spell

[quote]I think having a system where different AI play styles are chosen based on conditions instead of them trying to learn mid match is far superior. On normal or below you could have the AI just randomly choose a playstyle and on hard or above the AI can change playstyles depending on what it sees the player doing. Having it recognize some obvious player warmongering and responding by changing from say, the expansionist to defensive playstyle is relatively simple compared to trying to make

This is an awesome FAQ! I'd say it's the best one yet, but that's probably because you answer mostly gameplay-related questions (which you usually seem to avoid - understandably). [quote] A: Rather than using the terms good and evil we have elected to go with factions that either align themselves with life magic or death magic. The Empires make use of death magic and the Kingdoms make use of light magic.[/quote] I do like the departure of blatant good vs. evi

[quote who="Tourresh" reply="13" id="2313174"]Alright, so we've got a reasonable disagreement here on the merits of data collection & analysis that didn't degrade into a steaming pile of junk. That's a pretty amazing feat on the internet. "but what I hope to do is to build a cloud of multiplayer AI players that I can constantly be updating and enhancing in near-real time based on the data I get back from them on how they were beat, what exploits were used against them"<br

In my experience, I've found that statistics often lie and if you do a cursory analysis, or if you don't pay enough attention to context (or even worse - a combination of the two) you are likely to miss big issues and cause more problems than you'll solve. If Stardock decides to do any sort of statistical analysis on matches, then they have to fully commit to a rigorous and comprehensive methodology. If they don't, they won't gain anything - the really obvious things that they'd catch

[quote who="Tourresh" reply="9" id="2312969"]Stardock has quite the advantage here though. Since they already analyze matches with GC they can do a similar thing with choices. Let's say they program in a random event where you choose to lose X (+/- a random #) of your mana or lose (Y +/- a random #) of gold. The program then records and submits which option players pick most and what random ratios or variables were found to make the decision the most balanced. Then the game either modifies th

I'm also not the biggest fan of strict mutual exclusivity - whether it be in research or some other aspect of the game. I don't hate it, but I think a 'soft' form of exclusiveness works better: it allows people to mold their strategies more to their own personal preferences while still preventing players from getting the best of all words. To give an example, let's say there are two techs, "laser accuracy" and "laser power." With regular mutual exclusiveness, researching one prevents

[quote who="Shurdus" reply="25" id="2310271"]Of course is every soldier is treated like a seperate entity we will need some solution for problems like these. If this game should be 100% realistic there should be some solution for this as one slowed soldier can and will in fact slow 499 others down unless they leave the wounded one behind. What I am wondering however is why we would want a realistic approach rather than a more simplistic one. I greatly prefer the simplistic approach

[quote who="Tamren" reply="13" id="2308741"]I see what you mean now. Well we could add a rule that says at least 5% of the figures in a unit have to be affected before the unit as a whole will suffer a movement penalty. 20 elite swordsmen might be able to beat 100 mooks. But as soon as one of them takes an injury bad enough to make them limp the whole unit is affected. In this regard hordes are more "durable" to movement penalties. And it also makes much more sense to spend extra and outfit a

[quote who="RalphT" reply="11" id="2308309"]Brad, Have you thought about using Mono instead of Python? I saw that is what Sims3 is doing.You get a speed bump and can use C# or VB or ... that way. C# is also closer to C++ than Python is[/quote] Regardless of any advantages Mono may or may not have over Python, I'd say it's pretty safe to assume that the development process is way too far to switch languages - at least for Elemental. Additionally, it being close to a b

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="6" id="2308183"]Sounds good from a gameplay standpoint, but for modders (like myself) I hope that there is a cheat to make them all appear: debugging when you have to continually reload and tempt the RNG does NOT sound like fun.[/quote] From the sound of it, you could always just make a tech tagged as a core technology until you're done debugging. Although I wouldn't mind a game option to force all techs to be in the game.

[quote who="Tamren" reply="21" id="2306513"]Hundreds of games out there are advanced enough to recognize the effect of headshots. All you need is a second smaller hitbox placed slightly lower and there you go. Of course this assumes your game uses hitboxes in the first place. But even if your game revolves around dice rolls, all you need to do is add one more variable.[/quote] If it uses hitboxes, I sort of agree with you. However, adding tons of hitboxes representing different parts

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="14" id="2306136"]Upgraded fences I'd expect to relate to the civilization or soverign. Evil civs/wizards would have scary bone or spiky fences or walls, where good ones might have something like hedges.[/quote] I really hope they don't lock evil civs/wizards into having bony/spiky/scary everything. Let me choose what my shit looks like - not all evil is Sauron. [quote who="landisaurus" reply="14" id="2306136"]nipple... gat

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="19" id="2304600"] Is there going to be an underground? (ala Age of wonders) Briefly: No. However, one will certainly be modded in immediately after (or even before) the game is released.[/quote] Where did you get that information? I don't think I've ever seen any of the devs say anything either way about other worlds or underground...

[quote who="Tourresh" reply="19" id="2298821"]I'm not really seeing how the tactical battles are more like X-COM than like every other fantasy tactical battle. Looks almost indistinguishable from MOM, AOW, HOMM, KB, etc.[/quote] How could you possibly conclude the that combat looks indistinguishable from MOM, AOW, HOMM, and KB from that one screenshot - especially considering combat in MOM and AoW is totally different than the combat in HoMM and KB. Your post makes no se

[quote]All the units I have seen so far are male, but you never know..... we will probably have a female channe;er or two, the one on the cover is female (I think).[/quote] Looks like a man to me. Not everyone with long hair is female.