I think in general, if you come to an established forum that has been around for half a year with this many users and posts and you find it impossible to read - then it's probably just you. In this case it's definitely just you :P
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="17" id="2267580"] hmmm. I don't recall him saying that directly. Nor can I find it in any early dev posts, would you mind linking that to me? Perhaps I have forgotten information given out back in november (or earlier?). I was under the impression only the 1st city required essense directly (as the land would be completely barran at that point) I understood that essense would be required to make the land habitable, bu
[quote who="Climber" reply="10" id="2267535"]PigeonX2 & Scoutdog, I am raising a point that Populous spells can be done in another way & I prefer that way. Whether it requires way too much time/CPU cycles to do it, it is not me/us will know. PigeonX2, my description of old way does not imply it is 2D. The map is tile based, tile data still needed to be updated tile by tile regardless of the graphic engine is 2D or 3D.[/quote] So then what's your p
[quote]So, Frogboy says that there will be a large set of creatures. But in previous posts he said that it will be rare for players to have control of non-humans/fallen. So where are all the creatures then? In dungeons of course (or roaming the land I guess)[/quote] Frogboy said that the different creatures will be individually rare , but varied. That means you aren't likely to find a civilization of unicorns or trolls, but maybe you'll stumble acros
[quote who="Climber" reply="23" id="2267627"] Wow, I cannot foresee everyone attacking 1 of my points & ignoring the rest of my Reply #59. When sovereign dies, his land rot away; I don’t intend this rotting to be permanent nor all land rot. The rotting probably means temp reduction in productivity so rivals can advance troops more easily. In that Reply #59, someone new will become the sovereign after some turns. Reply #59’s point 4 lists the
[quote who="psychoak" reply="2" id="2267391"]50% for a 90 isn't too high. That's about right for maintaining formation. It's not the simplest thing to get a bunch of guys wearing armor and carrying pole arms to change direction while maintaining formation.[/quote] Like Climber said it really depends. Yeah maybe a squad of rookie pikemen will take some effort to turn around, but a squad of even rookie swordsmen, let alone veterans, would be able to turn around on a dime. It
[quote who="bleeba" reply="18" id="2267451"]One quibble with this last post-- Please don't call the ultimate, game-winning spell of spells "the making"...... It just seems to lack a certain weight.[/quote] Personally I think "The Spell of Making" carries quite a bit of weight and sounds much better than MoM'S "Arcane Spell of Mastery." If you think about it, "make" is a powerful word and can mean quite a few things. You can make something, as in create it, but you can also
[quote who="Denryu" reply="16" id="2267256"]Giving credit where it is due, GREAT job psychovarin for getting thru an entire post without using the word 'carebear'.[/quote] Considering he's advocating for channelers to be immortal and death a mere inconvenience, I think even he must realize that he should be laughed out of the room for calling people who want death=game over carebears :P [quote who="Tridus" reply="15" id="2267253"] But that's a problem. If yo
[quote who="Gabberkooij" reply="15" id="2267233"]Does this mean that the final product will also be ready later? It was 2-2010 with the first beta in 7-2009. Now this beta is 2 months later....[/quote] I hope so! I know it's odd to say, in a way, but a longer development time means a more polished and more feature-rich game. And if Elemental turns out at all like I expect it to, it should last me for quite some time, so postponing release by a few months (or more if they need it)
[quote who="Annatar11" reply="1" id="2267206"]Now we're up to horses? Where did horses come from?[/quote] From the Hyracotherium .
[quote who="landisaurus" reply="11" id="2266846"]why would cities require essence to found? it isn't magic (well it might be, but after the 1st one there should be other ways of getting a bunch of people to move to a new location. Its not like 'settlers' are going to stop existing as a concept to those trying to expand a kingdom.)[/quote] That was one of the first tidbits of information we were given about the game, that founding new settlements will require essence. Frog
[quote who="Luckmann" reply="1" id="2267078"]Just you.[/quote] That made me laugh.
[quote who="Climber" reply="6" id="2266876"] Old way: Cast a spell, terrain A is switched to terrain B, tile by tile as defined by the spell. The graphics engine represents this change. For example, a new hill is created by elevating a hill’s height across many land tiles. The area affected is defined by the spell. Another example, a spell start a forest fire, the spell has to tell how the fire is spread tile by tile. Material ph
Spartan - in the OP you should bold Wintersong's name like all the others. It's easy to miss that those avatars were made by him.
The world has been dead. Not just people (otherwise we wouldn't need to bring life back to the land with channelers to make it habitable for people). Forests would have largely died out, too... So whatever forests there are would (story-wise, anyways) be fairly new growth along with the few holdout old growths. Kind of like Fangorn Forest in the LoTR. Fangorn Forest used to be part of the Great Greenwood, and used to encompass a huge area, including most of Gondor and I think ev
[quote who="Paradoxnt" reply="9" id="2266010"]I dislike the idea of the lands cleansed with essense, going back into ruin once it's Channeler dies.[/quote] I completely agree. For one, I'm one of the people who thinks essence spent should be essence lost. You can't get it back, you can't "disimbue" the land, recovering some portion of the essence you invested in it, etc. Essentially, when you spend essence on something, that essence becomes intrinsic to the target and the connection t
[quote who="Luckmann" reply="20" id="2265982"]Would it be possible to have a "switch-key", perhaps on 'Alt'? I.e. If you hold 'Alt' down, you switch to the cloth map, no matter the zoom. I'm not sure what function it'd serve, but sometimes even when fully zoomed in, you just want to see things "raw" to get an overview.[/quote] Me like.
[quote who="DivineWrath" reply="24" id="2266330"]Can you create powerful units (lets call them champions) that are significantly more powerful than mere soldiers?[/quote] Poor word choice. Champions are what heroes are called in Elemental. So technically, the answer to your question is yes - you can create/recruit champions that are significantly more powerful than mere soldiers :P
[quote]Opposing you are up to 11 other kingdoms and empires who have a similar objective except with the world under their control.[/quote] Hmmm, this statement is kind of vague. Does that mean games will have a maximum of 12 players, and two players can't be the same faction? That would be sad. But it could also just mean that there will be 12 different factions and so you might encounter that many different factions.... And on a related note, please make
[quote who="Luckmann" reply="2" id="2265917"]Sounds like the "Ideas for global mayhem magic" thread. But I'm with Scoutdog, although in relation to the OP, I don't think I'd want a in-game 'map editor' that spends essence. But yeah, general Poulous-level magic. Raising and sinking of land. Earthquakes. Tsunamis. Raising Volcanos underneath the feet of my enemy's city.[/quote] What he said. [quote] It also sounds like some variation of material physic
[quote who="Paradoxnt" reply="22" id="2265211"]You see, the problem is that if they try to make fighting withdrawls/retreats/routs where the guy running away gets to pick which of his units live and die (while the game forces the enemy commander to fully cooperate with whatever the fleeing commander decides) = complicated and lame![/quote] No. That would be horrible. I, for one, was referring to how retreats are handled in Total War. I could choose to have my mages retreat and to have
[quote who="Luckmann" reply="5" id="2264371"]This made a lot of people very unhappy and has widely been regarded as a bad move.[/quote] Good reference.
[quote who="Denryu" reply="4" id="2263857"]If resources ever did deplete, I would expect new sources to appear at roughly the same rate as old one were depleted.[/quote] While I'm interested in something like that - resources depleting but being replaced at about the same rate - I'm also concerned about it. It could significantly devalue cities partway through the game, and considering settlements are going to be very large permanent investments which require essence, th
[quote who="Sarudak" reply="15" id="2264678"]I really don't like the idea of random units dying. I want to choose what units I am going to try to protect during a retreat and which ones I am willing to sacrfice.[/quote] Yeah. That's really the one reason that makes me want a more involved retreat system than a MoM-like one. I want to be able to do things like leave a portion of my army to their deaths in order to delay the enemy enough so that the rest can escape. And if you're totall
[quote who="Paradoxnt" reply="19" id="2264644"]Damn Pigeonpigeon, can I quote that last part to my friends?[/quote] Of course [e digicons]^_^[/e]