pigeonpigeon

[quote who="Sarudak" reply="25" id="2264538"]AoW (at least AOW2 don't remember the other one) you ALWAYS wanted your wizard on a wizard tower because otherwise your domain was limited to something like 5 hexes around your wizard. With him on a wizard tower AND wizard tower, magic relay, or hero had domain around it which meant spell casting area AND an effect for your global domain casting. Having your game end when your channeler dies is IMHO a very very BAD idea unles

[quote who="StoweMobile" reply="21" id="2263541"]LoL, I was kind of shocked to see this post resurrected. Indeed they would have to be fairly clever to make it so that you can't carry TOO much over to the next senario...while still have the player not feel cheated when starting the next one.[/quote] They could create limits on how much military/tech/magic you can 'bring with you' to the next level. You could still surpass that in each level, but you'd lose any excess starting on the n

[quote who="psychoak" reply="17" id="2263449"] Only because we're in agreement. The minute you disagree with me, I'm an irrational idiot! [/quote] Considering we seem to agree with each other almost completely on the direction we want for Elemental and disagree about most things regarding the rest of the world, that means you're capable of rational, intelligent thought the only place it matters. The world is going to hell anyways, one more irrational idiot isn't going

[quote who="PurplePaladin" reply="21" id="2264528"]Every Heroes of Might & Magic since the first one; both Age of Wonders, so obviously, I'd like to help beta this. How do I make sure I'm in the lotery please? (I have Galactic Civilizations II, DemiGod & Sins). I guess my friend, who has no SD games has no chance to get in (insert boos/hisses)?[/quote] Everyone who pre-orders the game will be able to help beta test. The lottery is only for the alpha. Stardock

Wow, are you sure I didn't write that, Denryu? Seriously, you just described exactly the way I tend to play, with one subtle difference: even before I've run into other players I tend to expand pretty slowly, making sure everything is well-defended and that I have the necessary supplies/funds so that new settlements can get on their feet quickly. I tend to focus on only a few new settlements at a time and don't start anymore until the others are off life-support.

[quote who="omniscitoad" reply="1" id="2262822"]I don't think an endgame stratagy is a bad thing as long as it is 'endgame'. Super powered armageddon spells and ultimate god-like heroes are common through fantasy literature and games, so why not here? As long as someone can't 'win on turn two' in multiplayer, than a well thought out and executed stratagy SHOULD eventually snowball your opponents if they havn't done anything to counter you. That said, I think there should als

[quote who="Climber" reply="9" id="2262604"]It become more like an ‘idea thread’! After say 30 TC turns, combat automatically ends regardless whether it is a siege or not. (There might be problem of stallying by using a fast unit running around)[/quote] Horrible. Dismal. Heretical. Only as an option, if that. The only way I would be even accepting of a 'feature' like that is if it were part of some grander scheme, like multi-day battles and such. Otherwi

Having multiplayer in the alpha/betas would be very cool. I don't play much multiplayer but it seems like it'd be fun to play with a relatively small community and a great way to find things that would be easy to miss against incomplete AIs. Also, a few things about that screenshot... Hopefully the rivers will look better come the final version. It would be really nice if rivers didn't have to follow along the edge of map tiles, they'd look so much better - and rig

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="25" id="2261645"]I wasn't really supporting resource limit or turn limit. But that is what it does. I don't really like it that much either, but I understand its need. Personally I think the best way is where a resource drops down to a low income rate when it is "spent" such as in much of the Command and Conquer series, the resources slowly come back. Or in Dawn of War, you can sometimes exhaust req sources which drops production down.&

Ooo. Friends and family have been trying to get me on twitter for a while now, but it seems like this may be what finally gets to me to do it...

[quote who="psychoak" reply="20" id="2261548"]As a hardcore as hardcore gets gamer without an internet connection to do it, I don't even give a shit how many people are interested in a game anymore. If there isn't a single person online, it doesn't pose a problem. They don't even notice us, they never have. They pop into Walmart, see the box, and think gee, that looks fun.[/quote] I just went to bestbuy the other day to look at monitors, and walked out with Elven Leg

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="23" id="2260955"]@luckmann: with you, there is no surprise. I find that in a game like this, having a resource to be finite, or appear to be finite (such as having mana nodes drain to a slow crawl) would encourage conflict and resolution.[/quote] What if we don't always want to be encouraged to be in conflict and for a quick resolution? Finite resources is like turn limits, and I hate turn limits.

I actually don't want to upgrade spells. Rather, I want spells to have their effects (could be one, could be many) and their associated base parameters including mana and/or essence. Yes, I want each effect to have its own base cost. And when casting the spell, I want to be able to vary how much mana/essence to invest in each individual effect. So here's an example: Spell: Fireball Effect: Direct Damage (5) - Cost: 5 Mana Effect: AoE (0) - Cost: 0 Mana So ass

[quote who="psychoak" reply="11" id="2261534"]No idea. I'm still trying to decide whether he's serious or trolling. Supposedly I'm a pessimist, but it never seems to work out that way when I aim for less than rock bottom.[/quote] I think you're just depressed that we found a bigger jackass than you, psychoak :P Though at least you're capable of rational thought and your most-often used word isn't carebear.

[quote who="Campaigner" reply="25" id="2261476"]And I don't know if it's a good thing if someone can neglect the citybuilding and just boost up heroes and powerup his spellcasting....it will become harder to balance if there's different ways to play. If everybody have to atleast build some cities then the game will be easier to balance because of the similarities.[/quote] We already know that one of their goals with Elemental is to allow for many different ways to play the game. Obvio

[quote who="Denryu" reply="1" id="2261243"]This thread was in need of resurrection. I know, I know, the less time they spend tantalizing us with tidbits, the more time they can spend on getting the alpha build ready.... but it HAS been a week.... please? Heh heh just noticed how closely this post resembled the OP. I must just be an impatient whiner.[/quote] Just because of this they're going to give us a dev post

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="16" id="2259965"]On the other hand, making a custom spell consisting of a bomb with swords tied to it, sending swords flying in random directions, piercing breastplates and their damage dependant on angle and force.. would be pretty cool.[/quote] Would be pretty dumb though as there's only a pretty small angle of incidence that a sword would do much damage to an armored person, and it would take a very large explosion in the first place to send something a

[quote who="Solam" reply="16" id="2260927"]It would be a weird move by Stardock not to have the SAVE option in this game. I would not worry so much I am pretty sure we will be able to save. It does not make any sense other wise,.[/quote] Yeah, developing multiplayer for a game like Elemental and then leaving out the save feature would be a gigantic waste of time and resources, because multiplayer wouldn't be usable unless you only like playing the first 20

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="23" id="2260906"]I'd want a spell that might prevent fleeing. It could be a high level spell, but still. In HoMM I was always angry when I'd crush an enemy wizard down to like 1 unit then they would flee. Sometimes I'd have such an overwhelming force that I couldn't imagine how they could escape. [/quote] I loved the shackles artifact in HoMM for that reason. And a spell to prevent retreat by putting up a magi

[quote who="psychoak" reply="20" id="2259580"] Then, the mines run out. A full scale assault every five minutes suddenly becomes a full scale assault every half an hour. The game is still playing out the same way, just slower.[/quote] And then it becomes impossible to field a full scale assault at all, and even if you throw everything you have at the other player it'll just be mowed down by his defenses (and vice versa). Then the game stops, when no one can do anythin

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="12" id="2259434"]I realize I am not 100% sure how I would go about creating particle effects for spells. I have not worked much with particle effects (or at all really, besides plugging into existing engines)[/quote] You would go about creating particle effects for spells using the particle editor . :P [quote who="psychoak" reply="13" id="2259564"]Destructible terrain, yeah. Sword swings using actual physics to d

Wow, I keep thinking psychoravin has hit bottom, but then he just keeps on digging. He's gonna fall off the other side of Earth soon.

[quote who="psychoravin" reply="10" id="2258598"]Ahhh just another bunch of carebear players the lot of you.[/quote] Carebear Stare! | | | <span st

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="3" id="2259020"]TBS and TC are NOT mutually exclusive, remember.....[/quote] Yeah, but I've never seen turn-based tactical combat that allows for situations like the one mentioned in the OP. Really the only games with tactical combat that do allow it are RTS's and Total War - Total War's tactical combat being fully real-time. Maybe Stardock's mysterious continuos-turn tactical combat will manage to bridge the gap, though. I hope so :)

[quote who="psychoravin" reply="19" id="2258590"]First of all in a fantasy wargame there shouldn't be any alliances at all with the ai vs the player. This is another feature that always leads to EXPLOITATION by the player. The ai doesn't use it well and it should be banned from the player to use at all vs ai. When he/she starts the game he/she is at war with ALL since this is going to be more of a single player solo game that's the way it should be. The player should have to deal with aggress