pigeonpigeon

[quote who="kerzain" reply="1" id="2235466"] Quoting psychoak, reply 24Were you on the Majesty 2 forums and got lost? Seriously, it sounds like you're talking about Majesty there. No idea where you'd get that idea for Elemental. Go through the rest of the developer journals, they've been quite informative. Elemental is being described as 'like majesty' in certain regards by Brad in an audio interview he did somewhere. I forget what the inter

[quote who="dctrjons" reply="5" id="2235560"]...even if some claim it be daft, going to build my castle in a swamp. Just to show them...[/quote] Monty Python for the win.

[quote who="Demiansky" reply="16" id="2234889"] I know it sounds spiffy and novel to have the game end when the channeler dies, but I think this will be fatal to the game. The biggest problem with the original Age of Wonders is the ease of which the game promptly ended. You would walk into a dungeon or take a wrong turn and be up to your nose in enemies, even if you were proceeding with relative caution. From the sounds of it, channelers are expected to be proactiv

[quote who="Denryu" reply="6" id="2235426"]To Pigeonpigeon, regarding your last paragraph: I want all channelers to start with all of their essence and all channelers start with equal essence (with a possible option equally available to all at setup to have extra essence - VERY costly). How you spend this incredibly vital, unique and limited resource should be what this game revolves around. Your point is valid, If channelers have all of the essence at the get go, how to keep them from being

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="2" id="2235404"]Have you ever played GalCiv 2? EWOM will have an in-game unit designer similar to the shipyard, where you can comp,letely customise your units.[/quote] I have, and in GC2 you can equip whatever combination of weapons and other modules that can fit. Basically the analogy to allowing troops to use multiple weapons.

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="3" id="2235381"]That's exactly the sort of discussion I'm looking for. At some unconcsious level, I was about 1/3 in agreement with you on "no spent essence should ever be returned to you" while I drafted the OP. but you and Scoutdog have immediately pointed more directly than I did to a global question about essence: is it a zero-sum thing or not?[/quote] Yeah, I'd vote either no, or make it a game type. Another issue is if the ratio of total essence to

I posted this over in the Internal debates made external dev journal, but it's particularly relevant to this topic so I'm going to repost it: I would love to see different types of roads with increasing bonuses. I kind of assumed they would be in, though. However, even more than wanting different types of roads I want constructing them to be expensive enough that you don't make all your roads to the best of your nation's abilities. Best quality roads should be mostly limited to c

My name is pigeonpigeon and I approve of this message. Although I'm not sure that I approve of your last bullet point, especially the part about the channeler who lost territory regaining their essence. I'd much rather see all essence spent as a sunk cost that can never be recovered, no exceptions whatsoever (could still gain essence in the ways you mentioned, but no spent essence should ever be returned to you). Edit: [quote who="Scoutdog" reply="1" id="22

I would love to be able to train and equip soldiers to use multiple weapons. The most obvious example would be to give a group of infantry a bow and arrow to set off a few volleys before engaging in close-combat. So yes, I think this kind of customization should be in EWOM - in fact I think EWOM is particularly well-suited to this kind of customization given the unparalleled control it seems we'll have in designing our troops. If all we can do is make cookie cutter units anyway, then all that

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="16" id="2235143"] Back on topic, I want to see some economic modeling as rich as some of the ideas we've seen floating around here, but the more I read this and similar arguments, the smaller I want the actual 'tech' (Craft) tree in Elemental to be. I might feel differently if we were going to have a generational approach to the calendar, but I still doubt that the devs are interested in anything like that. If game time flows in anything like the super-fuzz

[quote who="Climber" reply="15" id="2235082"]Units carry Y unit of food. Different unit has different maximum value of Y. Each turn, the unit consumes 1/X of the food it carries. Therefore when X reaches 0, Y also reaches 0, no food is left, thus the unit is then Exhausted. Exhausted units will have Att, Def greatly reduced & movement speed halved.[/quote] I don't really understand why X is a variable, or what it's supposed to achieve. Let's frame it

[quote who="psychoak" reply="19" id="2235102"]Hotseat, can't really see it working with what we've heard on the combat system. If it's implemented, it would have to be a restricted form, much like you can't do tactical combat in pbem at all without a huge amount of delay from playing out all the combat moves in individual battles. You just can't do simultaneous turn systems on one computer. They'd need to either cut it entirely, or include a desyncronized system for use with

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="14" id="2235036"]It might be safe to say the 'Chinese' (depending on what you mean by that) 'invented' most any major pre-industrial tech innovation you can think of, although they sometimes abandoned something for internal/cultural reasons.[/quote] Let's not go overboard here. The 'Chinese' invented much more than they're often given credit for, but because of that their contribution is often exaggerated (even though it needs no exaggeration). No other

This isn't really important at all but I'd like to point out that you have "EMoW" in the subtitle. But this game is not going to be called Elemental: Magic of War, although could be an interesting game, too.

[quote who="Hadberz" reply="12" id="2234852"]I think if there was going to be hotseat and PBEM Stardock would have said something by now. Judging by the screenshots there is no end turn button like in Gal Civ 2. Of course lots could change between now and release. This game could be released as a real-time strategy game and I would still be happy [/quote] Stardock's silence isn't as significant as you might think; don't read into it too much. I've been a regular of these forums since

[quote who="Sammual" reply="15" id="2225933"]*grin* They are the cloud covered mountains that appear in or bordering the poles. They should not be there but I haven't had the chance to track down why they keep showing up. Sammual[/quote] Even knowing what to look for I still can't find them (I also tried to find them when I first looked at the screenshots)...

I love how you post, "hey, I could use this" in a 4-month dead thread...

[quote who="azraelck" reply="9" id="2234784"] And I suggest you re-read both the original post and my own. You obviously didn't. The original post CLEARLY states that multiplayer games will only be hosted on the Stardock servers. No ports, no proxies, not even on the same box. Read that last bit there? It means NO HOTSEAT and NO PLAY BY EMAIL.The post clearly states that ALL multiplayer will be hosted on their servers, period. You will like it or you will die. [/quote]</p

I totally agree that trade routes should spread culture! That'd be awesome, and it would make winning via a culture/influence victory so much more engaging. In GC2 and Civ IV, for example, influence/culture victories were either much more boring than most others, or largely side effects of having already conquered much of the world. The reason being, as Swicord mentioned, that settlements (and in GC2 influence starbases) were the only sources of culture. If trade also sp

Yeah I like where this is going! The combination of an 'exhaustion meter' with food supply seems like it'll work quite nicely. Food cost could actually be a significant portion of military upkeep; obviously you'd have to pay your soldiers, but you also have to feed them. Like psychoak I think that a combination of foraging capacity and supply caravans would make this rather painless and achieve exactly the desired goals: make it harder to field massive armies, make it difficult to fight far f

I agree with psychoak and Denryu, too. It's too much hassle, with too many aspects that can't be automated well, for too little gain. Much better to abstract this away. It may be worthwhile to base caravan speed on the fastest non-mythical mount available to your kingdom, though; but even that may be going too far. There's nothing to micromanage there, but it might place too much importance on having fast mounts.

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="20" id="2234616"] I'm one of the folks who would like to see a timescale that ran across multiple generations and included either agelessness for channelers or a succession system, but I would be surprised to see it happen. Haven't seen the slightest encouraging peep from the devs for any of that sort of calendar-related talk.[/quote] Don't completely give up hope! The devs are very careful about what the say... They've revealed all sorts of informa

[quote who="Entorwellian" reply="4" id="2234189"]Sorry if it's been said before (only read the first page), but killing off bots for the A.I. would be a terrible thing to waste. The only multiplayer strategy games that me and my group of friends play are Sins of a Solar Empire and Civ IV with hard/king difficulty compstomps. Elemental still looks really fascinating but not having any A.I. players for multiplayer available would be a travesty. I know they're difficult to program but most 4X ga

[quote who="aLap" reply="1" id="2234082"] 2. I’m killing off the bots concept. People hate them. I thought they were cool but they’re too much work only to be hated. So there won’t be artificial players. Bad Demigod! Reconsider this, please... First for Demigod, I really hope that's not a decision based on a really loud minority of hardcore gamers. Multiplayer games are often riddled with these kind of complaints. Secondly, Demigod

I just need to say that I love that screenshot [e digicons]