pigeonpigeon

[quote who="azraelck" reply="23" id="2233989"]So this means no hotseat, and no play by email? Then it means I won't buy this game.[/quote] It may, but it may not. There's some confusion going around as to whether he meant all multiplayer games would be hosted on Stardock's server, or whether he just meant all internet multiplayer games (and leaving LAN/hotseat in). To me, the latter makes more sense as none of the multiplayer problems SD had had to do with LAN g

[quote who="woca" reply="22" id="2233710"]are citizens gooing to skills or some sort of ranking for intelligence, strength etc? so if a bunch of strong guys were in one town, it'd be better at mining then a town with just intelligent ones?[/quote] WAY too complicated, considering the vision is to have tens or probably hundreds of thousands of citizens.

I just have one gripe with this, but I think you're definitely headed along a good track! Basically, I don't like that in order to supply your army, you have to reinforce it with fresh troops. One possible concern is, what if you can't add any more forces to an army (as it seems like army size will be limited by hero/general leadership)? And it just doesn't feel right. Not to mention, what would be preventing me from sending in one single unit of Light Cavalry to refresh an army of 10,000? It

I'm worried about having caravans draw from population/beasts of burden in stock, especially if that will then affect their speed, how much they can hold, etc. It seems like it will add a tremendous amount of micromanagement to keep things going efficiently (like having just enough horses everywhere caravans will need them, but not too many that they'll be wasted). Another thing is that caravans start in one place and end in another, and if there is a trade imbalance going one way people/beas

[e digicons]:drool:[/e] ... [e digicons]:')[/e] [quote who="Seedy" reply="4" id="2233198"]Will cities cover area on the map or just be points on it? Most strategy games have cities towns and villages effectively take up the same amount of "space" on the strategic grid. There is something to be said for having big cities take up more space. (i.e. having to fight in the outlying parts of a city before getting to the keep)[/quote] We've been

[quote who="Darkodinplus" reply="16" id="2232120"] I can see where you are coming from but I would hate to have more penalties placed on my army just because I have a larger number of troops and if you’ll notice I said economy not purely up keep costs. I suppose you could abstract up keep to include everything but I had envisioned not only a financial cost to building a 100,000 strong army. Considering Elemental is leaning towards having everything as a resource your troops should

[quote who="Climber" reply="1" id="2231810"] I admit the original math isn’t right, but otoh since we don’t have the game it can't be. I’ve reduce the compound rate to 5%. I want to make certain industry be a national competitive advantage, if the nation can work on it. An improved version.[/quote] I think Psychoak's idea of improved efficiency only being a bonus of the early upgrades, or maybe every other upgrade or something. Upgrades don't n

[quote who="Darkodinplus" reply="10" id="2231750"]Actually that is depended on the type of military organization being used. Typically the larger army is slower but not always. As for cohesiveness that largely depends on how command is structured. The only consistent flaw of larger forces is they cost more to maintain hence as I stated before the best way to go about this is to allow the player to make any size army he wants. However, as the army size increases the burden on his economy shoul

[quote who="psychoak" reply="14" id="2230807"]I consider this a plus. Not that you have to look at two towns, but that you have to have the resources there to build something there. It adds depth to what is normally a pathetic half measure, towns that magically produce things regardless of their location in respect to the resources they're supposedly using. I'd gladly sacrifice a little time for such depth that makes territorial control and logistics important in how you dep

[quote who="Solam" reply="7" id="2231329"] If I remember correctly I do remember Sauron attacking the entire human and Elf armies single handenly and actually winning. So if the Channeler as that kind of power we could also find ourselves face to face with the Channeler and one week later our killer stack is dust...[/quote] It's not really that important but you're not remembering correctly :P Sauron never attacked anyone single-handedly, he relied on deceit and

[quote who="Ellestar" reply="18" id="2229490"]Nah. Even if game uses universal resource storage, it can calculate how many goods should be transferred along each route (based on supply and demand). When you're raiding some route, game may assume that you plundered that calculated number of resources. That way, there will be a convoy raiding but economic system will not use convoys so to transfer resources. I thought it was obvious what i wanted to say[/quote] You just described a vers

I wouldn't call that pseudo-confirmation. Those could be any sort of border and could be totally unrelated to magic. I think it was pretty much a given that there would be some manifestation of national borders (whether they result from magic, culture, or something else) - and that could be all we see there.

[quote who="Denryu" reply="13" id="2229140"]Maybe rather than having a set size for a caravan, have the cost per unit vary based on the size of the caravan. That way you can determine where the best balance is.[/quote] I did think of that as well, but I decided it might be too much and would probably result in people feeling like they need to make sure all their shipments are just right for ultimate efficiency. The problem with it is that it functions in steps, and thus (taking from y

[quote who="Darkodinplus" reply="9" id="2228668"]I really don't think magic will be that rare but I rather like the idea of everything else being rare. My interpretation of magic users so far is that there may be other magic users in the world besides the Channelers but they wouldn't be able to control magic to the same extent. As for the spamfest of magic creatures I don't think I will miss that at all.[/quote] Yeah I'm hoping for the same. If only the channeler can use magic, a

[quote who="Szadowsz" reply="24" id="2228175"] This is not directly related to the economy, but one thing that i don't wanna do is micromanage hordes of workers ala Civ IV(which is what seems to take the place of a decent economy in those games). What I would like to do is simply tell my serfs to build a particular building using a building selection screen and have them simply hop to it, rather than having to select any one individual serf.[/quote] I just want to say that if

[quote who="NorsemanViking" reply="3" id="2228087"]An army should need a hero/commander to fight better. That makes more usefull traits possible for the heroes. Traits making their troops fight better, the army to march further, or the logistics more efficient. One of the things i didnt like with the TotalWar games (pre Empire;TW) was the lack of enough commanders for your armies. Can't understand why that model should be attractive..... And one more thing, this game wil

[quote who="Climber" reply="7" id="2227316"] The PE I’ve suggested always prioritize to finish your last order first.[/quote] I actually really don't like this idea. In general I'd much rather that the game prioritize my first order. Otherwise I could easily see situations where an early order is incredibly delayed or even completely stalled for indefinite periods of time, just because newer orders constantly supersede it. There should be a prioritize button n

[quote who="Ynglaur" reply="10" id="2227202"]"Stack of Death" can be worked around with different types of game mechanic. Hard unit limits are one such method, though they can limit the "epic" feel of it, if they're too low. [/quote] They help limit one kind of Stack of Doom, but hard unit limits are the cause of the worst kind of Stack of Doom. Caps prevent you from accumulating your entire military into one unstoppable force, but there are so many ways of countering that

[quote who="Istari" reply="17" id="2226500"]Brad has mentioned that the hero's leadership ability determines the size of the army.[/quote] I'll be very sad if a hero is required for each army... The biggest downside is that it totally removes the decision of whether to rely heavily upon heroes or not; I was really excited for that. If you want to play at all militaristically, you'd be forced to invest heavily in heroes. On the other hand, if you told me that you could also recruit Gen

[quote who="Kefka 101" reply="18" id="2226441"]Camp #1 and #3 add something pretty important that I think a lot of people are overlooking here. Feel [...] My personal preference is option 3. I kind of like the idea of autonomous merchants. I'm a king! I don't have the time to say where each individual sword goes.[/quote] I think you and I are more or less on the same page (definitely regarding the feel part), but with a slight difference. I'm a king

[quote who="Ellestar" reply="8" id="2225972"]Obviously, you can live just fine without tourism income. So, by denying a country a tourism income you don't bankrupt it.[/quote] I'm assuming you're talking about GC2 and not the real world here... Because there are tons of countries in the world that due indeed draw the large majority of their GDP from tourism revenues. And countries have taken huge economic hits from drops in tourism. [quote who="Ellestar" reply="8" id="22259

I know. We've been on opposing sides of the picket fence several times in the past, and you've called me rude things and I've thought you an uncouth ignoramus :P It seems that while we tend to agree a lot about the direction of the game, we have nearly no common ground on less important, worldly matters...

[quote who="pmaxwell" reply="12" id="2225304"] Where it says "the iron ore is then directed to go to the city of Torgeto" in camp #1, this is a "push" model. This is made more apparent by the mention of the sliders and ratios directing how much of each resource gets sent where. We are directing the resources from their point of origin. To do this without automation is potentially a huge pain; instead of clicking a central point and directing things to filter into it, you have to go round

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="4" id="2224445"] Quoting Kitkun, reply 3...Anyways, they'd have to be a bit careful in some ares like dispelling spells, or any persistent powrful spells would be next to useless as everyone would simply band together and dispel them immediately. Other than that, looks great. What you mention here sounds like just another good reason to have a Cooperative mode for magic in the game. All the spells will cost mana, and presumably some form of 'atte

[quote who="psychoak" reply="10" id="2224934"]Pidgeon, are we related?[/quote] We have been in close agreement on eerily many issues lately, indeed... And on that note I'd like to say that I completely agree with your last post. :)