pigeonpigeon

[quote quoting="post"] The sorts of data I would like to find are things like how it changes based on temperature (melting, boiling, ionization, ect), hardness of the resulting material, malleability, density, ect.[/quote] I could be wrong but large-scale properties like hardness and malleability (especially malleability) might be extremely difficult, maybe even impossible, to predict without an insane attention to detail. For example, the hardness and malleability of smelted ste

[quote who="SSAF" reply="23" id="2028205"]That last episode failed. Miserably. They tried to cram what should have been a three parter or possibly a two part movie into 43 minutes. It could have been spectacular, but instead it was too fast and far too unexplained. And the wormhole drive? Seriously? Zalenka may well have said "This is an engine. It is made of plot. Let's use it." (Oh my god, they went to PLAID! (Obscure reference, sorry)). The massive wraith plotship was also kinda dumb. I li

I don't understand :(

Aaaargh stop it stop it stop it! [e digicons]XO[/e] There are currently two identical conversations going on. Please, choose one thread to post in and don't make identical posts in both. My recommendation would be to drop the conversation here in favor of the other thread. Less chance of repeating ourselves.

[quote who="Jonny5446" reply="17" id="2029248"]Yeah, how is that contrary to what I've been saying? The only real point I've been trying to make here is that I don't think it was in the game at the time of those screenshots.. otherwise they'd have a button for it on the UI, however basic and transitory that UI is. I hope it gets put in at some point, I'm just saying that I don't think it was at that point.[/quote] Oh. I thought you were saying that because there was nothing about othe

[quote who="Jonny5446" reply="15" id="2028883"] If something as far reaching as multiple plains isn't being tested in sync with the rest of the game at a stage where they're testing pretty much anything else in general gameplay then that sounds to me a bit like they're halfassing it. I think it's a pretty core mechanic and will have wide ramifications for the whole game so would need to be attached from very early on to come out well. [...] [/quote] The screenshots w

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="11" id="2028331"]actually that would be an american bear (black bear). Asian bears I think also get pretty high speeds, but I can't find any stats for that. As far as I'm aware neither africa nor europe have particularly fast bears (though again, I can't really find any places talking about it. I found a UK site that said they can get up to 30 kmph and a grizzly (american) can get to 48 kmph, but *shrug*[/quote] Are ther

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="1" id="2028322"]Other then that I can only really relate to the 'fortifications' as seen is civilization, which doesn't really apply since battles happen on their own tactics field where fortifications and such would be part of the terrain. So I'm not really sure how it could be used at all.[/quote] Uhh... that's not hard. Think Total War. If a battle takes place at somebody's fortifications, that player's troops have the benefit of a fortificatio

Well you've just named more reasons why special (or at least, extra) considerations would need to be taken into account for things like underwater cities. Luckmann's suggestion for how to supply domed underwater cities is good, though, and gets around any extra considerations. My point is that if Stardock doesn't intentionally work towards making underwater cities a possibilities, there is a large likelihood that they won't really be possible to mod in, or even for SD to add them in l

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="18" id="2028275"] Of course we should. You're forgetting three things, though. 1) We're geeks and/or nerds. 2) We've got too much free time. 3) We're bored. Side effects may include: Incessant whining, nonconsequential arguments, headaches, nosebleed, seizures, tics, distorted vision, nerdrage, momentary anger and/or violence, insults, trolling, sore throat(s) and/or lockdowns. By reading this you forfeit any claim of compensation an

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="11" id="2028083"]I understand what you are saying, but I like being "loud" about it because I want it to be known that I want it, and I know at least some others do too.[/quote] You know, one of the first dev posts on these forums said not to post the same ideas over and over again in order to bring attention to them, even if it is buried deep in an unrelated thread, because they read everything ;) But I agree about the whole UI thing. For

[quote who="taltamir" reply="8" id="2028313"]Now, I didn't say I expected elemental to have a persistant world campaign or even that I want it to. I was saying that if it did have one that this type of "beast lords' as desribed here will fit in very very nicely into such a setting.[/quote] I actually would very much like to see a campaign that utilizes some sort of 'persistency.' Maybe even multiple sorts. For one I'd like it to utilize map expansion (ala some levels in supcom), and i

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="13" id="2027837"]It's the 'versus' that's the problem. In my little thought experiment, magic = ownership & skill w/ steel weapons. A 'universal' militia would not need every member serving directly in combat, just in uniform. In modern 'tooth-to-tail' terms, it's a question of whether the tail supports the teeth out of fear or because they're together in a unified culture.[/quote] But Luckmann is saying that the two are not analogous situations; a s

[quote who="DrGuppie" reply="18" id="2027743"]It still isn't a hard cap though, since it's a dynamic balance between how fast people are born and how fast people are dying. Changing healthcare, for instance, would mean a rebalance or you could end up growing (positive healthcare change) or shrinking (negative healthcare change). That's all I'm after, I haven't advocated no population management mechanisms, just not a flat "limit to x". I'd like options, letting them starve, providi

[quote who="DrGuppie" reply="16" id="2027682"]And a "childs per household" mandate would be fine, it limits rate of growth but doesn't put a hard cap on population.[/quote] Actually it can. You just need to find the right incentive (or disincentive) for having children so that the birthrate balances out the death rate. The actual population will obviously fluctuate but it could be kept relatively constant if overseen well. And again, the point is to come up with a game mechanic to pre

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="8" id="2027656"]Well, would there really be any difference between a regular city and one underwater (other than model, animation, and so on) Or would it just be a city that exists in the middle of the ocean (or other body of water)?[/quote] Well it depends. The first complication depends on how water is implemented. Whether the city shows up on top of the water or below it is something that would need to be taken into account; and to be und

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="11" id="2027566"]I appreciate the general intent of the OP, but I have to say that any direct UI option in this area would seem very out of place aesthetically for the fantasy setting. AFAIK, the only top-down 'population control' efforts before the 20th century were to *increase* breeding, e.g. monarchs backing up religious bans on contraception. But I know very little Chinese history, and they seem to have done pretty much everything the Europeans did, just us

I don't know how much I like the idea of cities themselves contributing to magic research or whatnot. I guess for me it depends on how magic is going to be handled. The big question is, are channelers going to be the only people with the natural ability to wield magic? Or can certain other individuals access whatever magic is left in the world that isn't bound into the shards? If the former, it would feel weird if cities that don't currently house my channeler can really accomplish much in th

[quote who="alway" reply="3" id="2027319"]Halt population growth? I would rather use the excess as cannon fodder to wear down my enemy's army... Legions of unarmed peasants ftw![/quote] That sounds good, too, as another option. The thing is I'm assuming unarmed peasants would still require some minor upkeep, so drafting excess population into a massive force of cannon fodder might not always be practical. And just as importantly, that would break the immersion for anybody trying to pl

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="24" id="2026955"] [quote]Having creatures that can bury under the battlefield or cast their own spells has a lot more appeal.[/quote] Then I'm afraid that Elemental isn't the game for you. Stardock have said that magical creatures and the like are going to be rare. The vast majority of your army will be made out of Fallen/Humans throughout the entire game.[/quote] Also, they've said that in general the magical creatures will make up for the

I completely agree with your first paragraph, NTJedi. I'll be disappointed if water doesn't allow for at least that much. On the topic of underwater cities, I agree they'd be cool but they wouldn't really make sense. The two playable races are humans and human-derivative Fallen, neither of which live or even can live under water... I guess you could make it work through magic but it seems a little excessive to me. On the other hand I'd love it if they design waters keeping underwater

The fact that people are a resource does add another angle. Instead of a toggle that completely halts population growth, it can set the current population (or maybe even a player specified pop) as a target; if the population falls below that target, growth will resume until it reaches it again. If somehow the population exceeds the target (maybe you disbanded some old troops in the city) there are two things that could happen - the population could slowly fall off until it's back down to the

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="9" id="2026868"]I'm not sure. The top speed of an unladen bear is about ~55km/h.[/quote] What do you mean? An African or European bear?

What the title says. I want there to be a way to control population growth. The most important aspect of it that I want in the game is the ability to halt growth. The inability to do this in GC2 really drove me nuts, and I was very happy that Civ IV actually allowed you to do this. In Civ IV there was just a button that halted population growth with no strings attached, but enforcing population restrictions could cause some unrest (the amount could even depend on what the growth r

[quote who="GW Swicord" reply="4" id="2026746"]I'd like this idea even more if the details of the map also played a role. And I'm trying to keep the re-thinking economics thread in mind here. A population center that has significant caravan traffic should be more inclined to a mercantile specialization. A center with only a few routes passing through might also be inclined to specialize somehow if the caravans all carried related goods, e.g. foodstuffs, building materials, or metals.[/quote]<