MichaelCook

I'm waiting for Beta 2. Go Beta 2!

[quote who="ChongLi" reply="14" id="2537495"] What happens next? It's random! Your unit may lose his movement point with nothing to show for it. [/quote] Beautiful chaos..... [e digicons]:grin:[/e] I guess the moral of that story is that sometimes we like random and sometimes we don't.

One thing from this gets me thinking, how exactly will combat between two units occur? Traditionally (pretty much EVERY turn based game I can think of, MoM, Elven Legacy ect., Age of Wonders has a "free hit" system but its still similar) does it as: A is seperate from B --> A attacks B and they roll for damage --> magically A and B are seperate again. Or... How about when A attacks B, they become "joined" together in combat. They rol

[quote who="Demiansky" reply="7" id="2537407"]What I would like to see is a "discipline" rating for your soldiers....[/quote] Nice idea. And spells to lower discipline.

[quote who="Cerevox" reply="4" id="2537373"] Fleeing cowards shall be slain![/quote] Only to rise again.......

I would also like to see less of the complete destruction of armies and more cases where survivors are able to flee and regroup. For example if the losing army has faster units why shouldn't they get away? What about flying units vs an army with no flying units? This will make the complete destruction of an enemy harder, as they can lose, then trade land for time to regroup. Sure they will probably lose anyway but if the diplomacy is good (read this post about normal game diplomacy vs "risk"

Absolutely awesome work mate! I'm pretty sure I didn't see this one, inspired by the "color-blind friendly" suggestion, make if deaf freindly as well. Check out: http://www.deafgamers.com/pcgamereviews.htm I'm not deaf and don't know any deaf people, I like reading their reviews because they do a good job. They point out what a game needs to be deaf friendly.

Nice! [e digicons]k1[/e]

[quote who="ChongLi" reply="3" id="2537023"]Bigger doesn't always mean better. Making the battles take way longer (like the Total War series' hour-long monstrosities) will make it a fundamentally different game. To me, it sounds like the argument for how to make chess better by making the board way larger and adding all sorts of extra stuff. Sure, that may be fun, but it won't be chess anymore.[/quote] I wasn't exactly sure they way Stardock were going with t

[quote who="-Ue_Carbon" reply="5" id="2536509"]Boo!!!!! They dont have Red Alert with the expansions. Saw this and got my hopes up.[/quote] Yes they do, scroll down the page a bit....

[quote who="Cerevox" reply="37" id="2536466"] have you played civ4 recently? there are like 4 menu pages when you start a game, each with dozens of options, sliders, drop down menus, lists of checkboxs. One of them has an option for no settlers built, and another for only one city. I think we have hit the equivlent of a pink elephant already and blown right past it.[/quote] Alot of people like the One City Challenge in Civ. I have not played without settlers before

Yes, a "cold war" against the top dog would be good. It depends on what in the game is possible (eg raids, if your units have your name on them its not possible to conduct a secret raid, but if like privateers in Civ IV you can have hidden nationality troops then direct raids against infrastructure are possible) and thats up to Stardock to think what they can add to the game to expand on this. What I get also is that you suggest a diplomacy "council", where you get toge

I think thats kinda not decided, its going to be a mixture of turn and real time, but how that exactly plays I'm not sure. *edit* posted without reading the above first. What exactly is "continuous" turns? Like Heroes of Might and Magic 5 where some units move two times for others once because they are alot quicker?

Lets brainstorm this, retaining the tactical combat of Master of Magic how to make it better? I'd say bigger battle maps and bigger armies (but still place a limit on army size). Make the average movement of a unit greater than 1, make it say around 3-4. Keep with squares or go with hexes? I'd say hexes and include unit facing as being important. Allow flanking attacks. Include some terrain features th

I think, at this stage, its still up in the air exactly how the combat will play. Looking at the pic above its all very messy looking but I think as a promotional pic it was meant to be.

Simple Civ style city management. Nothing complex to understand but allowed for easy and strategic planning of the economy. Civ 4 with BUG mod is great example. The spells. There could have been more, look at Dom 3. Variety in the races. Not well balanced but so much variety. Tactical combat. Expand the complexity of this in Elemental. MoM crossed with Dom 3 = Awesome. Keep units, not individual soldiers in mobs. Allow units

If you want it to be interesting tell us what makes you happy? What makes the man who can't smile smile? [e digicons]^_^[/e] I don't mean that to be rough, but seriously, we know what has dragged you down, whats lifted you up?

How did you find out about Elemental?

Well you sound pretty upbeat about it all. It sounds like you have had alot to deal with but am still positive about the future, and that counts for alot. Only advice I'd say is don't get in with gangsters, nothing of lasting goodness will come from it. [e digicons];P[/e]

The game is what the game is. Next people will want a pink elephant box, if they don't want pink elephants they can untick the box. Don't like cities? Untick the box. What about a game without a sovereign? Untick the box. Don't like your computer? Smash it. Yeah, I understand what your saying. There are things in games that annoy me too, and I wish they could be changed. But thats all part of game evolution, its those little differences that make each game unique and e

[quote who="Cauldyth" reply="53" id="2534220"] Quoting Wintersong, reply 52Hey, there is life beyond WoW, you know. A wonderful world, in fact. Count me as someone else who didn't know who or what that image was of, and I've been gaming for 30 years. 'Meh!' to Warcraft. [/quote] I finally tried it and was ultimately unimpressed. What does impress me is the level some people take it to, like the guy who plays with 36 accounts

Bullies suck. I used to be bullied but now have found more confidence. I realised this when I did karate for sometime and was walking home at 3am and two youths decided to try and have some fun. One had a foot long truncheon but I was under ALOT of stress at the time and something in me just snapped and I basically stood in their faces and thought "Bring it on because I'm going to blind you both and leave you here in the dark", real psycho stuff. It all ended well and when they started walkin

Ok, is it slow when you start afresh and load from level 3? This might test Moosetek13's idea. It could be that those parts of the campaign are more graphically intense, and this is not always noticable to the player. Do you have a kick ass machine? Does it help to turn down the graphics? Beyond that I would say post on the L4D forums, see if others have the same issue. Good luck :)

Your computer gets tired. Try going to the menu screen and leaving it for thirty minutes, then come back and play it. It should be rested by then.

If one civ gets a second channeler and the others don't will that be too much of an advantage?