[quote who="kapeman" reply="19" id="2792426"]Whatever conceit you want to use, just make long distance travel faster. It is rather tedious now, especially since the food resources are more scarce than ever in 1.09.[/quote] Ships, then, not a sci-fi device. Of course teaching to teh Ai to use shps would be harder than just make units jump around... But then again this is not an arcade!
[quote who="psychoak" reply="18" id="2792414"]I'd rather overland movement rates not suck. You need piss poor movement in games that lack tactical combat. Your tactics are all played out overland. As we're devoid of any real point to positioning and such, base movement being 6-8 wouldn't change anything but how obscenely long it takes to get shit done.[/quote] But the game shouldn't be about having that same stack going back and forth, real war
[quote]I'd rather see gates be something anyone can use and become strategically valuable. [/quote] The problems I have with teleports of all sort are that "it spoils the Epic sense", as I mentioned, since that great map you guys have managed to pull out has a great potential for strategic bonuses and it is so huge: beautiful! I'd like instead to see its possibilities exploited better with different kinds of terrains: snow, desert etc... rather than having armies bein ab
[quote]I am not really sure what feel they are going for with the movement. There are ways to speed up your troops though boots, cloaks... still very limited. Would be nice to have a forced march ability that could be used occasionally.. [/quote] That's a great Idea actually, maybe after a forced march the unit would have its statistic halved for une full turn to simulate that they are tired.
[quote who="hannahb" reply="9" id="2792344"]I am not really sure what feel they are going for with the movement. There are ways to speed up your troops though boots, cloaks... still very limited. Would be nice to have a forced march ability that could be used occasionally.. I am also not a big fan of the teleport ... I think it should scale with the number of units transfered. 1 guy cheap, many guys maybe too expensive to cast. &
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="7" id="2792339"]Personally, I would prefer to have a tech that allows players to find Moon Gates or something like that. But that would be some thing in the future.[/quote] Hopefully that one will send to te moon those players who like teleporting spells!
[quote who="gsitetfs" reply="5" id="2792327"]Teleport mana has been ramped way up to 15mp, making it basically useless early game. Combine it with only *one* essence increase and you have "Elemental, War of Armies" heh heh. [/quote] Fine with me as long as I don't have to play "Elemental War of Jumping Around Teleporting Wherever the hell I Want" Magic is NOT teleporting - Teleporting is a SCI-FI device not a fantasy one!
[quote who="cpl_rk" reply="1" id="2792124"]Are you aware that there is is a teleport spell? The problem with spells like this is that the AI does not use them, hence they provide a *huge* benefit to the human player and as a result the human easily whips the AI. Players can easily dream up more spells to add to their hearts desire, problem is the AI never uses them & the spells just end up making the human player outrageosly overpowered (even more) over the computer A
AAAHGGHHH!!! I agree that units are too slow in this game, but adding even MORE teleporting stuff, no thanks, this is no Star Trek! It' a FANTASY game!! Instead I suggest that units should go a couple of tiles faster, which would also helpin having interesting turns when a "Play By E Mail" option gets implemented. Teleport is abusive, it spoils the strategy and the epic sense of games like this one! The only teleport spell I find acceptable would be one that would allow
Anyone remembers Warlords II? That game at the time was really great and often difficult to beat. One thing I remember about the way the AI worked comes from an interview with its developer Steven Fawkner, a true pioneer of TBS games. What it said basically was that the AI in that game would calculate 20 times the result of a battle before deciding if it was possible to win. If it was so (more victories than losses in that virtual combat) the AI would actually move forward and t
[quote]The reason i don't want this and instead everyone has an equal base initiative(before modifiers) is because basing it off combat speed would make mounts and archers godlike. They would always get to go first and get more attacks which would be devastating to balance.[/quote] Archers will always be godlike until they introduce distance (then they'll be demigodlike :p ) cavalry that depends, the supremacy so far goes to the unit that waits for the other (the AI) to advance, then
[quote who="Stmorpheus" reply="11" id="2790439"]multiplayer CAN work in this game, if you approach it right. you have to know what people want. example: people that play with friends tend to want to play co-op against very tough AI's in long games that can be saved. people that want to play competitively want quick games where they can come at odd angles toward their opponents, just like chess. you have to open your imagination. nobody knew what the wheel w
[quote who="midn8t" reply="12" id="2791114"]well be honest I think you are wrong me and my friends dedicate ourselves to our games that we play, they should not spend allot of time on this just take single player game and make it multi player that is all that they need to do to spend more time trying to make it different with man power and resources is point less I think. specially when people who want it are hard core with there friends they want the original single player experie
Sounds like great work Frogboy, can't wait to try it out!
If you save the game at the beginning of a turn and reload lots of things are not being memorized by the game. The most obvious one is the units that were just created that very turn: they are not there when you reload. Also all sorts of locations/resources may not be there anymore or new ones can appear. I am not 100% sure but I believe that technologies (and spells?) that have just been learned are suddenly "forgotten" Not sure about strategic spells that are
[quote]camera focus on build[/quote] Sorry but I can't find that in the options, are you sure it's called like that?
Ii just noticed this issue was already reported; sorry
It mostly happens when playing oon the cloth map. I choose a new building but as soon as I click to the tile where I want it the map recenters the view, thus making my building start being built in another tile.
a unit is ina city if I click on a destination it tries to go out from the closest tile to its destination without considering terrain. In fact if a mountain foe example is in front of it it should have exit from the other side. I then have to go back in the city and exit one tile at the time from the other side
[quote]The problem is really just with bows and armor... Heavy armor should have a larger penalty when using ranged weapons. I don't see why it would give a penalty when on a mount since IRL knights had heavy armor even on horses. Either that or make it so that ranged weapons forbid you to use any armor heavier than chain mail. I don't see how anyone IRL would be able to pull back a bow and fire it in an effective way in a full suit of armor.[/quote] That is also a possibility, or
I really think that with a rule for arrow (and magic?) distance and a rule for armor to slow down as I mentioned in my previous post you would have a pretty good starting point for an effective system.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="107" id="2790643"]In the traditional strategy game, you would just solve this with pre-made units. But since users can design units, we need to make sure that there are definite reasons NOT to create the uber armored horse mounted mega archer.[/quote] I just believe reality offers already all explanations. If in the middle ages didn't use that it was because being on and horse and having a big armor would definitely hinder your aim, while the armor wo
Great game but not fixed. Come back after Xmas.
Arrow should be more powerful at short distance as in they are in the real world. Their damage should be relative to the kind of armor worn by the enemy, but at close range they should still be lethal. But if all these rules are introduced the UI should clearly state the chances to hit and the possible damage when a cursor is on a target.
[quote]VERY IMPORTANT - PLEASE DELETE ALL OTHER THREADS BECAUSE MINE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND NEEDS TO GET LOTS OF ATTENTION![/quote] Hey are you trying to get some of the attention that is obviously only deserved BY ME? [e digicons]:D[/e]