[quote]John_Hughe said: [quote]Nick-Danger said: "You can build huts and farms gardens with no civics techs or doing any research in any line whatsoever."[/quote] Just to clarify. You get "Huts and Gardens" without Tech. You do not get "Farms" without Tech. [/quote] [e digicons]:-"[/e]
[quote who="Tridus" reply="544" id="2659975"]Working on the assumption that they have the same manpower, budget, and time in both scenarios? Yes. There is no replacement for Steamworks that you can simply drop in, they'd have to use something inferior (GFWL or Gamespy) or roll their own solution. Creating their own solution is time spent building, testing, debugging, testing, implementing, testing, rolling out servers... and testing. Locklear93's post on the last page talked about that, from
[quote who="Toppins" reply="13" id="2659770"] [quote] Nick-Danger said: [for some reason that game started me with 25 materials, not sure why...][/quote] Altar (as I see by your red color) start with 25 materials. Some kind of racial bonus I presume. It's an interesting bonus given the jump-start it gives a city-builder...[/quote]Thanks! It was bugging me and I didn't put 2+2 together. [4, right? ;) ]
[quote who="Sherekhaan" reply="12" id="2659758"] [quote]Nick-Danger said: You can build huts and farms with no civics techs or doing any research in any line whatsoever.[/quote] You can at the moment, but the tech tree is at odds with that. It's like palaces. it shows you need administration to build one, but you can build it straight away. Likewise Harvesting shows it provides gardens, but you can build them straight away.[/quote]Good point. I think gardens ar
[quote who="Tridus" reply="539" id="2659865"]My interests as a game player are best served by a fun, bug free game. A game using Steamworks for connectivity has a pretty good chance of working, so that's not a bad thing for me.[/quote]There were fun, bug free games before steam, so it's not a prerequisite. Do you think a steam-Civ5 game will be funner/bug freer than a non-steam civ5 game (factoring in the $ that goes to Valve being instead spent on development/etc.)? [quot
[quote quoting="post"]} Ability to eject more than one unit at once, or lock units into a group. Nice for pulling stacks out of cities[/quote]Already possible. Use SHIFT to select multiple units from an army or from inside a city, then you can eject them as a group.
[quote who="CdrRogdan" reply="6" id="2659239"]I'm pretty sure that houses and gardens both require civ techs, and why the hell do you want a level 3 city that can only build huts?[/quote]You can build huts and farms gardens with no civics techs or doing any research in any line whatsoever. Plant a city, build a mill (costs 10 gold, provides 2 materials) and a workshop (costs 10 gold, provides 1 materials), both can be immediately bui
[quote who="Andorfiend" reply="10" id="2659615"]It's not bad to present early options in a tech tree which are either poor choices or highly situational.[/quote]Maybe I'm missing something here in what you're saying, but these are 2 vastly different things. "highly situational" is good -- for example if you're taking the warfare route then X is a good choice, but not Y. If you're going the diplomatic route then Y is a good choice but not X. That's a situational best-choice
It must really burn his butt that folks can play the game for many hours and he doesn't get a cut from that. He's moving towards everything being hosted/stored in the cloud where they'll have complete control over their games (unbreakable DRM?) and our information (to sell for additional profit), and selling us the game (plus microtransactions and DLC to get the 'complete' game) then having recurring charges to play.
[quote who="Tridus" reply="516" id="2659273"] ...Developers look at all the functionality Steamworks offers them *without them having to build it* and see good things. They've got their multiplayer matchmaking, friends, communities, achievements (a selling point for some), and the other stuff Steamworks provides. Looking around, there's nothing else that offers a comparable featureset except GFWL, and everybody hates GFWL. Given the option of using Steamworks or having the exp
[quote who="Dale_" reply="91" id="2659478"]War is only one path to victory. If you always pursue war, then you're only exploring one aspect of Civ. You're missing 80% of the game.[/quote]Agreed. The reason games like Civ and UO have such a long life (for me anyhoo) is that they are many games in one. Tired of warmongering in Civ -- try culture or diplomatic. Tired of PvP in UO -- try crafting or exploring or building a guild or collecting rares. No matt
[quote who="John_Hughes" reply="14" id="2659498"]The idea of exploitation will creep in as more and more useful and powerful items surface in game...[/quote]Imagine getting a powerful item, having a champion use it in a battle at one location, then teleporting it to another champion at a second location to be used in that battle, etc. Hopefully a cost will be required to transfer across a distance, and that process will prevent a champion who's engaged in combat from then being able t
[quote who="Andorfiend" reply="6" id="2659499"] [quote]John_Hughes said: "Also, get the market as quick as you can!" And this is what we want to avoid. The "must have quickly" in any Build order...[/quote] Why is this something to be avoided? There are always going to be bad choices available including "Do nothing and hit the turn button until an NPC gobbles you up like trail mix." *shrug* Any game with a tech tree is going to have trees that come into pl
[quote who="Stmorpheus" reply="3" id="2658627"]this sounds cool, but keep in mind as you research the adventure tech, more powerful champions become available.[/quote]True, but that doesn't preclude champions leveling up skills. People like to form a bond with their 'heroes' and watching them level up enhances said bond, compared to just hiring a 'new improved model'. [quote]i personally don't need to, and would rather not upgrade heroes manually. i would prefer if they at
Ya just had to bump this, instead of letting my faux pas... errrrr the forum's faux pas -- yeah, that's it, the forum's faux pas [e digicons]:-"[/e] -- fade quietly into the night... I'm unsurprised this would be one of my most embraced suggestions ;)
Do you have any malware programs running like Ad-Aware or Spybot? There are thread on problems connecting with Impulse (which apparently you can do but it's not clear you can) that may offer some clues, a few I've found are: http://forums.impulsedriven.com/339802 Zuzag's and Gargabee's replies in that thread may offer some help. <a href="http://forums.impulsedriven.com/330758/page/1/#replies" tar
One thing that kinda bothers me with the current champs is that when I see a champ I see them as a possible fighter (attack rating), or a resource (+2 spell points per turn, etc.), not as 'individuals' (ie -- a guy who is wandering the land, dedicated to bringing back life to the land -- a Johnny Appleseed or the like, etc.). Perhaps the skill tree idea that SavageBananaMan34 and others have mentioned (in the "how much do you like the current champion system? thread in the
[quote who="seanw3" reply="23" id="2658531"]So your [Tharn] solution is that my merchant is now a wizard?[/quote]That's a pretty big solution, given how important magic is supposed to be. And they can get 1 essence per level-up, which isn't inconsiderable. That said, there could be some improvements, as mentioned above. One thing that kinda bothers me with the current champs is that when I see a champ I see them as a possible fighter (attack rating), or a resource (+2 sp
From the 'City building too complicated or not enough so 2 schools of thought' thread: [quote]Quotoing Stmorpheus: "...i have said in another post that if i have a huge forest next to my city i want lots of improvements to put there in order to take advantage of said forest. i don't want to have to build another city just to get an additional lumber yard or whatever.[/quote]This is a good point -- a city with a large forest should be able to yield more material
darn forums...
darn forums...
I've noticed a definite slowdown when the skating golems are moving. The game seems to stop while they move (as opposed to when other critters or my party moves -- the world then seems to go about its business while we move). Dunno if this is related but there may be a common thread.
[quote who="DeeRock66" reply="45" id="2658492"]I just preordered the game today and missed the 18th because I didn't know the game existed. Any place to still DL the beta? Or is it true I'm able to download beta 3 when it comes out?[/quote]I think you're too late for phase 2 but will get in in phase 3 (a few weeks probably). Remember to check Impulse's 'show pre-release versions' option (the upperleft tab) to see Elemental on your games list.
Do you have a unit like a ship or caravan that is moving and its path is blocked? That will prevent a turn from ending. The end turn button is not grayed out when this happens as the unit is trying to complete its move.
[quote who="Blaze of Glory" reply="9" id="2658029"]I had this two times in mine. Once was a caravan that got stuck, confused, whatever. I disbanded it and it worked. the other was a transport. I didn't more it and I think it was autoexploring, but then ran out of things to explore or whatever. I moved it and then could end the turn.[/quote]This sounds like the bug I reported here -- a transport's path was bl