Tasunke

I believe April 1st was the due release date.

Karma ++ ..... in any case, it was a nifty survey.

was enron in bed with the state? This is more of an intellectual curiosity than a challenge. But yea, Im curious.

I would say the concept of living in my own Personalized Empire is a marvelous idea. Especially if I get to do things like ... build my empire from the ground up, fight other Kingdoms with my Empire, ect.

I like it (... double posting .... [e digicons]:S[/e] )

I like it

Aye Roman Guy, it would certainly be nice to be able to directly attack the walls and fight for the Streets, as opposed to playing an abstract land battle with arbitrary bonuses based upon walls and seige. For instance, if walls/city gives bonuses, it should be for units within the City Walls of a City, with the Walls giving them the additional protection of blocking the enemy melee from attacking them until they can breach the city somehow (Seige Towers, Magic, Arrows, Batterin

I would personally prefer there to be (if gunpowder is modded in) a race whose Magical Prowess is so limited that all they can use are counterspells, if that, and they recieve a slight inherent resistence to magic. Due to them being so bereft of any magical energies, not only can a Channeler of their race barely use any magic, but also they themselves have somewhat built a resistance to magic. Their channeler was able to use the spell to bring life back into the earth only onc

For anyone that wants a game with strategic depth, I suggest trying "Making of History" from 1933 onwards. Its ... certainly an interesting style of gameplay.

Hmm, I seem to have misjudged what you dislike about the game. Aparrantly you play Continent Mapscripts, or Islands, or some Equivalent. Firstly, if you play a Continents/Tournament Island game ... then yes Acheron DOES suck because thats land you have lost for a LONG time. In that case, simply TURN ACHERON OFF!!! There is an option to turn off alot of the systems in FFH to customize your style of play, I suggest using them. Orthus, on the other hand, is so weak he is laughabl

I think the biggest decisions will be When various players will be giving what orders/functionality. As well as movement interception, simultaneous turns, and tactical battles. Personally, I think if you want to fight more than one battle in one turn, you will have to autocalculate, move, attack, and autocalculate again. Otherwise, you attack, que up the Tac battle, the first Tac battles start, other people attack and que up their Tac battles, Multiple Tac battles can happen at the sa

Fraction traits? In any case, most traits should be simply so exclusive that its a single Checkbox (15-20 for each category, more or less) while SOME traits can have a 5 tick slider. (5-10 total) all in all, probably about 40-60 checkboxes and 5 sliders. maybe 5 additional Sliders if we have things like "how Financially inclined are you" or "how Scholarly are you" or "How Organized are you" and perhaps organi

yea, Tactical Battles shouldn't be completely repetitive/boring, however they should be determined Exactly by the terrain. AKA, higher ground in Strategy Map = higher Ground in Tactical map ... however little details like a minor stream, and abandoned fort, patches of trees, a farmer's Vineyard, mysteroius wall, or the ebb and flow of the particular terrain can be randomized to a point. A plains map shouldnt be entirely covered in trees, but about 20% of the map or so can be c

Why would adding a champion reduce the number of peasants to 2500? Having champions doesnt seem to require much of an investment (at least if its just the ONE champion) ... after all your Knights of death probably have a couple champions as well. Still ... even without bonuses, the basic scenario of 5000 peasants equipped with leather gear and sticks vs 450 mithrilar knights simply raises a balance question of stats, without any actual stats involved. I assume you mean that yo

Sovereigns look like peasants kinda

[quote who="Lavitage" reply="16" id="2559813"]. This is much easier to implement in a TB game like elemental, where there's no arrows and giant rocks and spells flying around in real time to get lost in translation and gum everything up.[/quote] You realize that these things "will" be for the most part flying about, simply on a continuous turn basis. I suppose since its not exactly real time, and instead everything does have an inherent turn, it will be much easier to simply "pause" a

[quote who="John_Hughes" reply="40" id="2565691"] Send in your 5K peasant based Stack and see how they do against my 450 Mounted, Heavily armored, superior Weaponed Calvary? [/quote] It would certainly be an interesting battle. Especially if the 5 thousand peasants are led by a Champion with Command/Organization benefits, and imbued with the ability to cast "Quickened Blood" which doubles the attack speed of my peasants and increases their movemen

[quote who="=Outlaw=" reply="23" id="2565190"] Quoting Tasunke, reply 17 "If however, we went the route of charging 1 essence every time the shard is used ... then I fear it will break the game. If you have too much essence, its a war of attrition, and if you have too little essence, the option will be impossible to use." Not sure what you are trying to say is wrong with this. Seems to be the modus operandi of all strategy games. If you have resources, you are ab

alternatively, "Send Resource X to city Y" and for all intents and purposes, the Resource is being harvested in City Y at 75% efficiency. so, if City size 1 farmed 1000 food, and decided to send all of it to City Y, then city Y would have 750 base food. And all food caravans exporting from city Y would be increased accordingly. (the resource would now "exist" in city Y) alternatively, you could have it be harvested in City Y at 100% if it pleases you, however, if harvesting bo

Yea ... as I have said before, if we are not separating outposts from Cities, then level 1 cities should be a viable option for resource gathering. level 1 cities should not be included in the arithmatic sequence of maintanence (+1 instead of +(n+1)) additionally, I think that level 1 cities should be able to have a strategic Domestic Trade option. (or two) This strategic option should be "Send all of Resource X to city Y" ... so the resource would now b

Just allow people to continue their turn as normal (issue orders, ect) while other people enter tactical battles. If person A is in a tactical battle, person B can attack another army of Person A, que up that tactical battle, and move the rest of his units in a flank. While person A and B are in tactical battle, person C can initiate further tactical battles against person A or B, continue the rest of their turn, and enter tactical battles once A or B are ready to fight. Of co

Hmm, they say the person that crafted the Shards was the Mage of Emerald ... (or something) ... yes? In that case, how about having rare artifacts known as Gems of Emerald. Every Sovereign can start with one, or maybe have to spend a certain number of Sov points to start with one (5 sounds like a nice even number). These Gems of Emerald are extremely powerful, and give a Channeler complete and full control of a magical shard for a split second. It is so quick, in fact, that al

YAY vieuxchat!! I hadn't heard for certain they were going to use such a system, but it sounds good to me (still not exponential city gain of course, but heck, im not complaining ... its like 95% of the functionality I wanted anyways) certainly good news that a market is 5x as effective in a city than in an outpost ... but the fact that outposts can build markets anyways is just silly :3 (well, maybe if it was a bank). In any case, I still advise that all cities that remain le

Personally I would prefer Permanence in effect as the cost, rather than essence cost. In my method, if you never found a fire shard, you could only ever have one fire shard. In your method, you could have as many fire shards as you wanted, but it would cost you essence. Change it back? Will cost you essence. I don't know, im not opposed to your idea, and I think its a good idea. However, to not go too far from current implementation I like my idea better. Even though I

I personally favor the arithmetic sequence. However, I feel that cities below level 2 should not count in the sequence, and should merely be a +1. In addition, I think that "captured" cities should work at 50% efficiency, and only cost a +2 (while if only size one, will only be a +1). Then you have the option to "upgrade" the captured city to a full fledged city, citizenship or whatever. It would cost, say, 100 gold and 20 prestige points, and the city would add to the arithmetic sequ