Tasunke

Obviously the combat system needs improvement first (along with other things) ... but this game was originally concept designed to eventually evolve into NATION-STATES fighting against each other ... not just whoever gets a Company of War Hammers first.

Hehe ... yea, Combat mechanics/ heroes vs armies is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!! xD ... but as to this topic ... there *should* be AI directives for heroes/champions. They should have alignment motivations, greed motivations, and safety/security motivations. Champions of similar or near-similar alignment should *readily* form alliances (parties) if greed or safety motivations overlap. Also, if the greed or safety motivations are EXTREME enough, opposite alignm

Aye ... and personally I think that the "spawn chance" for new lairs should increase as lairs get destroyed. (not immediately, of course, but the longer time passes without new lairs being spawned, the greater the chance increases) So for instance ... you could avidly destroy all the lairs, and only have to deal with new lairs one at a time, maybe once every 10 turns (and thats if you control the world/ world-wide) ... Yet ... the more that time passes,

GAH! Quick move should be for Tactical Battles! ... :( Its funny that its only for the strategic map.

Nice. Probably an option to "Auto" (while your watching) ... at various speeds. In addition, options like "Quick Move" and "Quick Attack" to forgoe animations altogether. I want a game . ... I don't want a lot of "animations" that will take a lot of time to perfect. I mean, if you want animations, make a frikking real time battle like total war. This turn based stuff can have Static 8-bit pics for all I care.

Well, with the mechanics I'd LIKE to mod in ... believe me having more soldiers will actually count for something. Its not like its stupid HOMM battles, nah. I mean I want the battles to be as "Credible" as possible within the settings of fantasy (as opposed to within the settings of real life or, say, a Random Number Generator) ... even if it means battles will need to last a *long* time (many turns). So yea ... even numbers, battles won't last that long (probably....). But given ass

Anyways, I'd just like to rehash/summarize. Basic resources like Food, Materials (Wood, Marble, Clay, etc), ... and Gold/Magic/Knowledge, should be Global (always). All other resources will also be global ... just "less so." For instance, requiring a trade route (either with a city w/ source, or capital if no source) and a particular building. And by "all other" I mean the ones with specific military application ... Iron, Steel, Horses, Wargs, Young Dragons, Bone Ogres, etc.</

I think the system could still be made deeper and more complex without resorting to local resources. For one, have some buildings cost maintenance in gold ... have more ways to get gold/tax populace. Honestly ... I think POPULATION HAPPINESS would be a strong way to create a deep and fun game with the global system. Sure, its been done a zillion times before, but its *almost* necessary to balance a proper taxation system. That way you have two sources of

The point is ... the more soldiers you can have in the battlefield ... the stronger Monsters/Heroes can be, and you can choose to field an army of weak mooks to try and take down a few overpowered Monsters (not possible with a "fair" take on the current numbers) So yea ... its for more variability in battles, not cause we always wanna see "more" ... its just so we can have Quantity be a Quality all of its own (fielding "Russian" armies vs enemies) or in other wo

Persistent Corpses ... when a soldier dies (whether solo or part of a squad) his body should lie on the ground where he died and stay there. Lets say there is a company of 12 dudes. 4 of them die on tile X, and their bodies stay there, another 3 die on tile X++, and stay there. Then the remaining 5 die on tile Y. Enemy mage casts "animate dead" on tile Y, getting a unit of 5 basic zombie soldiers. Enemy mage casts "T-virus anomaly" on the zombies to turn them i

Heck, I'm mainly in it for a Rally PRO-litter the field with Bodies!!!

Yep ... Total War style battles are simply THE BEST way to fight tactical battles. Its simply true. I honestly can't wait till my "good" computer is fixed and I can play the LOTR mod for Medieval2. (does anyone know if that mod uses heroes??) Because ... if a proper RPG stat system can be worked into a Total War framework (where normal troops have 10 or 0 in all stats, depending on the stat, giving them no special bonus) ... that'd be awesome.

Well ... it was an "organized and prepared" pikemen force that defeated cavalry. A pikemen force that was charged from behind, or charged on all sides, was just as dead as the swordsmen. (but not quite as dead as archers or siege crews)

Um ... I played MoM after I played Elemental ... as of 1.06 Elemental, MOM is much, much better.

I think there should be a poll for A- Real Time, B- Baldurs Gate, and C- turn based and a poll for Tile-based vs Tile-less and a poll for "taking turns" and We-go

[quote who="Yellowstone_1872" reply="17" id="2769451"] Quoting Tasunke, reply 16 My current formula of choice is HP = Consitution*((level-1)/3) Doesn't that give you Zero HP at level 1? (HP = Con * ((1-1)/3) = Con * (0/3) = 0) [/quote] Right ... I was thinking Con*(1 + (level-1)/3) = HP ... my bad for missing the 1+

well, as of 1.06 we had (worse) than MoM ... I'd say having tactical battles being Tile-less (yet turn based) WeGo is a fair demand. As well as squads upwards of 50 or 80 soldiers a piece. As well as individual soldiers (within a squad) being viewed as individual objects (but gaining experience as a squad). That would be about fair. ... As for acceptable ... basically anything I (and other combat oriented posters) have suggested previously.

I remember it Raven ... and the reason we have small unit sizes BETTER be just because of the blindness of the Dev Team instead of the weakness of the engine. Cause honestly ... the only reason I'm considering modding Elemental is because its supposed to be a "great platform" using a "good new engine" ... and if it turns out its a weak engine that pales in comparison to Total War's engine ... then I'll probably have to mod a much crappier version of my game on Civ IV or

Yea ... I think this should turn into a RALLY FOR PERSISTENT CORPSES!!!!! HUZZAH!

I totally agree with your concept Tridus ... and actually while I started with 10 + (X/5 * level) My current formula of choice is HP = Consitution*(1 + (level-1)/3) so basically your HP increases by "Constitution" every 3 levels ... and it also works retroactively. So, assuming you don't add any points to Constitution, your HP doubles at level 4, increases 50% by level 7, and increases a third by level 10. However, if you decide to

I definitely think there should be a difference. In general ... horses should be faster ... but a racing warg might be about as fast (or faster) than a heavily armored war horse ... and then a racing horse would just leave everyone in the dust. (this is why combat speed != run speed) I mean, I realise that MoM just used a single combat speed, but come on ... if we are using Action points, then we should rly have a Run Speed and an

Well, the thing is ... if its a global magic pool ... and EVERYONE uses it ... then all you need is to have a Hero in the army and BOOM! Access to overland spells. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e] I mean seriously ... there is like 0% reason to risk your sovereign now (and I'm ok with that). I guess we will still have Intelligence (how powerful your spells will be) and Wisdom (how many spells you can cast per round), so that'll still be cool. But yea, at least

Havok would have a lot more usage if the battles were real time. Also, limitless battles and powerful heroes/creatures are (probably) easier to balance with real time. By that I mean ... real time (or total war) battles always seem to be more flexible. Huge Monsters, hoardes of small units, powerful heroes ... real time is the current champion of large-scale battles. (and small-scale too, if you count continuous turns a-la Baldurs Gate and Dragon Age)

X + 1DN .... (where X is based on level and how awesome the hero is) vs C (where C is armor + how awesome the hero is) ... in D20, people start with a C of 10 ... which would translate to a D100 while people start with a C of 50. My proposition is to have "regular" soldiers with a C of 25 (based on D100), while Heroes have a base C of 50 (that increases by 2 per level) // and where 96-100 is always a hit, and 1-5 is always a miss //

Lol Simsum, tile-based battles won't EVER look like that ... I didn't say you couldn't pull off a battle with that many soldiers. Its kind of like Paradise Lost, only its Epicness lost. Sure, you CAN get a fun system that's tile based (will it look like the pic- No), and you can even have moments that feel pretty epic. (since epic is all subjective, etc) But no ... and, whats your business about piles of d2 rolls?? That's VERY simple ... I mean, I dunno