VR_IronMana

[quote who="jamotide" reply="36" id="2769364"] And it was unbalanced, but why is that bad? What is so good about balance? Balance sucks, it means everything is equally viable. In other words boring. [/quote] So having multiple viable paths towards victory is boring? However having one obvious way to win and all other are worthless is fun? For me, the reverse is true. I'd rather have a game where I can pretty much mix and match or try

[quote who="cammagno74" reply="21" id="2768949"]I disagree, I like the random name generator and the names it produces (they have the right 'flavor' for me), and I really hate the predefined names of cities (probably the thing that I hated more in Civ4[/quote] Why would all the nations used the same "language" for names? To me, at least the name generator should use different "parts" for names of the factions, or at least Kingdom/Empire. I don't think names shou

[quote who="FadedC" reply="33" id="2769105"] Well there's a right way to be poorly balanced in a single player game and a wrong way. The right way is to have lots different classes or factions which play extremely differently, but which are not equally strong. One might be better, but people will still have fun playing through all the different ones in order to get the experience of it. And the differences should not be so blatant that you can say one is better then the other in every po

[quote who="deimios666" reply="215" id="2769032"] Quoting Wintersong, reply 213+1000 to Miko outfits. Seconded. Also need armored skirts like the one Saber wears: Reduced 95%Original 600 x 450[/quote] Nice - I'd love to see more of that in the game. Heh miko. Would be interesting.

[quote who="Vladesch" reply="30" id="2769037"] People worry too much about balance. Look at fall from heaven. Very little balance there, but its heaps of fun anyway. Games with pvp and ladders need balance (ie sc2), not (primarily) single player tbs. Not at the cost of fun anyway. [/quote] IMO, balance can add to the fun. That's why some worry about it. I don't agree that only MP games need balance. Some people h

[quote who="NTJedi" reply="17" id="2768703"] I agree... Kingdom should be able to use Wargs for training soldiers to fight and archers to shoot. While Empire should be able to use Horses for food. .[/quote] Dang, the Kingdoms use wargs as bait and the Empires are a bunch of horse eaters - what a cruel world! :D

[quote who="oera" reply="12" id="2768275"] On a related note, if you don't like the weird names that often happen now, what would you do if stardock made sure they were ALL weird because that's what they imagined the Krax, or Urxen would find normal? (Like those crazy people that spell Matthew with one T).[/quote] Have you noticed a change in the names by faction? I haven't. I could see if, say, Resoln had "funky" com

[quote who="ChorgeNegro" reply="6" id="2768192"]I disagree, i think the random name generator should be disabled and just a huge list of good sounding names implementeand. [/quote] Yeah, like the Disgaea games - you can randomly have names selected, but they all (well, a lot of them given how crazy NIS is) make sense and could be pronounced easily by most. That said, I like the idea of one person had with rolling up syllables, though it would have to

[quote who="JSJ101" reply="10" id="2768530"] "No, they did not. The pikemen did." Correct, although this contributes very little to the thread. The OP's point remains valid, mounts should really be more powerful than they are currently.[/quote] They should be more powerful, but also then have counters. Spear/Pike could make horse/wargmen lose their combat bonuses while archers might do some extra damage (I would say higher to-hit chance, but you always hit, so on

[quote who="Raven X" reply="8" id="2768493"]Pfft...I want Flying Dragon Mounts!!!! Horses and Wargs....how pedestrian... .[/quote] Perhaps it would be something good to add to the end of each element's spell book. For example, Air could get Pegasi, Fire could get Red Dragons, Earth could get a giant spider, water...well that might be a challenge. Maybe water would get a sea serpent and be THE way to travel on water. Require ownership of a node as well.

[quote who="falconne2" reply="27" id="2767834"] Until some APIs for the AI are released, is there much point adding special abilities? The AI wouldn't know how to use them.[/quote] Probably only for multiplayer.

[quote quoting="post"] What do you think? What is the main reason of combat being boring? Can it be singled out? Understanding it should help the developers. [/quote] Going to steal a piece of your post: "All of it together" Basically all of those things you presented (except maps being too big, maybe). Actually, I think what's too big are the squares. If the map was the same size but the grids were smaller, then movement would be eve

[quote quoting="post"] I see no reason why a kingdom person couldn't ride a warg, while an empire person (particularly those of Kraxis) couldn't ride horses. [/quote] Is there any difference between the two anyway? But if a Warg is just a "horse in wolf's clothing (fur?), and of course vice versa for horse -> warg in equine clothing (fur?) - then that should be addressed too. That would make for another point of difference

I think tech trading should be an option to be enabled. As far as a nation not trading their best tech - it depends, imo. Perhaps if one nation has the top bows in the game but crap swords (they focused mostly on bow tech) while the other nation has high quality swords but they only thing they know about ranged weapons is throwing a rock at the enemy, then I could see a swap between those two nations (especially if the sword nation is going up against another bow nation in war and I'm

[quote who="stax77" reply="7" id="2768105"] Some of them play for the challenge - the competitive type. For them, a game that does not put up a difficult fight is meaningless. They see no point in playing if they can just rush the AI and win everytime. Then there is the player who doesn't care about winning as much as he does about playing. The 'sim-city' type of player. He does not care if the AI is strong, because he just focuses on building his little kingdom, and derives p

[quote who="Suunman" reply="3" id="2768003"] I'm not a Chess Master, nor do i pretend to be a master strategist of any type. I don't play games to prove anything - least of all the fact that I'm cleverer or better than a Games AI. I play games for the fun. Knowing i'm going to be beaten 5 times in every 6 doesn't make me want to sit down and play a game. (though I accept that may be an allure for some) Knowing I always have to use the same strategy to win doesn't

[quote who="sagittary" reply="3" id="2766262"]Sorry, I can't afford the per-turn gildar cost.[/quote] He could earn his keep hunting spiders. You'd just lose some of the gildar in keeping his armor in good shape and buying dog food.

Can I imbue him with essence and teach him how to cast spells? Me: Now, Fidoom, wag your tail *Fidoom wags tail and casts a lightning bolt* Me: Good boy *gives a treat* Now, hold up your left paw and bark once. Fidoom: *holds up right paw* Ruff! A boulder nearly hits me in the head. Me: No, Fidoom. Your other paw! Fidoom: *Now lifts up both paws like in a begging pose* Ruff! A desert suddenly appears and nearly wipes out a farm M

[quote who="keithburgun" reply="192" id="2766278"]I can't believe this thread wasn't completely laughed off the boards and locked. Why not hot MALE armor? Sexists.[/quote] Find me an argument in the thread AGAINST hot male armor and then we'll talk about sexism :P

Well since Elemental AI will evidently be so easy to create, I'm looking forward to playing several community AI mods once we're able to really get at the guts of the AI [e digicons]:grin:[/e] I'm looking forward to AI modding myself, but I don't think it will be "easy" to get Elemental's AI to play well (as in, like a quality and diverse human player with as minimal cheating as possible) no matter how "simple" a game Elemental evidently is.

[quote who="Austinvn" reply="83" id="2766088"] And a word on sons inheriting - it may be the classical European way to only consider sons as heirs and ignore daughters until you run out of sons, but there's a way to give players the option of having daughters inherit equally (i.e. oldest child is heir regardless of gender): just tie it to the Egalitarian trait. Perfect, isn't it?[/quote] Anything that makes Egalitarian more viable works for me (since I always take

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="74" id="2765649"] The way Dynasties are evolving towards is that when a sovereign dies, their kingdom (or empire) will go to the player who is married to the next in line for the kingdom.[/quote] What if the next in line is unmarried? Does that mean no one inherits and it just goes poof and it's basically a game over for me? Can my unmarried heir take the throne?

[quote who="Nick-Danger" reply="152" id="2765655"] Am I living in a different world, one where many games are released in what can reasonably described as 'unfinished with the intent to fix later', and the rest of you are living in a world where this doesn't happen? [/quote] Is balance considered "fixing"? Because SC2 has a balance patch due sometime. Most games have balance tweaking (especially strategy in either flavor, RT or TB). Does that mean the balan

[quote who="thisisretarded" reply="187" id="2765982"] "thrust" (freudian slip?) [/quote] Maybe, maybe not. Don't ask, don't tell. [e digicons]:X[/e]

[quote who="Zeferoth" reply="183" id="2765663"] The morale of this post. You dont have to be naked to look like a woman[/quote] Exactly, and I think the real thrust of this thread is exactly that. Not the "OMG I WANT ALMOST NEKID CHICKS IN THE GAME" like some tried to turn it into.