Always find it fascinating where the realism lines are drawn on a game where unrealistic stuff happens on a turn by turn basis. :) Taking 1 damage from a lightning bolt smacking you on the head is okay. Fighting at full power when you're a paper cut from death (1 HP out of 100) is okay. Breasts and curves on armor is "going too far".
[quote who="solidsmooky" reply="55" id="2756448"]On Friday it was over? It doesn't even matter, it's pretty lame and everyone is still kissing Stardock's ass when these people have families to take care of during a recession. [/quote] Who is "everyone" because I don't see "everyone" kissing anyone's ass. Some? Yes. There's some that aren't.
I've always thought "minors" where basically "majors" without Channellers. I.E. they are a bunch of common people gathered under the banner of a non-magical though stronger-than-them leader. Like a champion with groupies, as it were. As such, have them act like "majors" but missing some of the tech/buildings that "majors" get, like shard harvesting and using Lost Temples.
[quote who="BOTA99" reply="218" id="2755548"] I would like to second this point. I guess no one here - or very few others here - played Demigod. [/quote] Developer: Gas Powered Games Publisher: Stardock There's a difference between being the developer and the publisher of a game.
[quote who="awuffleablehedgie" reply="1" id="2755603"]This would be fixed simply by being able to "attach" guards to caravans so that they could defend themselves.[/quote] Yeah - or the ability to design some (like when making a caravan unit, you can design it with "Guards" that up it's HP and defense at the cost of more materials/gildar to recruit the caravan).
[quote who="BGH122" reply="5" id="2755316"] Name: Egalitarian Effect: Recruiting soldiers only costs 0.5 population per soldier rather than 1 (or whatever the equivalent game mechanic is) Description: The Egalitarian nature of your society means that recruiting soldiers doesn't impact civilian life so strongly (after all, if only males are allowed to work and only males are allowed to fight then every soldier created has twice as strong an impact upon the civilian e
[quote who="Shermyth" reply="14" id="2755449"] Also, it would be nice to see mixed squads. Males and females fighting side by side.[/quote] Especially if you're an egalitarian faction.
[quote who="AlixeniusTheGreat" reply="10" id="2755417"]Seriously, the practicality of such garments would kinda ruin the immersion factor. It would be like Final Fantasy now, when 50% of the female character's body is showing yet she resists a punch from some giant demon-angel thing.[/quote] Meh. Just throw it on the "RPG-only" pile with getting struck by lightning 20 times and still surviving with no permanent damage or getting chewed up by some monster, but never ever losing a
[quote who="Psiborg" reply="183" id="2754601"] Unfortunately, the world is all too quick to jump on our failures. But, as cliché as this may sound, what's more important than our failures is how we recover from them. It will take a lot of work to turn Elemental into the game it was intended to be, but the passion and commitment is there; the raw talent is there; and now the subjective blindness that prevented them from seeing how far they'd drifted from their
[quote who="Kuriostone" reply="45" id="2754667"] MoM is far from perfect, but it has a unique feel. I think the graphics have held up well (16 years, guys! We're all old now...), and if you want to grab it, it's like $6 from gog.com. I highly recommend it, but you may want to google some screenshots first. There's none of this campaign nonsense. Significantly different gameplay based on Wizard design and difficulty, too. Warlord, Crusadered, adamantiated berzerkers... with flying. Mess y
[quote who="deadzy13" reply="42" id="2754637"]i might be a little off base here but it some way's it makes me think of an old school game called ogre battle i use to play back in the day lol[/quote] Now there's a game I haven't seen duplicated. I'd love to play a PC version of Ogre Battle: March of the Black Queen.
[quote who="Sethai" reply="19" id="2751391"] you say it as if it's balanced at all at present. myself i'd do it like this: typically infantry has speed of 1, cavalry has 2 etc strategy map movement = 1+your speed tactical map movement cost 1/speed action points, with a maximum of your speed+1 moves in a turn. so infantry move 2 on land, cavalry move 3 assuming 2.0 (ie, defau
For me it's not Master of Magic (never played it, but want to now after hearing how, basically, perfect it seems to be). For me, it's Age of Wonders. Got all those games, loved them all - have been looking for another one ever since. Maybe even some Warlords 3. Actually I think true, old-school, RPGs are just as rare. The Bard's Tale, Might and Magic types. Wizardry 8 was the last one to give me that feel.
[quote who="Zero_the_Hero" reply="75" id="2754099"] I apreciate all the effort of SD to hurry with the patches and taking our feedback into major account, but we MUST NOT forget that these patches are merely COMPLETING an unfinished game. These patches could really be directed into improving the AI and balance the game, but instead all the efforts are directed to fix several amature bugs that shouldn't be there from the beggining. [/quote] I agree with keep
I think there has to be something in the middle. 1d65 isn't good, but 17d4 is too predictable, imo. I think at some point, you'll just end up having randomness just so you can say it's randomly determined. Likewise 1d36 would be bad, but 9d4 would be too predictable. 6d6 seems like a happy medium. Or do (strength + 1/2 weapon attack + 1dN) - (dexterity + 1/2 defense + 1dn) = damage. Then do hit % = 50 + weapon attack - target defense. Have that rolled for each
[quote who="Sethai" reply="11" id="2750663"] i can see an argument for armour changing your total amount of action points (let's call combat speed what it is, the combat speed name confuses me). however, you don't want to end up in a situation where light armoured bravos are a match in almost every regard for armoured soldiers on a battlefield. [/quote] Up armor's defense. If light infantry is a match for a knight in heavy armor - that would seem to tell me
[quote who="Spyndel" reply="12" id="2751075"] I was concerned about being able to produce too many units that couldn't actually *act*. I figured everyone should have a basic default action they could perform. As it is, there would probably need to be some sort of watchdog feature on the unit designer to let players know they were building a unit that wouldn't be able to fire their bow in combat. I had another reason too, but I can't for the life of me remember wha
[quote quoting="post"] Almost all gear, including light armor, weapons, and even special ability packs, should have a plus or minus speed modifier (much more so than in the game currently). Heavy armor, and powerful two handed weapons (blunt weapons more so in exchange for even bigger damage) should have significant -speed modifiers that really impact speed in meaningful ways. The penalty from heavy weapons + heavy armor should quickly bottom out your speed, requiring a mo
[quote who="Bellack" reply="13" id="2750250"] What they should do in combat is run it like D&D. When you attack you roll a d20 then you add what your attack bonus is to that roll. This is then compared to the defenders Armor Class which is not a roll. Then if your score equals or exceeds the Armor Class you hit and then roll damage. Now in Elemental what you could do is run the attack roll just like I described above. But the Defense could be done in two
I agree with the 1 to X damage rolls. Probably done this way so that shards move it up to 2D then 3D, etc. So more shards give tighter curves (guessing). Only other thing really rubbing me the wrong way is how stacks are. 9 guys (or gals since I'm egalitarian) with 6 attack are not one person of 54 attack. They are 9 girls each attacking with 6 attack. The hit calculation should run once individually. Perhaps that might kill off sovereigns..but 9 vs 1 is pretty long odds unless you crush them
[quote who="NTJedi" reply="4" id="2749089"]I know creating GOOD maps for any games takes a very long time... which is why I wish at least the cartographers table had more features/configurations. At least then I could bury myself inside creating maps while the game was improved/repaired.[/quote] I admire map makers. I've tried it before, but they ALWAYS are either overly simplistic or ugly. It really is an art.
[quote who="Krelk" reply="73" id="2748930"] Quoting trollkhan, reply 67yeah this game is not finished, why release ????? i fell stupid to buy a game completely unready to be sell Quoting Rune_74, reply 72A troll who actually puts troll in his name:) Well he's got a point. The game really doesn't feel finished. I'm kind of suspecting it needed another 4 months of development to clear up the bugs and make the game mechanics make sen
[quote who="EsamMoney" reply="22" id="2747151"] What? Why would a city have negative food? What is negative food anyway? So you have 10 people and...they owe a food to someone? It doesn't make sense to me. Really? This makes perfect sense. Negative food production means food CONSUMPTION. They are EATING one food per turn, but producing none. It doesn't make sense NOT to start out having negative food.[/quote] If you have no
[quote who="Windchill33" reply="19" id="2747063"] Quoting VR_IronMana, reply 18 What? Why would a city have negative food? What is negative food anyway? So you have 10 people and...they owe a food to someone? It doesn't make sense to me. I think he's just saying that to make a level 1 city (obviously after your capital) should cost 1 food, like I have 3 food, make a pioneer and go found a new city and now I have 2. Makes perfec
[quote who="Baleurion" reply="17" id="2747009"] I know this may be harsh but imo EVERY newly founded city should start out with -1 food. No joke. That way you have to pay something to get something (the 1 gildar, material, arcane, tech, and influence). [/quote] What? Why would a city have negative food? What is negative food anyway? So you have 10 people and...they owe a food to someone? It doesn't make sense to me.