(Forgive the research paper-wannabe structure of this post. Skip to the proposal if you want to cut straight to the point.) Intro: Though I would love if this was added to the actual game, I know this more in the realm of a mod. There was a nice thread that was lost in that forum shuffle awhile back. We discussed allowing players to play the game without needing to be tied to cities. Players would act as merce
Yeah this far into beta, I don't think it will make it into the official game (hopefully something similar later on) But I definitely would love to see it as a mod. I have zero programing skills to mod a game, so anyone who does feel free to use this idea :)
[quote who="Terran_242" reply="101" id="2617277"] How does the empire rely on strong individuals, when it seems like the individual (in its society) is subsumed in the multitude? How does it sustain its oppression and "evil", when such a system would presumably cause massive rebellion? You're looking at it the wrong way mate. Sure enough, if you tried to create the an Empire's culture in any real life country you can name there would indeed be a massive backlash, o
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="20" id="2616129"]I like that. Guildsmen. I also like Magistrate or something too.[/quote] How about Magnate ? –noun 1. a person of great influence, importance, or standing in a particular enterprise, field of business, etc.: a railroad magnate.
Decided to make a purely non-combatant champion. He looks very old, and I based him on Socrates: he has outcast and ugly, but also brilliant, meditative and scholarly...and also has Bard. He has no weapons/amor low dex, str and cons, but high wisdom. Hes good to keep around in a city to up research, or keep in an army as an "advisor" (due to bard). http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6636384/Hugotes%20the%20Ancien
[quote] This long time lurker votes for Factions/Lore first.... but really I want both and don't understand why it can't be done.[/quote] Because they have limited resources. So hes asking which of the two should they focus more on.
I would like to have complete customization of faction and race. I want to make one Elf faction that are savage warmongers, an another orc faction that are noble savages. Don't skimp too much on the stock civilizations though. In Galciv, I also enjoyed playing against the stock civs with my custom faction. But I also worry how this will seem to a newbie player. It can all get kinda confusing. Maybe break it down like this, so a new player can easily understand. <
[quote who="strager" reply="14" id="2603015"]waaay too complicated. This would force you to focus on building placement to a level that would be too much. The game should be focused on getting you out exploring.[/quote] Its really not that complicated (don't let the wall of text fool you). Its a fraction of what many city building games are. Currently, the city building is too bland imo. I know Stardock wants to streamline as much as possible, and we all want to defend that ideal....
[quote who="MagicwillNZ" reply="5" id="2602733"]I have a dilemma. I really like multi-tile cities, they're very fun to make, but from a design perspective they don't make much sense. There's many ways to exploit their use. It's really simple to simply wall off your kingdom, and to build "highways" where a single long city transports units through it. I'm starting to think cities should maybe be more decentralized. Else, we're going to have to impose a lot of arbitrary restrictions on how peop
[quote who="PyroMancer2k" reply="2" id="2601502"] I like the idea though it could be really hard to implement effectively as well as raise issues with all the resources in game. In sport it was easy with only 3 building types. Currently we have Prestige, Food, Materials, Iron, Gold, Housing, Crystal, Research, and Spellpoint buildings. That is only the buildings I recall and still leaves out % increase buildings and ones that give access to other units, such as stables or har
This is not probably what the devs want to hear, but ... I am having fun with the beta (I originally wrote this prior to 1-Z3). Well not exactly with the beta, but with a mini game that I overlaid on top of the beta. Its basically a simplified version of SimCity, and so far its made me more attached with my cities, and the world around me. I actually think about turns, instead of just plowing through them. I spend time personalizing and tweaking my cities, without being completely
I don't mind uber units as long as they have appropriate costs. I think instead of having units labeled "elite" , elite units are good as you make them. Spend only 1 turn training them, they are green and start at low level. Spend 20 turns training them, they are elite and start at a higher level. More weapons abilities are unlocked and available the higher the level of the unit. Different weapons should have different kind of abilities -AND- at different levels. So a wooden s
hmm, Im not sure I want this added. I like the idea of looking at a character and being able to tell what kind of stats it will have. I also don't like the idea that I might see a character deck out in plate armor, but has the stats of a naked mage. It all just rubs me the wrong way.
[quote who="strager" reply="48" id="2585871"][quote who="=Outlaw=" reply="47" id="2585861"] Quoting strager, reply 29I think that there should be a minimum distance that requires at least one tile between the maximum range a city can build into- this way you can still turtle (you'd have to put an army between them or something) but it would make it much more challenging....just my opinion of course I don't think you'd want to build them too close to each other anyway. I'd put a min
[quote who="strager" reply="29" id="2585619"]I think that there should be a minimum distance that requires at least one tile between the maximum range a city can build into- this way you can still turtle (you'd have to put an army between them or something) but it would make it much more challenging....just my opinion of course [/quote] I don't think you'd want to build them too close to each other anyway. I'd put a minimum distance simply to prevent newbies from crippling themselves
[quote who="strager" reply="25" id="2585604"] Quoting Frogboy, reply 24My goal is to make my territory very defendable. My second city is 4 tiles away from the first one (city center to city center). My strategy will be to have the two reach out to one another to build a wall to keep other players out. Shouldn't there be some kind of disadvantage to doing that? Otherwise your going to see everyone linking their cities instead of expanding outwards...[/quote]</
[quote who="strager" reply="7" id="2582320"]Outlaw - more than just bonuses for the cities... armies should move faster (or fight better, etc.) on prefered terrain if they are made up entirely of a race that gets that bonus. I made your suggested fixes to the other post using the in-forum editor. Let me know if its easier to follow now. Jafo - Sorry about that- I don't know what happened- it appeared as plaintext to me in the editor. &n
What you suggesting is easily do-able. It’s basically a racial trait that confers a bonus to a certain land type. So as an example, the more of the preferred land type within your city's radius, the more of a bonus given by this racial trait If there are multiple races in a city (which I hope is possible), simply multiply the bonus by the percentage of the city's population the race composes. As for your other thread, these forums add in more spaces if you copy and pasted from o
The "manlands" from the worldwake mtg set gave me the idea of turning landscape into creatures. Imagine turning a mountain into a colossal rock elemental/ golem. Gain an ally and remove a mountain that might be in your way. I like the idea of controllable/uncontrolable aspect to these 'megabeasts'. I think a good way to do this might be to not only require a certain number of shards to summon the creature but also maintain control over it. So if you have just enough shards to summon i
Good one...we all fell for it. When can I start downloading the patch [e digicons]:pout:[/e]
Weapon types should have innate abilities and/or a wide and varied range of damage types and ranges (even for melee). Look at a matchup of a dagger versus a sword ...Why would a player want a dagger over a sword and vice versa? If they both have the same damage type, is it simply which one has the best dps (damage x combat speed)? If so, then the choice is just a matter of which weapon cost more or less. Not very interesting. For example, an innate ability for d
[quote who="Ragnar1" reply="30" id="2577409"]Another way to limit fort spam or otherwise limit a resource collection point that stays within the premise of the game is to have them cost 1 essence. Basically, you still have to create living land to make the fort or resource collector, but its cheaper than a city. Obviously, once the restored land expands, you can place these outposts without essence.[/quote] The problem with that is towards the end game a big chunk of
I have a link directly to the Elemental section. I was wondering why there were so little new posts lately
[quote who="Splitshadow" reply="16" id="2575262"] Just to let some of you know, copyright capitalism is the number one killer in the United States. Do you know why we can't cure cancer or any other disease for that matter? Because it isn't profitable to research a cure if it can't be copyrighted. For example, cord blood cells are over 9000% more effective than stem cells, but no company will make a profit developing methods to use stem cells. PROTIP: We cured cancer in 1962,
After 'Z' its 'GT'. Everyone knows that