Infantes

Istari: Hey now, looks like we just founded a new sport! Go over suggestions in the forums an turn them into something with hardly any sense at all! So when somebody writes "I want a bug-free EWOM!" you write something like "E womt all bugs freed!". Hey, that´s fun. Try it. ;-) Oh, and my (additional) silly suggestion, ehm... You should be able to research a tech that enables you to use crystal to make magical disco balls. This would make your people happy. It

@TorinReborn: When I look at all those different reports of how the game always crashed/never crashed/was awfully slow on a highend computer/ran perfectly smooth on a standard PC, I really wonder what might be the reason for that? Sure, there are a gazillion possible computer hardware configurations, resulting in a gazillion of possible bugs, but many games seem to have none such problems. So what makes the difference here with EWOM? But, Stardock really isn´t the only comp

@Derek: Fast response, cool. @asadex: Ahh.. I don´t know, I generally like the tactical battle system as it is. As said, the scene on the picture rather looks like strategic battle where you put armies against armies (or in this case dragons). I wouldn´t really want that.

@asadex: Hm, for me, image number 8 is a different one, or I´m just mistaken with what pictures you mean. But you´re right, this perhaps shouldn´t be in there. It even looks like a strategic view, not a tactical battle.

I don´t understand you? If you´re talking about the screenshots in the Media section of the website, then image number eight isn´t even a picture of the tactical battle screen. The next picture shows tactical battle as it is seen in the game. I don´t know if I get what you´re referring to?

@asadex: No, it´s not. You´re out. ;-) @Gammit10: I don´t find (primitive) firearms ridiculous. They wouldn´t have to work with normal gunpowder, they could work with a magical gunpowder or could be entirely magical. And nukes - ok, nukes would be ridiculous, but nuke-like highlevel magic wouldn´t be. And some beasts attacking your ships would be a nice addition too. But ok, guess I have to make a ridiculous reques

@Stuie_: Ok, so, as I understand it, you like to have a frame that fills the game with meaning. I can relate to that. Almost every game at some point made me think "What am I doing here, what am I wasting my time on?", and that was when that meaning diminished. I guess I was baffled because for me the meaning of games such as EWOM or Master of Magic or Civilization or Master of Orion is to play the "sandbox" game. I always write "sandbox" in quotation marks because t

@Mhantra: I personally wouldn´t play without that sovereign-trait. Also I´d like to say that a very nice way to up your mana is to have children. As I´ve understood it, offspring of the same gender as your sovereign will have the sovereigns traits, meaning it will produce as much mana as your sovereign does.

Didn´t we just have a thread discussing this very topic? I think to remember that a demo-version was not to be expected anytime soon, though I don´t recall to have heard an official statement. Personally I would think that Stardock will fix the game first, and only after having published the "Fallen Enchantress" will work on a demo.

[quote]sandbox gets old pretty quick.[/quote] You honestly baffled me. Now I can relate to many a users priorities, but THIS simply is out of my range of comprehensible values. Even where I play the campaign, the "sandbox" mode easily gets played 20, 50, hundrets of times more often.

[quote]When most of the world is kids obsessed with Twilight and Vampire Diary and similar stuff it is hard to ignore it if you want to earn money in the entertainment business.[/quote] So you think that Twilight became so successfull because they simply copied? I´d rather guess they became so successfull because they delivered something new (well, not new like in "nothing even remotely similar ever existed", more like in "a new mixture of known elements"). Vamp-Diar

Hm... I don´t care much for a campaign either. And I´d much rather have Stardock working on the game in general than "wasting time" on a second campaign. I almost never even play a campaign or tutorial, and I didn´t play EWOMs campaign. So, if it should be so that this "tutorial-campaign" doesn´t cover magic or research, then perhaps it should be extended as to encompass them. But I really don´t think that making bigger and better campaigns

[quote]Get some decent hardware and keep your drivers up to date? Other then the original release I have never had any problems with this game. I think its alot of users piece of shit computers causing them troubles. Not all users of course, but a lot of users.[/quote] Yeah, sure, now it´s their fault. Sure you´re somehow right, but that still doesn´t make it better for the people who have problems with playing EWOM. Still I have to say that it may be

Would love that feature too. I have to admit though that I realized it was missing pretty quickly, but never really felt the need for it later on. Guess that is because there are no units that e.g. build roads along a userdefined path. For me personally, a unit is either well enough defended that I can send it out without having to look after it, or it is so weak that I have to care for it myself anyway. Perhaps Stardock has not yet released such a feature because they

@seanw3: I don´t see a "nodes"-based system of ressources as a principal gameplay problem. They work. If you´re lucky and the gameworld contains enough ressources, you will probably end up with excess ressources, don´t really having to care anymore about them. Let´s say, I don´t like how the availability of ressources progresses ingame. First you have near nothing, later this rapidly grows, and with certain buildings suddenly explodes. Like

@loondenhur: You can pick the flavor of the roofing when creating a custom faction. Like for example peppermint, chocolate, fish or gore. ;-)

[quote]While this makes sense in a lore related way, it makes for a very boring map. And imo, gameplay always trumps narrative.[/quote] Signed. Oh, wait - signed with one exception. Cause it doesn´t even really make sense "lore-related". As troglyte insinuated, the idea of a landscape that looks healthy from the outside but in fact consists of ashen marshmallow cream with zero nutritional value is rather ridiculous. If the landscape really is THAT barren, where do

Interesting, didn´t know that. @Wintersong: it wouldn´t [b]have[/b] to be forests, hills or even mountains could provide some materials with a mine that could be built. Or you could get away from the necessity to construct buildings alltogether and just give material and food based on the value that would be given by the terrain tiles within the cities radius. This way each type of terrain would need to have a value for food and material productiveness, but that&acute

Well, in fact it really should do [i]much more[/i]. This way the landscape influences... well, the way it rather [b]doesn´t[/b] influence a cities production at all is the one most unsatisfying lack-of-feature for me in Elemental. There really should be a better way to deal with ressources, a way that takes into account the different kinds of terrain. I do like the way that Elemental handles city expansion, and it wouldn´t be very difficult to use this exact same

@Quabar: Thing I see here is, as said, not the graphics. Todays onboard graphics chips let you play a lot of games, and even portable graphics should not have that much problems with 640x480 VGA-graphics in 3D. The problem would rather be sheer CPU-power and RAM. Especially in lategame the computer has to deal with lots and lots of actions every turn, with dozens of cities and hundrets of units. I honestly doubt that todays atom- or whatever portable CPUs will be able t

@Mystikmind: I guess that´s not the problem. The problem would rather be that you handle a touchscreen-device differently; clicking on tiny icons with your fingers just wouldn´t be practical. Also when dealing with a e.g. iPad you don´t have as big a screen as you normally have for todays desktop computers, so in the end probably the whole GUI would have to be completely rewritten as to make the game playable on a touchscreen-device. As was already said,

@Frogboy: I agree with the AI-issue. I remember finding out how to beat MoM´s AI pretty easily by just striking very early in the game. Worked every time. Also I wouldn´t bother too much about balancing. Absolute balance equals absolute symmetry equals absolute order equals absolute standstill equals absolutely boring. I would rather fix the most important issues and then concentrate on the interactivity with the ingame environment, e.g. food and material production a

I don´t have a clue when "these things" are going to happen. I somehow don´t understand the hassle, though. Perhaps that´s because I only came to know about Elemental in summer (?) 2010. At that time my impression was that it wouldn´t be released until spring or summer 2011. Knowing that Stardock will not let it´s customers down, I can wait that long. I consider Elemental to still be a beta-version, for me the "real" Elemental will not be

Hm, I don´t really get why "Fallen Enchantress" should be a bad title? I mean, honestly, how silly is it to assume, people would associate a person who has fallen to the ground? Wouldn´t that rather be a "Clumsy Enchantress"? Yeah, being critical is a good thing but there also is a being ubercritical. If we assume that the targeted customerbase doesn´t get what "fallen" and what "enchantress" mean, we can assume that almost NO title would be "save" and

Hm, the only thing that comes to my mind would be Umberdroths. Sure, they are expensive and you first have to find a lair and pay for to be able to recruit them. But with how quickly they can be available; and given that a lair will nearly always be in range; they can really hurt in early games. I would rather have their defense rating drastically lowered at first level, and have it get better when the Umberdroth advances in levels.