david39

Just a nagging concern - my understanding is that beta .77 increased the xp needed for heroes... the next patch as I understand it will make xp split between heroes (which I absolutely agree with). This just seems like one of those classic fixes that will now shift the balance too far in the other direction. If you have a stack of 5 heroes at the next patch they will now get experience 5 times slower (xp split 5 ways). When added to the increased xp needed in patch .77... I

Death magic should be able to change injuries into chaotic mutations that don't delete the disadvantage, but add a really good bonus. Say theres a weakness to cold injury - death magic spell 'mutate' mutates the hero so now though they are still weak to cold they are immune to fire. Of course said spell would be very expensive.

In regards to the wildlands: I think monsters should level up over time, and become more aggresive over time. So yes you can ignore the wildlands next to your cities but 20 turns from now when they send out monsters and raze your capital you may regret it. If this really is player vs. opponents vs. environment then the environment should win sometimes

I like this idea

[quote who="Malsqueek" reply="2" id="3063814"]I could get behind the installation of a per city "Governor" city-building OPTION, with military-growth-gold settings. However, making the cities auto-build removes one of the fundamental qualities that make these turn-based conquest games what they are. The CHOICES, the ability to micro manage your empire in various ways to achieve different results. Setting the city/empire aspect of this game to auto as the standard

[quote who="Goldseeker" reply="1" id="3063810"]While i find this suggestion interesting, it is unrealistic to think that they will change the game so drastically over the course of beta.[/quote] I agree. Just had the thought and throwing it out there. I wouldn't think implementation would be that bad though, as the leveling mechanism is already there.

Loving the beta so far. One thing I have been struggling with is city development. It seems... bland. The part I love most about them is when they raise a level but that is few and far between. My suggestion is to get rid of manually building buildings. A city would have 2 modes. Training and Growth. When a city is training a unit, it does not grow - this is the tradeoff between development and expansion/protection. Sort of like civ 4 w

Happened to me with Bears - but only after around 40 turns.

Well, after playing around with some more custom factions, for me lucky and powerful racial traits seem to do nothing for troops... they get the icons when built but not the stat bonuses. And I believe none of the stat based strengths or weaknesses for races are working for troops.

When designing troops they do not seem to get any benifit from the faction bonuses (like trogs +3 strength and +2 constitution). I've checked this by building a new city going to training and designing a new unit - the stats from int, str, con, and dex always add up to 34 for any race. Races that have stat based faction bonuses should add up to more than races that do not. Also when picking the negative magic resistance trait on a custom race it doesnt seem to show up wh

[quote who="ddd888" reply="70" id="3057791"]civ 4 multi sucked [/quote] I thought civ 4 multi was pretty good you just needed to play with people you know. You could make your moves at the same time as others. I still log many hours on it today. edit for quote

Made the 1st BETA. Happiest day of my life. Which should make me sad - nope still happy!