Well, I like being able to create individual units. They are useful for scouting, playing a diplomat, role-play, etc. So maybe something like this? Individual - 1 Platoon - 25 Company - 75 Battalion - 100 I don't think the top level should be called an "army". An army usually means all of your units combined as a whole.
As my city grows, my population shrinks? My buildings consume people like materials? Yeah, woohoo, this is a great idea! While we're at it, how about we can also turn our champions into buildings too if we want. Afterall, they're people too, they should have that magic ability as well. [/sarcasm]
[quote who="Wintersong" reply="24" id="2783137"] quoting postThis is what a good UI looks like, as far as design goes: it's intuitive, it stands out, and does its job very well. Basing your opinion in a pic, without being able to actually try it (the interface, not the pic) and see if it really works well...[/quote] I'm not saying that the one shown in the mock-up is perfect. I'm saying it's a quite few steps in the right direction. Obviously, we have more resou
"build multiple buildings in a given city as long as you have the resource (available citizens) to make use of it. This encourages fewer cities and makes players choose between using their population for building their economy or putting them in arms. " Wait, so help me if I'm seeing this wrong. Improvements will be consuming people like weapons consume metal? So, if I build a workshop the people in my city will disappear into thin air? If build
This relates to another recent post I created, but felt it needed it's own space. While I love the unique lore of the game, with the interesting way that factions can bring the world back to life, it sort of shoehorns us into the game's back-story when we may not want it to. At the same time, I think this would be the simplest way to breathe life and color into the graphics that so many have criticized. I thin
Our current interface simply has too much there that get in the way of usability and simplicity. For example, does the faction progress graph really need to be on the overworld interface? Wouldn't it have made more sense to put this in the "Kingdom Report" section? Also, a unit's actions should be front and center on the screen, not buried under a tab. The whole interface needs more text labels, really. The most important buttons for a city is obviousl
[quote who="coreimpulse" reply="58" id="2782105"]I wont be buying from them again when they relaunch. I'll just get the games i already bought and go somewhere else.[/quote] I will continue buying from GoG. I don't think people should go off and get their panties in a bunch over a PR mistake. GoG is still the best digitial distribution company out there because what they offer. I'm not going to start supporting DRM companies like Steam and Impulse who want to remove
Remember this picture? Apart from the much more colorful world, who the heck changed the User Interface into what we got now? This is what a good UI looks like, as far as design goes: it's intuitive, it stands out, and does its job very well. For all the talk of a tutorial, an easy-to-use GUI goes a long way to helping people understand
I have been playing Elemental non-stop since the day it came out. I think about it all day and dream about it at night, I still get out the manual and read it and look at the amazing box art every chance I get. I have not had this much fun with a TBS since HoMM 3. I played Civ 4 for about 3 hours and never touched it again, it just put me to sleep with the incredibly boring game-play (Leonard Nimoy didn't help). Believe me, I'm not a Stardock fan. I hated GC2,
[quote who="shadowtongue" reply="34" id="2782278"] Quoting JimKnopf, reply 33 Quoting KzintiPatriarch, reply 32 Quoting JimKnopf, reply 29This is getting ridiculous ! Civ IV I bought from the bargain bin and it was even worse. You even could not raze cities that did not fit in your scheme. In one of the game setup options is the ability to raze cities or not. Apparently you didnt spend much time with Civ IV. I was not able to
[quote who="Thizzbaby" reply="118" id="2782249"]Content, content, content, I saw everything the game had to offer by my second play through. More monsters, interaction, quests everything. I am really hoping 1.1 offers something new other then rebalancing and a new magic system. Its pretty bare bones and soul less at times which is why alot of people are bored. The techtree is always the same and you can max it in no time so even if you wanted to try a different way to play its not going
Depends on how you define "quality". Churning out shallow first person shooters is not quality to me at all. There are probably a dozen independent developers out that there are doing more quality than Halo.
Is it just me or do the forums seem awfully quiet from the dev team and Frogboy? Did they all take the week off to play Civ 5?
I'm pretty sure this is all just a stunt. Check out the recent video at 13 seconds: It looks like they are rolling out Baldur's Gate after the site comes back.
[quote who="stax77" reply="5" id="2781889"] Quoting GaelicVigil, reply 3What does land affect? Hold your mouse over the defense rating of your unit standing inside your territory, the tooltip will show the bonus(25% to defense i believe)[/quote] Wow, you too? Seriously guys it's, "land effects ", not "land affects ".
What does land affect?
Don't know where people get the idea that the smaller battle scale jives with the Lore. It doesn't. You are able to have dozens of cities with literally thousands and thousands of citizens in the late game, but yet you're relegated to no more than a couple dozen soldiers per army? So according to the city sizes, the game is actually supposed to be very large in scale. It just makes no sense for a city with 5000 citizens to have an "army" of 16 soldiers defen
Well the IGN review is out. They gave it a 9.0 which is lower than Civ 4 (9.4). This part makes me happy I'm not buying it: "I say Civilization V is only "good" -- and not "great," as I would have said about Civilization IV -- at crafting stories because I feel like the game's taken away some pretty important tools for customizing your society. " This is the main reason why I will not buy Civ 5: I've been there, done that. &nbs
It would be nice if we started posting mods on this site rather than here. It has been up for weeks now, yet I still only see 1 single mod there. It's just a lot easier on the eyes.
[quote who="Snarl" reply="28" id="2780799"]This IGN Review is pretty valid in my opinion, I do however think a 7 would have been a better score. I have no doubt that Stardock will get this up to a 9 soon enough. [/quote] Yeah, I don't know about the rest of you, but my favorite games are usually in the 7-8 score range. 9.0 or above usually means that the game focused on too much polish and not enough "game" (which consequently, most reviewers think more highly o
If there's one thing I've learned from the internet, it is that anything, and I mean ANYTHING , can be argued one way or another to be true if one wants it to be. I could start a thread stating: "The Sky Is Blue" and I guarantee that I would have 20 people telling me how I am wrong and explain it with some long-winded scientific reason. The internet is just a giant soap-box for any moron to spout whatever they want, however much
Can a developer explain why early spawns got nerfed? This was not a part of the 1.08 changelog. I only saw this: "+ Late game monster respawning reduced. " Late game monsters were, indeed, out of control, but early to mid game were fine in 1.07 IMO.
[quote who="control-SEVEN" reply="25" id="2780751"]Review is up for Civ 5! IGN: 9.0 Does this mean the end for Elemental? (Reminder IGN Elemental socre: 6.0) [/quote] Wow, worse than Civ 4 (9.4) - a game I hated with a passion. This is good news, it means I spent my money wisely on Elemental.
[quote who="control-SEVEN" reply="59" id="2780755"]I wonder, Civilization V just got a review score from IGN of 9.0. Does this mean the end of Elemental multiplayer?(Reminder IGN Elemental score ws 6.0!!) Will anyone be playing this game? Or should I invest in Civ V better than Elemental?[/quote] Oh, that sucks, they rated it worse than Civ 4, which I hated. Hooray! Now I won't have to waste my money on Civ 5.
[quote who="econundrum1" reply="2" id="2780614"]Yes people eat food and they live in houses, shacks, huts, etc. It's all very well to build those buldings but if you can't feed the people they attract they aren't going to stay. Hence the abstraction in the game you see.[/quote] Also, what happens when you recruit half your citizens to the army? Does your food requirement cut in half because half your people are gone? No, it doesn't, and this is what the OP is getting at.</