I'm guessing it's gonna be like the Civ games. Simultaneous turns, they end when everyone has clicked the end turn button, etc. I'm not sure how the battles are gonna work out though. It'd be nice (or not) if the other players could spectate the battle while the 2 players fighting duke it out.
Nice idea. I like how it worked in Total War games, and it would work well here as well.
I'll quote someone from the other thread, whose comment I think makes sense: Whether you are interested in MP or not, it is simply the best way to really analyze the game rules. Most games actually start with multiplayer before the AI is even considered. That way you can see if your rules are holding up and have the potential for competitive fun. I know alot of you don't appreciate being beta testors, but MP is the way to fix the single player game most quickly and thoroughly
[quote who="Zero_the_Hero" reply="80" id="2764561"]So back to my question: can't we mod this game into a better AI and implement the new combat ideas?[/quote] While I support the modding community of all games 100%, things like these should be fixed in the vanilla game. Only lazy companies like Bethesda make their fan community fix their games.
[quote who="PyroMancer2k" reply="5" id="2764599"]1) Choice - Like you said every choice should be meaningful and difficult to make, in that they are balanced. I always find it annoying arguing with people who say something has plenty of "options" when there are say 4 choices but 1 is noticeably better then the others. It's like sure a player can purposefully gimp themselves by choosing to but that doesn't really mean there are a lot of "options" for a player looking to play at top level.<br /
Of course. It doesn't have to be ULTRA complicated to be entretaining. Most of the suggestions I'm posting come from other games, and they have really simple, but fun combat systems, after all.
[quote who="Tempestwrath" reply="13" id="2763731"]While I don't think copy/pasting another game's combat system is the real solution here, I think a good way to go about things would perhaps be to instigate two changes that interact with eachother for tactical combat. I: Unit Action Point Differentiation *snip* II: Unit Attack Order is by Total Amount of Action Points. *snip* These cha
Like I said in another thread, Everything takes no risk to make. Want to build a city? Sure, just build a cheap pioneer that takes like 3 turns to finish and almost as expensive as 3 peasants and set sail! The city got destroyed by a random bandit because you didn't plan it properly? You can just train another one! What's that? You don't know what magic to research? Just get all of them, it's not like researching them takes long anyway. Need more research? Simple, just s
For me, it was this: - customization - Civ-like strategy + actual good combat instead of unit stacking - Modding potential - Some RPG elements to give it a twist. I'd say I only got half of what I expected. The second point wasn't achieved at all, and that saddens me.
Oh, ok. They better add an option later on, I hope.
Agreed, good ideas in this thread. I hope the devs re-work the whole tactical system.
I have a similar thread here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/395918
I'll ask again. How can I delete custom factions? I cant delete them using right click like I can with sovereigns, and I can't find any file to delete in the game folders.
Global economy needs to be modified. Something simple like a "priority" system on cities where you tell the population what to focus on (therefore, making the city giving more of resource A but less of resource B and C) would already give cities more meaning. Or even something like a global budget system that decides wether you want to focus on a resource or another. Right now, all you do is build. Make 10000 cities and build, build, and build even more. There is no strategy, just min
Yeah, that's why the current system seems so innapropiate to me right now. Sure, having the AI at a disadvantage doesn't really trouble me much, but what about multiplayer? One player is always gonna be at a disadvantage, especially if the attacker has archers. Turns determined by side need to be eliminated, and replaced with unit-based turns. And if that's not possible, at least determine who starts first by taking something into account. It could be something like the general's stat
Yes. It will most likely work like multiplayer in Civilization games (which is REALLY fun, I can assure you), except for the tactical battles, of course.
Many good ideas to reduce-city spamming. Seriously, lvl 1 cities should be bare bones, why the hell can you build market, workshop, arcane university and study on a city with like, less than 1000 people? And why are pioneers so cheap and fast to make? They should go with a system similar to civilization here.
Well, on the one hand, I think the singleplayer should be fixed first, but on the other hand, multiplayer will need A LOT of feedback, so it's better to start early.
Nah, randomization in matters like these does not work. It'd have to be affected by something else, like overall speed of the army or something. To begin with, I'd rather not have a "side" based turn system, it just doesn't work well. I got a different idea here: https://forums.elementalgame.com/395918
I'd say turns should be unit based, not "side" based. I'll quote what I wrote in this suggestion post https://forums.elementalgame.com/395918 - Now, when I mentioned unit speed in the sub-title, I was refering to the way the game handles turns. Personally, I don't think it should be "First attacker, then defender". In
Now, I'm not a developer by any means, so I'll try to suggest ideas that can, from my humble understanding, be implemented to the current system we have. - First of all, I'd like for groups of units to be managed properly on the battlefield, meaning, no more 1 on 1 duels while the rest of the squad watches, that's just incredibly annoying. The current dice system we have is ok, but I think at least the animations should be changed. Seeing all the troops from 2 squads of troops fight
True, but it's one of the main flaws of the game, it has to be changed somehow. It may be too late, but it has to be tweaked AT LEAST to make tactical battles somewhat fun.
Oh, of course. Even some of the most modded games like total war or bethesda RPGs are played in vanilla state by many many players, so the base game should always be good.
I only hope they'll change the system and introduce actual TACTICS into the matter. Things like flanking, thrown weapons, counterattacking, different unit speeds, improved combat between squads of units, stats changed by the terrain, etc. All we do now is just make units go foward and attack mindlessly. It doesn't matter if one unit is a spearman or a cavalryman, a swordsman or a maceman, it's all the damn same. Weapons and armor should be more than stats modifiers, and units shouldn'
Good, I hope so. I hope they manage to make this game good, but if they can't, at least I hope the community gets the tools to "fix" it.