Fistalis

I'm sure its in the to do list.. they probably have no idea when though. They can't really mess with multiplayer til the core game is finished and this newest beta process is changing the core game so. If they continue with the competitive multiplay path (IE changed tech trees removed tactical combat etc) rather than just a copy of singleplayer with players in some of the slots rather than all AI then I won't touch it anyway personally.

[quote who="sagittary" reply="32" id="2841828"] . This was one of the reasons they gave units the ability to go overseas without a dedicated boat; it helped make the AI better while also getting rid of the micromanagement for the player. [/quote] Speaking of the embark dynamic.. It would acceptable to me in a fantasy game like elemental.. but I find it horrid in a loosely reality based historical game like civ V. Simply because the logistics of a large scale a

[quote who="AllegroMonkey" reply="13" id="2841063"] You really should start a new game with every patch. There is a high chance your past save either A.) won't work or B.) crash with the new coding.[/quote] Want to stress this point. Old unit builds sovs and save games all could add to crash issues with each patch.. your better off imho removing old user files after each update.

[quote who="pad152" reply="26" id="2841626"] The issue here is the AI, it's not able to play on a map of islands because it doesn't use boats, something CIV games have been doing from the begining. [/quote] Selective memory here.. Many of the vanilla release versions of various Civ releases had major issues with AI using boats. Civ IV for instance had issues til about the time of release of BTS.. and the vanilla patch that accompanied it. <

[quote who="Javaslinger" reply="12" id="2841763"] Quoting Heavenfall, reply 7Following this thread. Why do people write this? Who cares?!?[/quote] In order to follow a thread on your account page you need to have posted on it. So people who want to follow a thread but have nothing to add to the conversation at that time post "following this thread". So then they can simply choose posts I have replied to to see threads they are interested in rather tha

[quote who="Whiskey144" reply="35" id="2838028"]No, terrorism is not simply an act of violence to achieve some goal. It may be an act of violence to achieve a goal, but first and foremost it is a violent act intended to inspire TERROR and fear into the enemy, usually the enemy civilian populace. The fact remains that terrorism != war. War can involve terrorism, and terrorism can escalate to a full-scale war, but they are NOT the same thing. Terrorism is an act of violenc

[quote who="Whiskey144" reply="32" id="2837970"]Except for the fact that it is HIGHLY likely that much of the released information has caused harm to those civilians in Afghanistan. Additionally, Fistalis, you are an idiot if you think that war is by definition terrorism. War is not terrorism; it is actually the function of one entity attempting to impress its own will on another entity; whether this is two people, or two nations (or more than two parties for that matter) is fairly

[quote who="FadedC" reply="30" id="2837949"] Quoting Tridus, reply 27 The words you're looking for are "invasion" and "conquest". Far, far more people were killed in those actions then have ever been killed by terrorists, largely because the millitary has much bigger guns. No the word I'm looking for is war, although there was an invasion as part of the war. And yes wars kill more people then terrorists but I'm not sure how that's relevent. Wars kill mor

[quote who="Tridus" reply="27" id="2837917"] Quoting FadedC, reply 26 Quoting coreimpulse, reply 24 States too engage in terrorist acts, like uhmm, illegally invading a nation bypassing all international treates. That ring a bell? Well no. That's an act of war, and depending on your perspective it may be viewed as immoral (I certainly did not support it). But it is not an act of terrorism. The words you're looking for are "invasion" and "conque

[quote who="Windexglow" reply="7" id="2830085"] How about: stability, It will be designed with consoles in mind. better animations, Why bother making new ones when Fallout3's do fine? better writing, Why bother when no body reads it? Clearly combat is much more exciting. a more fleshed out magic system, Nobody likes complexity. There will be a few "attack" spells, and a few "healin

happy thanksgiving.. and um "happy turkey day" is just terrible.. i don't think you'll find very many happy turkeys today [e digicons]^_^[/e]

[quote who="Luckmann" reply="2" id="2830878"]People actually play Civ5? [/quote] Ya for the first few weeks after they get it [e digicons]:ninja:[/e]

[quote who="taltamir" reply="101" id="2828903"] That being said, MS said windows 8 will be 64bit only.[/quote] Which won't matter to many since we all know MS will continue their price gouging leaving many still running xp 32 bit.. or ubuntu lol. TBH if I had not received XP as a gift i'd still be running windows 2000 pro. But hey i'm one of those silly working poor.. who cares about us since we have such low purchasing power anyway.

Feel free to mail me a copy.. otherwise deal with the fact that i refuse to pay an arm and a leg for a new OS [e digicons]:erk:[/e] Especially when my current OS works fine. [quote who="Luckmann" reply="95" id="2828856"]Stop producing for 32bit. Until 32bit applications stop being mainstream, you'll always have people like my father, that still lament the death of Windows 3.1 and program his PLCs in DOS. If you want it done, you'll h

[quote who="StarReaper" reply="31" id="2816758"]and the takesfreakinforevertofinishagamesobuymoresodaplease. [/quote] Reminds me of my old DnD days where a few packs of smokes and a 12 pack of mountain dew were the basic supplies...

Same only on XP and 1.09e.. I think its pretty safe to assume its not system conflicts but an issue with the cartographer itself. AFAIK fixing this stuff is on the back burner til they get the core game fixed up [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

(Insert words of encouragement and praise here) [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

AFAIK in the latest patch there is no summoning spell book. Summons are divided into other books. IE fire elemental is part of the fire book. Ice is part of water book etc. The general summons.. uh familiar etc are part of the advanced books you have to research. Maybe enchanment spell book is required for them as well.. idk i rarely go without it lol.

[quote who="Gazz_" reply="32" id="2819047"]All spell costs? Wouldn't that just be the next "Organised", where you would be stupid to ever not take it? That would buff too many areas of the game at once because spells do more than one thing. [/quote] I said tactical or strategic depending on the flavor of the ruler.. not ALL Spells. [quote who="Gazz_" reply="32" id="2819047"] Forcing the player to pre-select an element such as "cheap fire spells" is problema

Lots of good ideas here. SO ill add the only idea I had that I didn't see already here and edit as i come up with new ones. Reduces tactical or strategic spell costs depending on the flavor of the ruler. Either by a set number or a % based on level.

[quote who="Glowing_Ember" reply="84" id="2817098"]When you understand the tech tree and get a feel for the ai it is very easy to set yourself so that that the computer will never want to attack you. Especially if you eat one or two of your neighbours. Incidentally this makes it easy to win through either magic domination or the adventuring quest. You can play the game as long as you want and then end it when you are ready to declare victory. Once Frogboy gets to play with the ai some more th

[quote who="Sinzer" reply="80" id="2816801"]Stuff[/quote] Ya I don't rush out pioineers out of cities as fast as possible and I rarely build military units. My playstyle is more based on enjoying the roleplay/empire simulation feel than to rush to victory. I'll tell you this... if they decide to balance it so that one must rush everything to even be viable in playing then i'll be among the multitudes complaining about this game. I play freeform sandbox games to take my time an

[quote who="Sinzer" reply="76" id="2816519"] My whole army usually tends to consist of heros sovs and a few peon units. I use heros and sovs for the majority of fights and pretty much ignore normal units. What difficulty are you playing on? I can definately do that on normal where there is not a problem. However, normal is not a fun mode to play as the AI does absolutely nothing, I mean 250 turns and I find SOVs sitting on their starting to

[quote] But, if you figth a human opponent, you'll rapidly see that your hero wont last long. T[/quote] Ya this is probably the disconnect.. i was unaware that tactical battles were even functional in multiplayer. Or is this due simply to the Autoresolve results? [quote]IIRC, magic defense is actually just defense. It uses the same stat as physical defense. Some of us were arguing for more stats a long time ago in beta, but it didn't pan out.[/quote] </p

[quote who="Glowing_Ember" reply="70" id="2816488"] It is the scalability of heroes that is part of the problem - they just don't scale at the same rate that other units do and buying equipment for them doesn't come close to making up for the lack loving they get when they level up.[/quote] I personally don't get this argument because they use the same rules as SOVs in leveling up. I have no issue with making heros strong when applying stat gains to the right ar