MxM111

So, if one unit has attack 5, and another has defense 10, does it mean the following: Attacker makes a roll 0 to 5 (or is it 1-5 ?) Defender makes a roll 0 to 10 (or is it 1-10?) Then defender value is subtracted from attacker value. If it is 0 or less, then it is a miss. If it is positive number, then it is a hit with the damage of that number. Is it how it works? Also at what point attack/defense benefits are accounted and how? There are 2 of them, on

[quote who="ddd888" reply="4" id="2723580"] if they would all roll 0-10 against 40 defense they would do nothing [/quote] Actually I do not think it is true. If you have defense higher than attack, it does not mean that you are immune, there is some chance that unit will still hit you. I do not know how exactly it is calculated though. A good way could have been the following. Both roll attack and defense, one is 0-10 and another is 0-40. Then one c

[quote who="Astrobia" reply="33" id="2723530"]I heard loosely somewhere you can research missing spell books. If correct then why not start with them all, you'll have them all anyway by the time you can use them effectively. It's just trading research time for stats or equipment and vice versa effectively.[/quote] That's strange logic. If you are going to have +10 armor eventually, why don't you start with it? I do think that different sovereigns should start with different se

[quote quoting="post"] Some of the basic armour is bugged (costs 10 material and 10 gold or something silly like that). [/quote] I wonder if this is bug. It is early and bad armor, but, it is low on tech tree, does not require metal. So if you have lots of material and gold, even 1 armor makes unit effectively 20% more robust in early game (for attack 5). So, I am not sure if this is intended or bug.

The game needs tutorial, (that would address more than 50% of your concerns), however they could not do tutorial, because the game design is still in flux, like building improvements by clicking resource was finalized like what? 3 weeks ago or less? And for those who saying that "day 0 patch will fix most of it" no it will not. These are the same people who were saying "oh the game is miles ahead from beta and everything will be sorted out at release". They have NO idea how difficult

Never mind. It looks campaign is not saved in the save folder. In order to load saved campaign, one needs to restart game, select campaign and then there are saved files there.

I have deleted the folder. Now when I try to load I see no files there. However, I have noticed that to continue campaign I have to click campaign and the save files are there. This is confusing, but I think it works.

Hello. I uninstalled my beta 4 and now I am playing freshly installed campaign of released version. However it looks that the game saves into one location, and loads from another, i.e. I see my old Beta 4 save files when I want to load my saved file and do not see recently saved files. Does anyone else have the same problem? I have reported this in tech support forum, but I want to know if anyone here experiences the same with campaign.

Hi, I have uninstalled Beta 4 and installed release version. It plays fine. However, for whatever reason when I want to load game, it shows OLD SAVE FILES from beta 4, and my new save files, while they were saved somewhere, are not shown here. What should I do? Please help. I can not play the game without being able to load saved game.

[quote quoting="post"] I like the way they do business and I like them as a company, since Galciv 2 I just bought the game as soon as I heard about it and figured I'd like it. I haven't found one I didn't enjoy yet, flaws or not. [/quote] Well, that's not surprising, considering the fact that the first game since GalCiv 2 that stardock has developed was... Elemental.

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="67" id="2721065"]It'll still be a couple of hours. Bear in mind we're between gold and day 0 so we're having to put this stuff together. We weren't even planning on being here today.[/quote] Thank you SO much for you update. Now I can unstuck from my PC for couple of hours.

[quote who="Raven X" reply="5" id="2721042"]The best fix I've found is to....not buy an ATI card. NVidia, the way games were meant to be played!!! [/quote] Yeah, NVIDIA drivers usually of better quality, but ATI makes good cards and many people are ATI fans that will not consider buying NVIDIA card.

This game does not have copy protection, so you can play it on two computers at the same time (it may be against EULA, but there is nothing that actually can check if you are running it or not)

[quote who="fatindian" reply="47" id="2720988"] I still have a point. Brad saying preorders and beta testers getting it early is the "privilege" part. Release date is 24th, that hasn't changed. [/quote] Just because you call it privilege does not make it any different. People have pre-ordered to get this privilege, thus it is their privilege and they are understandably upset when the promise was not fulfilled. (though it is time only for beta testers) Re

[quote who="killer105" reply="34" id="2720882"] Quoting MxM111, reply 30In my experience, most of the games uses additive percentages, and most of the game specifically say so. This is completely off topic. It isn't a place to express your angst, there are plenty of other threads for that. I rather thought the point was a centralized location for all reviews about the game.[/quote] It is ON topic because it explains why reviewer calculated this way, it is n

No, this is how constant checking for release feels: ARE WE THERE YET ?

[quote who="Themysticeye" reply="27" id="2720637"]Most people won't care about the math and not even notice, letting the game figure that out. Let's face it, we are most of us lazy that way. [/quote] I disagree, most people do not check the numbers each time, that's true, but most people RELY on the game to do math correctly. If you think your bonus is 10% it SHOULD be 10% not 50%. [quote who="Themysticeye" reply="27" id="2720637"]What kind of good reviewer fails to mention sp

In my experience, most of the games uses additive percentages, and most of the game specifically say so. This game uses compound percent, and does not mention it (well may be it will say so in the manual), so I would not blame reviewer for missing it. A good game should be clear about it. A good fix would be when it shows bonuses (on second screen) it should mention it somehow. Now the problems with the game as I see are the following in this example: 1) 50% bonus inst

2:44 am is also morning. WHERE IS MY GAME? [e digicons]}:)[/e]

OK, it is Sunday! WHERE IS MY GAME [e digicons]}:)[/e]

I played AOW: SM for last couple of days. Guess what guys? Surprise! I had more joy playing Beta 4 (and still would play it if it was not self-deleted by update). 7 years in gaming is LOOONG time, so, what was considered superb 7 years ago, does not cut anymore...

Please do not forget that there is also coop in multiplayer. And in coop, it is fine to have all those imbalances.

[quote who="Frogboy"] 3 out of 4 PC game sales occur at retail with the bulk occurring at just a handful of retailers (Walmart, Best Buy, Gamestop, etc.). The remaining 25% is via digital distribution (Steam, Impulse, D2D, etc.). [/quote] Frogboy, Can you give us the source of your information? Is it just internal SD estimation? Then what do you base it upon?

Does anyone know if large portion of online sales are just subscription sales, like word of warcraft? In this case it is quite possible that Frogboy talks only about new game sales, while NPG about sales that include subscription, and sales of the old games for couple bucks which of course would not be applicable to elemental.

Yes, imagine you can be a historian watching how everything develops before your eyes with ability to interrupt the events. This is like world simulator from god's point of view. Could be really cool.