_PawelS_

It's primarily a strategy game, not an RPG, so I think such complicated RP features as multiclassing are not necessary.

The latest Dev Journal makes me think that one of their inspirations was the Sword of Truth series (Kingdoms of Midlands -> Kingdoms, Imperial Order -> Empires).

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="18" id="2616117"]The different factions in Elemental will be fairly distinct from one another but it'll be based on what talents and other faction strengths/weaknesses. Those choices can result in significantly different gameplay experiences (or will in the final).[/quote] So the differences between Kingdoms and Empires will be qualitative, while the differences between specific factions will be qu

[quote who="Xan" reply="16" id="2616112"]By that reasoning, then Civilization and Age of Empires and such games only have one faction.[/quote] Yes, most of the historical strategy games don't have big differences between factions. But fantasy games, for example MoM and the Fall from Heaven mod for Civ4, have them.

After reading this dev journal I get an impression that the differences between individual Kingdoms and Empires will be minor, so we'll have only two really different "factions". It's not much, but I guess more of them will be added in expansions (and mods, of course [e digicons]:)[/e] ).

Hidden strategies - good (but not one strategy that makes you win in all situations) Exploits - bad

GalCiv 2 [e digicons];P[/e]

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="196" id="2611525"]Even more importantly, though, is that the factions all feel finished and diverse; so that playing as any one of them results in a very different game.[/quote] I think the same. Customization is less important in the first release, more of it can be added in expansions.

[quote who="Naithin" reply="49" id="2611271"]1) Non simultaneous play option; that is, have the game hosted by a server and allow players to login, take their turn, then wait for everyone else to come in and take their turn as well. Perhaps have a host setup option of a turn limit as well, if a turn isn't taken within 24 hrs, those players turn button is hit automatically for them. Combat would almost by necessity have to be autoresolve, but that's fine. Also, idea

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="42" id="2611128"]On an unrelated note (although some-what similar to having no hotseat) ... I find it very odd that a game with Online Campaign COOP will NOT allow for split-screen COOP. Its ... quite frustrating for one, such as I, that rarely likes to combine gaming consoles and the internet.[/quote] You mean cooperative campaigns? Great idea, I didn't know that such things were planned. Another reason for implementing a hotseat mode (spli

I think hotseat is the easiest MP mode to implement, so I'll be surprised if it's not included in the final game.

I found this in the "Elemental for dummies" thread: Battles are turn based. However, by default, they are continuous turns (turn button pushed automatically but can be turned off). This is good news for me.

Yeah, the "forsaken land" would become radioactive land :)

I think a "phase-based" combat (a phase of giving orders, then a phase when all units move and fight simultaneously for a fixed amount of time, then an orders phase again and so on) is a better idea than BG-like pausable battles. In multiplayer it can be annoying if the opponent pauses the combat every few seconds, and if the pause is disabled in MP it becomes an RTS, which TBS-lovers like me don't like.

I'd like a "generic fantasy" mod, with Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, Orcs and so on. Maybe I'll even get involved in creating it... (inspired by some classic games, like MoM, HoMM and the Age of Wonders series).

Interesting idea. Especially in games with a large number of players (including AI) it should be limited somehow, so after researching a technology you can't sell it to everyone in the same turn. The only games having diplomats as a "resource" that come into my mind are Europa Universalis & the like.

I prefer a simple system. Disciples I & II had a very simple one, but it was quite enjoyable (and the battles didn't take as much time as in some other games). I don't want it to get too complicated, like the Total War series.

I don't like mass teleporting, and I think it's good when the frontline cities are more threatened than the other ones. It encourages city specialization - you can concentrate on defensive structures in some cities, while the less threatened ones can be the "cash cows". If you can expect attack anywhere, the only viable defensive strategy it to have a fast (or teleporting) army that can react to enemy attacks. It makes static defenses pretty useless, unless you have them in <st

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="2" id="2609773"]Meanwhile (1-Diversity, 2-AI, and 3-Modding) are all part of gameplay.[/quote] Yes, but I think "gameplay" is too broad term, and it's important to define some priorities within this category. Lore seems to be already in place (there will be even a book). Whether the diversity comes from lore or not, is not important for me. Speaking of art, the most important thing for me is that the graphics should be "clear" (not confusing th

[quote who="psychoak" reply="39" id="2609771"]It had tiles, they were just a lot smaller than before.[/quote] The battlefield was divided into parts, but they were too small to count as "true tiles" for me. It wasn't possible (at least for me) to determine precisely to which tile a unit would be moved.

1 - Diversity . Make the factions and/or races really unique and play very differently, which adds replay value. Fall from Heaven is a good example. 2 - AI . In a game designed primarily for single player, a good AI is important. 3 - Modding. The number and quality of Civ4 mods shows that allowing the modders to change as much as possible pays off. But it's not a high priority for the first release, more modding capabilitie

I have a question: On this screenshot: https://www.elementalgame.com/images/Screenshots/ele_dynasty.jpg the following information is written on the info card: 4th in line for the throne of Darkwood. If the "vanilla" game has no inheritance, what's the point of such text? Was this feature planned earlier and dropped?

Agreed.

I think there should be a possibility (by getting enough levels or maybe by a random event) that an experienced unit will become a Champion.

I think it won't require designing different units - when you produce a unit of a different race, it will just get some bonuses/penalties to its attributes. Only the visuals can be a problem, if you design the appearance of a unit, when it's another race it will look different.