Philocthetes

[quote who="Tourresh" reply="4" id="2388977"]... The best option here is to give this thread more use by categorizing the suggestions so we could easily find all suggestions related to a certain topic.[/quote] I'd really like to see a Suggestion Roundup similar to Kryo's Bug Roundup page, but I'm too lazy to build one and find a place to host it. Categories seem like a must; maybe if you edit your replies so far to give them category titles,

What little I know of Glen Beck quite horrifies me, but I have fairly equal contempt for all the 24-hour 'news' channels and a fairly sturdy respect for Brad despite our very different politics. The story is definitely an interesting sign of just how fuzz-muddy the 'news' has become these days. I wonder, if I change my Elemental pre-order to include the disc & box, will that make me an involuntary Glen Beck supporter too? The silliness of the idea might just make me go for it...</

I think beta should stay in the name until the beta is over, and possibly after that if it's easier to start fresh with official docs as a baseline than it is to prune out all the beta-related things that are likely to accrue over nearly a year of testing.

I'm still in the 'give sovereign death = game-over a try' camp, but I remember a couple-few MoM games where the Spell of Return saved my ass. If you can continue the game as an heir but none of your heirs can ever present a threat to you, that would be too 'gamy' for me. If sovereign death means game-over or succession, I want the creation of heirs to have some sort of ongoing cost/risk-benefit factors.

Please pardon the possible threadjacking, but your post makes me wonder when we will see the champion code active in a build. My guess from the wording of the current schedule is that we'll see it before beta 2, but it could be as early as 1a, part of the dynasty system implementation in 1e, or as late as the quest implementation at the end of Beta 1, 1g.

[quote who="Bingjack" reply="23" id="2382855"]... I'm aware of the status. My issue is not with the cloth map,or the map at all, or what will eventually be 3d graphics, but with the interface. Fantasy games have typically had nicely rendered interface elements. Stardock's philosophy is to sacrifice the look of the game for "infinite" scalability. The result, in my opinion, is a very sterile looking interface, devoid of much in the way of personality. T

At the very least, it seems like the UI should flag 'unspent' money in some form analagous to how bank/CU web sites indicate that there are pending transactions against the current balance of an account. A treasury total with no future obligations should look different from a treasury with a known future outgo.

[quote who="FalseMyrmidon" reply="3" id="2388429"]... There's currently very little actual "game". ...[/quote] I've never been in denial about the early betas being "no fun." I'm just curious whether anyone else in my situation has played enough with their kludge installation to have noticed something they appreciate in the changes for 0.23, something they might have reported as a bug if their instance was kosher, etc.

The 0.23 patch did not get a kosher instance of the game running on my machine. I can still get going via deleting the FamilyTree file(s) and restoring after the main menu displays. My overall performance seems a bit 'buggier,' although I don't think it's fair to call anything a bug if you've manually mangled your installation. So, given that it doesn't seem right to try posting 'real' bugs, I'm curious to see what changes other splash->CTD sufferers have seen between 0.22 and 0.23

The real world's irrelevant on this one for me. It just seems easier (more player-friendly) to take the money from the treasury upon commissioning the building. Whether it goes to the builders promptly, stays in 'escrow,' or gets paid in per-turn installments is secondary.

So in a world where many whine about walls o' text, I step on my toes in the name of brevity. The fine Aha Moment that Demiansky gave me not only entailed the unconscious assumption that there would be a variety of special tiles like the farmlands, but that they would all be visible on the main map and that some of them would be distinguished from GC2 by limiting the choices for what you can build on them. Or at least that's how I hope it will go. I'm as big a control freak as any oth

[quote who="Raven X" reply="26" id="2386524"]... I've been out right attacked by a enemy Sovereign before. The red and black one, evil side. He's literally chased me down. I notice the AI units tend to be more aggressive when your Sovereign's life is low. If your life is full they will almost always try to move away from you. If your life is low they will take that opportunity to strike. I've seen this behavior 5 or 6 times so far in Trolls and Spiders as well.[/quote] It's probably m

[quote who="KellenDunk" reply="31" id="2386582"]... Could we make the Sovereigns vulnerable to death by heartbreak? If you marry off a bunch of your sons and daughters and some evil-type decides to slaughter them all mercilessly, have that be a way to kill you. Could be fun. [/quote] Ever since we heard that there will be dynastic mechanics in the game, I've been regularly thinking "All's fair in love and war." But the only conflict mechanic I'd thought of was willful offs

[quote who="Lord Cobol" reply="5" id="2385968"]... I think it would be fun to start off under the protection of someone else, and see if I can outgrow him without rebelling.[/quote] That might require a custom campaign, unless setup options eventually include some sort of fast start where the turn 0 map already has established cities, etc.

[quote who="landisaurus" reply="2" id="2385713"]... In theory there could be events that provide you with wives, or the sovereign could produce a child magically because... well... he's a channeler, he can do whatever he wants.[/quote] Hmm. That functionality should enable a truly all-female Amazon Faction, in combination with the 'pop growth comes from the wilderness' thing and possible corrollary 'fertilization magic' for the general population. Frankly, though, I'll

Holy unconscious expectations, Batman! The farm tile just 'naturally' seemed like the first instance in a series like you describe. The Mushroom Field is an especially neat idea.

[quote who="Demiansky" reply="21" id="2386181"]... I think elemental needs to go one way or the other, and not halfway. If they want some completely original lore, get rid of the dragons and trolls too.[/quote] Originality is both claimed far too often and rather overrated as a goal. On this specific point of how the playable factions look, Elemental is aiming to be at least 'unusual' in the fantasy TBS genre, and I'm getting increasingly tired of how much people want to complai

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="23" id="2386174"]... Trfolls. And. Enemy. Soverigns. I always wind up fighting them, sometimes because they attack me and other times because the auto-pilot puts me right on top of one.[/quote] I wonder if there's something drugging the already-dopey AI in the FamilyTree workaround context. I've never been attacked by a troll and I don't think by another sovereign either. (I've seen them cruising around lots inside my lines-of-sight, but they never seem to

I'm still hoping that Elemental will see "a certain someone" spread his interests to include AI that is 'on staff' for the player as well as running a strong civ all by itself. Maybe the vassals will be a good starting ground, and eventually we'll get royal councillors who can truly handle some delegated responsibility without too much risk of them abusing their authority.

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="25" id="2385602"]Well ageless doesn't work either. ...[/quote] My Webster's says "Without old age or limits of duration." The wiktionary more or less agrees. I see no reason to keep using a term badly just because lots of people do. But then I'm a self-professed curmudgeon who fears living to see the death of the sentence in 'modern English.' I take the language much more seriously than I take mysel

[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="13" id="2385466"]I don't have time to read this ungodly massive thread, but getting knowcked off by a monster in the first turn every few games is starting to get annoying. ...[/quote] How are you managing that? The only few times my sovereign has died fighting a monster (or other sovereign) is when I got greedy and thought I could take another solid hit before going off to hunt healing drafts or loiter in a town. p.s. The other thread is massive,

[quote who="Strand" reply="23" id="2385319"]... It was a documentary.[/quote] Yea, apparently dictionaries have been out of fashion for longer than I thought...

[quote who="KellenDunk" reply="18" id="2384716"]I'm not sure the idea of succession of the throne is really going to take place in this game. Your sovereign is immortal and he is the boss.[/quote] Sovereigns aren't immortal, the devs just use that word instead of ageless, not sure why. You can't kill an immortal, but you can kill an Elemental sovereign. That word-quibble aside, I wasn't thinking of the game continuing after my sovereign dies, but about successions among

For those interested in 'historical' debates, the sovereign death = game over thing spawned this huge thread back when the boards first launched and had a few recent entries earlier this month. I don't think that the early betas will be much to go by in terms of assessing whether it is too easy to kill sovereigns. When we can run larger maps, build real militaries, recruit champions, and go on quests it should be a lot clearer whet

There's a 0.23 patch available now. It might help some folks with crashes after the title screen, but it didn't help me. Deleting the FamilyTree files in the Screens folders does still get me going, more or less. Edit: Still need to start the game up to the main menu and then restore the deleted FamilyTree files to get access to the Kindom menu.