Wahngrok

[quote]Cities being limited by placement and resources, that sounds better.[/quote]Then you need some real restricticted resource to achive the desired effect. How about spendig some Essence to have a bigger city. Maybe population growth decreases at higher city levels and has to be pushed with Essence to a size where the city can grow again. Another idea is to draw population (growth) not only from the void (or surroundig as is the reasoning) but from other cities as well. So your highly pre

[quote]One of the key things you guys really need to do first off is make a clear distinction between major cities and minor cities. Major cities should be large lively places and all of them should have significant character but a player should only generally deal with a handful in a game no more than a dozen perhaps altogether on the entire map (including major enemy cities) any more and they all kinda just run together.[/quote] I absolutely second this. There could be a mechanism w

Merry Christmas from Germany as well.

[quote who="MagicwillNZ" reply="25" id="2459970"]I have always preferred the linear probability models for combat, because combat is where crazy and unlikely stuff should happen. Having played with both GURPS (3d6) and DnD (d20) quite a bit, I can say that the d20 model makes for much more satisfying combat and the 3d6 model is just far too consistant.[/quote] For a RPG I agree but for large-scale tactical combat I'm not in favor of too much randomness.

The difference between real-time and continous turns is simultaneity. In a RTS all units act at the same time. In a real continous turn system the units get their chance to act in an order determined by differend factors (initiative, speed, number of actions per round, etc.). Now, if the duration of a turn is small enough (say, anything blow 1 second game-time) and some actions take more than one turn to finish there is no discernable difference to a real-time system. So it all depends on the

Yay, Cari's doing a Journal entry again! Although I don't code myself very often I always enjoy these. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

[quote]Elemental: War of Magic, will be the first game that makes use of it but the RPG we’re starting to work on will make use of it too and there are other games in the design process that will exist on it.[/quote] So instead of looking forward to E:WOM we have the next game around the corner* too? Nice! So we just need one more info: where's the pre-order page for those games? [e digicons];P[/e] * Although I don't expect it will be out for quit

[quote]Warfare III is 40 points, not 30 (per the OP) so it appears that each level is double the previous. (10,20,40,80(?))[/quote] I'll bet the numbers change from experience from the beta. The increase should probably be modified by the map size and other factors, so I wouldn'd want to nail them down on anything (although doubling seems like a good base to start from).

That's a very nice Master of Orion / Alpha Centauri approach of research. I like that very much. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

[quote]UFO Afterlight is the only non-brand sequel to X-com that has been worth a damn, in my eyes, but that one is actually pretty good.[/quote] The prequels (Afterlife and Aftershock) were kind of OK, too. But Afterlight is the best of the three being closest to that X-Com feeling. I encourage everyone to give the demo a try (you can find it at the official site ).

Ultima V and Fallout 1-3 (although FO3 is the odd man out here I loved the game for its atmosphere). Planescape: Torment should also get an honorable mention.

[quote]It will still randomly corrupt your boot disk, kill random pets, and [b]make small children cry[/b].[/quote] So that's what's causing it... and I was thinking it is baby colic... [e digicons]O:)[/e]

If you can make combat like Age of Wonders, I'll be pleased. That was the series real strong point. Just the single units were a bit of a letdown. But other than that it is a good sysem to start from.

[quote]On the topic of ridiculous patents, this is hilarious. They filed it as a joke, and lo and behold! The US patent office showed its quality [/quote] Please don't confuse Trademarks and Patents .

I just like to remind everyone clamoring for a complex system that the economic system of Master of Orion was pretty simplistic yet the game itself was not "too simplistic to be challenging". The need of micromanagement was very low because unused resources were converted into money. Also it should be considered that the more complex a system is, the more difficult it is to have a non-cheating but challenging AI. I agree with Myles that a city-management system like Colonizati

[quote who="vieuxchat" reply="35" id="2409150"]The extra turns are just here to say your labor needs to get the needed resources.[/quote] Exactely what I was thinking. The extra turns are just a representation of the exra time it takes for the manufacturers to get the resources themselves. [quote]But ... some resources should be on the can/cannot side. Like extremely rare materials (think mithirl).[/quote] Another point I agree on. [quote]Anyway, I've always th

I see what you did there... and I like it. [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

The way of map creation is moddable as well, I hope. Not that i don't like it but there are very good map creation modders for Civ IV out there who completely override the standard placement of tiles and resources with fantastic results. The expandable terran type thing sounds pretty promising and will hopefully add quite much to the mood of the world you're playing in. edit: did I read this right that a tile can be either mountain OR forest but not both?

[quote]It is said that it WILL be in the game .. when you'll zoom out at max you'll get the cloth map.[/quote] Not only that. In the videos from PAX you can see that there is an option to set the "distance" for the switch from fancy 3D to cloth map. In another video Brad said that you'll be able to play on cloth-map only on low-end systems (so the distance can be zero, one can assume).

[quote]...technically it's next week... [/quote] Not according to ISO 8601 . But then again no one is using that. [e digicons];P[/e]

[quote]Well, I could ask you the same thing: where did you get that information?[/quote] That's how Stardock betas have alway worked (for as long as I can remember). Also there are a few threads on this forum where this system was officially confirmed. Since Kryo has done it in this thread as well I won't go searching for them. [quote]It would simply be more convenient to have the option of paying up front.[/quote] As long as it would be an option I agree. But I'm done

Nice. :)

[quote]The preorder page says I won't be charged until the product is available. Does that mean when it ships? My card expires in November, which is almost certainly before the game ships.[/quote] You will be charged as soon as the beta is available. You will not have to pay anything for the game after that. So you can go ahead with your pre-order. [quote]Actually this whole we-will-charge-you-when-we-ship is kind of annoying.[/quote] This is not how it

[quote]Somewhat OT, the wording is you wouldn't be charged until the final game is released; not just the beta. [/quote] Please get your facts right. It has been confirmed by Stardock that you will be charged when beta starts. When the payment goes through with your bank, you'll get a serial key by email and can download the beta with Impulse.

[quote]I believe you need to do it online, as they obviously have no idea/information from gamestop on YOU personally.[/quote] Besides the obvious fact that you stated one shouldn't forget that Stardock profits much more from a direct download copy than from retail. (I'm aware though that retail is important as well to get shelf presence)