VicenteCartas

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="43" id="2424764"] HoMM actually is one of the few games that didn't invariably run into exactly that problem. Have you ever played as a necromancer in, say, HoMM 3? And raised an army of thousands of skeletons? Black dragons better beware, because those skeletons can wreak havoc on them. Thousands of skeletons will do major damage to even Black Dragons... This is not the only scenario in which low-level units are still effective. For example, they ma

[quote quoting="post"] Resources are finite in quantity (not on the whole map just the amount you have at any one time). [/quote] One question: resources shipped count to the total you can have at any one time?

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="117" id="2424417"] It is arbitrary because fire elements don't really exist. Anything and everything regarding magic is necessarily arbitrary, because it is fully subjective. [/quote] And that's one of the reasons why it's complex. [quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="117" id="2424417"] There is, IMO, some logic to beings consisting of/subsisting of or generally reveling in, say, fire being resistant to or immune to, say,

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="112" id="2424008"] I have already covered the versatility front and I'm tired of repeating myself. If you still don't see my point there, then you are either stubborn, ignoring me, or our perceptions of reality (or understanding of the word 'versatility') are not consistent [/quote] I see your point, I just don't agree with it (nor the argument you used to support it), it's not so hard to understand. It's probably similar to what you think about t

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="38" id="2424358"]Well, I think Large armies vs Small armies is a battle of fatigue vs morale. Smaller armies of elite units have the advantage of dealing out potentially devastating hits upon opponent morale, and have excessively high moral themselves ... while the large army's job is to wear them out, and get them as exausted as possible so that they run out of steam before they blitz through the entire army. Do morale and Fatigue well, and you will see

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="24" id="2423448"] You guys have definitely misunderstood my post. My point was that 200 dread knights would be an equal match for 50 paladins and 1000 footmen. [/quote] I don't think so. The problem with that equality is that even if those armies were equal in cost, in general most combat systems produce the result that high level units can walk over masses of low level ones without worrying because low level ones can't even damage th

[quote] Also, the longer your population is off at war, the more of an economic and happiness penalty stacks in your cities, because the economy has been distrubted by the disappearance of workers (these penalties would encourage an "organic" end to wars). The more dire the call to arms, the more additional "less qualified" soldiers are called to the front and the greater the penalties. A dire call to arms would naturally be made in a defensive war, which would also give defe

[quote who="Suunman" reply="109" id="2423853"] To me, this aspect of the game seems to be about the different sorts of magic nodes, and the elements they control. So I guess I am going to come down on the side of a more complicated elemental damage types. I mean, what is the point of having fire nodes and air nodes. Fire elementals, Air elementals - If they all do the same type of damage? And have the same vulnerabilities or none? I guess the answer is

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="102" id="2423382"] I single magic damage and resistance annihilates versatility for pretty much no meaningful reduction in complexity. [/quote] Several magic resistances add little extra versatility (and even less when they are a weird case in the big picture) and add a lot of complexity (for little gain).

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="93" id="2422886"] I don't understand why people dislike several damage/resistance types - correct. They are not difficult to understand and result in a much more versatile magic system (and magic is central to the game...). [/quote] No one argues they add more versatility, some people argue that we don't really need so much versatility (in normal Elemental, modders can go as crazy as they want). And it's more complex than you&

[quote who="Raven X" reply="96" id="2422984"] Any of them really. All I ment by bringing up D&D was that it's where I base a lot of my fantasy ideas from. Like using healing magic to harm undead etc etc. [/quote] AD&D 2e doesn't have the concept of damage types and resistances for example (it uses an universal magic resistance, saving throws and weapons inmunities, damage types and resistances are weird and badly defined when they are) and healing spells do

[quote who="stupored" reply="12" id="2422802"] In the Middle Ages (and pretty much the rest of history I think) class was a major factor in what equipment people brought to battle and what role they played. Heavy cavalry was limited to people with the means to afford a suit of armor and a warhorse and a leader could (usually) trust that small group of people to maintain the status quo. If a King/Queen blew their national treasury to make armor for 10,000 peasants, there's a solid chance

[quote who="Tasunke" reply="11" id="2422707"]HoMM is not the template for comparison. Anyways, with 1000 foot-soldiers, you would flood a good portion of the battle-field with your troops, and your 50 paladins can move about the battlefield at will, striking the 200 dread-knights where their morale and/or fatigue were the lowest, hoping to cause some strategic route or something. [/quote] Or the 200 dread-knights would move butchering footmen, putting always some betwe

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="9" id="2422662"] With monolithic armies, though, you might spend all your resources and spend an immense amount of time training 200 Dread Knights. Meanwhile, your opponent has fielded 50 Paladins and 1000 footmen. These two forces might be ~equally matched. Without monolithic armies, if armies were limited to, say, 500 units... Then your Dread Knights will only have to go up against 50 Paladins and 450 footmen at once, followed by 500 footmen if you

[quote who="pigeonpigeon" reply="87" id="2422360"] There are two kinds of people arguing against different types of magic resistances: some seem to be arguing against it because they don't want any more than a few basic unit stats. My response: if 5 or 6 magic resistance stats (among the simplest stats possible) are going to overwhelm you, get a new brain - you got cheated at birth. The other kind is of the opinion that the effects of different types of magic damage/resistance would

[quote who="Raven X" reply="86" id="2422304"] Indeed. I have every book in print in Second Edition (yes including the old Myth Dranor Boxed Set). I even have some old modules from GreyHawk. I haven't played pen and paper D&D with the new rules set yet, but I am aware of all the changes. [/quote] Then which version of DnD are you talking about?

I think the problem is not so much researching powerful units or stacks limits, but allowing to produce an infinite number of powerful units once they become available. In medieval times heavy plated mounted troops didn't compose 100% of all the armies because they were finite (they were Knights after all).

[quote who="Tridus" reply="81" id="2422139"] I actually want them because its the most straightforward way to handle things like immunities, but it also adds customization options, yes. There's things that simply can't be done with only one damage type, which have been pointed out already. What I don't want is Civ 4 style combat. [/quote] The thing is that everything is not so black or white, is not "having damage types" or "Civ 4" (even if it's impossible we have

[quote who="Raven X" reply="65" id="2421440"] Honestly, it's been about 10 years since I played it (which is sad because I still have the disks). I can't remember if it had specific damage types for magic or not. When I think of magical damage types D&D (Dungeons and Dragons) comes to mind and that's what I use in most of my ideas. AoW Incorporated magical damage types to some extent too though. [/quote] You know damage resistances and vulnerabilities work

[quote who="Tridus" reply="60" id="2421311"] No, you've wiped out the whole thing. What are we going to be customizing, exactly? We've got one kind of offense units can do (physical). So we have one kind of defense (physical). So, you want to optimize those two stats, and you're done. Its actually a lot like the customization we have in the last beta (and probably the current one, though it doesn't work for me so I can't look). That is, a novelty item that doesn't actually do a whole lot

[quote who="Tridus" reply="54" id="2421169"] Congratulations, you've defeated the a good deal of the point behind having customizable units. [/quote] Nope, only of magical damage types and resistances and the "logic" behind "fire makes more damage to water" and so on.

[quote who="Mandelik" reply="53" id="2421160"] And that should be a reason for the combat system in Elemental to be a million times simpler than the one in Dominions? We should push for this game to draw the best parts of existing ones, improve them and meld them together. Shoot for the stars, reach the Moon! [/quote] There seems to be two camps here: A ) Putting the most complex systems out there for every part of Elemental will create a great game.

[quote who="Tridus" reply="42" id="2420516"] There is no better way to address the cases he mentioned then with damage types. How else would an Ice Elemental take extra damage from enchanted flaming spears unless there's a way to tell that it's fire damage? [/quote] You don't have to address this case, there are papers published in the "Journal of Magical Research" that show that minor magics enchanted into inmaterial objects can't compete with the energy radiated from pure

[quote who="Tormy-" reply="50" id="2420942"] Dump system...what? Ever played with Dominions 3.? It has the best combat system [Including the elemental dmg types/resistances & immunities]. Go and try it out, but maybe you won't like it. That game is for hardcore strategy gamers. It's not Civ 4. Either way, if you decide to try it out, your first nation should be Abyssia. Why? It's a fire based nation for example. You will understand that why do need to have a system like that in&

[quote who="Tormy-" reply="39" id="2420386"] "You simply can't have a game like this and Not include them." -> Very true.[/quote] This is like saying: "You can't have a combat system without units retreating" (morale) "You can't have a combat system without wounds festering and things like that" (injures modeling) "You can't have a combat system without units not following your orders perfectly and automatically (because you aren't onmipresent and onmip