mqpiffle, I think a simpler solution to the far away outpost risk system might be better. Outpost upkeep could be relative to both how far the outpost is from your nearest town and how far away it is from the nearest ZoC that has a town inside it. This would mean that it is cheaper to have outposts inside your ZoC than out in the wilderness (logical), and it is cheaper to have outposts near a town than far from a town even if inside your borders (logical again). I think the road-under
LNQ
Philly0381, recently I've begun to wonder if there will be a larger pushback with regards to this high tech craze. I was born and raised with pretty much every single high tech gizmo that I could dream of. I am an IT expert now and know my way around technology perfectly. But in the past year or so, I've gotten rid of my smart phone (I have a very cheap Nokia phone that has some functions but not a lot), lost all interest on getting any new toys and generally just enjoy a more simplis
Well, when you look at history, I don't know how strongly all our most important values were ever collectively derived from human dignity. It's never really been a choice. And that can be either viewed as a blessing in the olden times or a cause for the problems of free market today.
I wouldn't be surprised if untrackable / harder to track consumer technology would be the next step in this field. There's definitely a market for it.
I don't like the caravan idea either. In GalCiv the world wasn't nearly as hostile as here, so the freighter system was quite alright. I still didn't like it, but it was ok. Here, it would be tedious. I wouldn't mind having a road requirement, or some kind of a connectivity system.
That's the thing; if someone would now post in an old thread in one of the dead sub-forums, there's a high risk that it will go mostly unnoticed because the misc forums are active and cause any single posts to drop from the recent posts list pretty quickly. I know it's not too serious of an issue. I just wanted to help improve the forum experience.
The thing is that it doesn't help that I find the posts, when others don't. I don't want to converse with myself. [e digicons]:digichet:[/e]
Well, to me you're a representative of Stardock. Probably the way things work in the GUI side of SD is different to the games side, so there's two kinds of forums conflicting here. The atmosphere feels more professional at the games side, and less communal. And I kind of like it that way. Oh well. I still hope the last post thing gets fixed if any of you have time. It should be pretty quick and I don't think a lot of people really use the current system. There are
Hey, I just wanted to let you guys know about an issue that's pretty annoying, got some backing and then got shot down by a moderator basically saying "I don't care, lol". Forgive me to be irritated. I never said these forums are bad, I like it here a lot. How did this discussion even get there?
Screw you too.
So you're saying that you access the forums almost always via the way that I suggest the last post system would work , but still you say that maybe the way it works now is as intended and shouldn't be changed?
:( It doesn't make sense to be a feature. Only on forums such as dev journal or news, where only moderators post it can be of use. But when we have user created posts, it makes more sense to see when the last reply has been written on the forums. The Stardock forums are the only forums I've seen where the Last Post Info works like this. Everywhere else it shows the time and date of the last reply and which topic it was written on. [e digicons]:pout:[/e]
Hi, This problem has been irritating me for ages, and it should be really quick to fix. The last post info from any forum incorrectly displays the information about tha *last created thread*, not the latest post in that sub forum. So if someone makes a thread that no one replies to, but conversation runs thick in earlier threads, the Last Post Info box still displays that age old thread with no replies and it looks like there's no activity inside that forum. It's really unhelp
Bringing any dead champion back to life could require a sizeable offering. Enough materials / gold / population that making the sacrifice really stings. So much that if your kingdom is already on the ropes, there's no way that you could bring champions back, so they are essentially "dead for good". But if you have a strong enough kingdom, your champions are essentially immortal.
What about champions that hate each other, so that if some champion is allied to you, some other champions will refuse to join you.
In conquest of the new world (1996 pc game), you got points for being the first to discover new rivers and such. It was a lot of fun. I would be happy if Elemental had something like that.
I don't think the GBOR is dated at all. It is fine as it is, but I guess there are some things on DLC that could be added. One thing I might want to add is related to inconvenience of downloaded songs from Singstar (PS3): "Gamers should have the right to access and re-activate previously purchased downloadable content with ease." Also, a more general one related to DLC: "Gamers who buy a product advertised as a full game should receive a full game experience withou
[quote who="scifi1950" reply="31" id="3026212"] Forget MOM, I want this game! [/quote] http://playthisthing.com/fatherhood Go wild. [e digicons]:digichet:[/e]
I will put my Elemental lore knowledge to the test, but if I remember correctly, pre-cataclysm mana wasn't confined into the elemental crystals but flowed freely. What Frogboy meant, I guess, is that in the wild lands the mana flows somewhat more freely than in the rest of the world. The guardian/boss of each wild land defend the mana source whatever it takes, trying to hold on to the pre-cataclysm days. I could be wrong though. I was kind of hoping that there could be som
When you get a good starting position, it's fun to see how fast you can overrun the world. Also, when I get a very good starting position I try to not load as much as when I get a sub-optimal one.
Vaul, you're at fault here when you personally ask for the CEO to reply to your specific post. You're elevating yourself above the rest of the community, saying that your question deserves an answer more than others. Imagine if every one of us bumped our questions asking for a reply to whatever we want to know about FE. These forums would be a mess. To top it off, you didn't even accept a fellow forum member telling you what the answer is, you said that only an answer from
jpmcconnell, you don't need to calculate the movements of each threat. Just like Heavenfall said, you mark the squares that a monster can reach in the next turn as inaccessible; that's it. Just like a human player does, you actually CAN just find the shortest/least dangerous path assuming that the threats all stay in the same place. Each turn you re-calculate based on the new positions of the monsters. That's the way I do it when I play the game, so I think that's sufficient f
Here's an idea that would help the issue a little bit: make the settler unit a decent defensive unit that cannot attack or be grouped with anything else. Kind of like the mobile outposts in RTS games (command & conquer etc). Since a settler founds a whole town, it makes pretty good sense for it to have enough firepower to fight off a few bandits or the occasional beast, but not anything stronger like dragons or skags. It also makes sense for the settlers to not be able to pair up with
To me those ideas sound pretty weird and gimmicky. You shouldn't ever consider the saving/loading issue when creating AI. That's not part of the gameplay, that's just human cheating in the game. If winning / losing the game rests on whether or not your settler gets attacked by sheer chance, then that's a gameplay issue, not an AI one. Bottom line is, you should be able to move the settler to where you want to create your next city with relative ease after you h
I don't get why pioneer pathfinding is that CPU extensive either. Shouldn't it be quite simple to mark tiles that have a threat as no-go and then do a simple adjacency matrix power calculation weighted with movement costs for the shortest path without threats? In general you shouldn't move settlers by themselves that many tiles into the wild, so the matrices shouldn't grow that big before you need to have an escort and thus solving the problem. When I play Civ, I don&#