[quote who="Raven X" reply="2" id="2585800"] Quoting Aractain, reply 1So to sumarise, Online Delivered Games will kill PC Gaming. I can't think of anything that would really change in the grand scheme of things. I mean sure businesses would stop but then thats what happens as technology moves on. I've seen people say that the internet is responsible for the destruction of media and that we should limit the use of the internet to protect it. I say why does the
vieuxchat
[quote]The technology companys will see their server markets expand, steam and stardock would probably move to the new onlive delivery service and the fanbois would still claim superiority of thier favoured brand like little sheep. Gamestop will burn in hell. Game developers will still create awesome or crap games depending entirely on what motivates them and fools will still play the crap ones. I will still play the good ones. Females are still attractive and the French are still
[quote]You encounter a young, armed man in the wilderness. As he approaches, you can see that he is panicked. "Madam, please help me! My family and I were living in a cave yonder when a colony of giant rats beset upon us in the night! Please assist me in rescuing them and you will have my fealty[/quote] Good idea ! It fits more in the Elemental Lore. And there's a glitch in the screenshot : Engeneering text says that "Allow the construction of workshops ..." But
Well, it would be a good idea, but what I'm talking about is some mechanics that you couldn't really avoid. When you get really powerful, you can't micro everything. you couldn't say "I need a workshop here". You just ask your citizens that you need warfare infrastructures. But if they think that they need a new farm instead of a workshop then be it, and you'll have to deal with that. More power, but less control. Maybe the most powerful spells like raise volcano could get your people angry a
Will the scripting system allow us to re-name in game the places ? I would love to be able to add name to places where 10 000+ men did fight in a huge battle. Or rename forest if it has been burned, etc...
And why not some drawbacks to overpowering ? In late game, with the rise of nobility you start losing grip on some sectors of your kigdom. You're more powerful but you lose step by step control of it. The late game would still be challenging because you can't have what you exactly need. Your empire could get some independance.
It reminds me of the rule from Sid Meier : "Simple systems that interact in interesting ways" A bit of theory : If we have a game with simple rules, then the game can only be deep if thoses rules allows for different things. A a rule R can only let you do 1 thing and Rule S let you do 1 thing too, then you can only do 2 things with those 2 rules. But add synergies, and you get 3 actions with 2 rules (R, S and R+S) Example ? Workshops let you build siege weapons. Forges
[quote who="RisingLegend" reply="169" id="2584222"] I want simplicity, yet depth. As I ramble, this is what I really want. This is what dwarf fortress lacks. It has complexity and depth. If we get to a place where things are simple, yet there is great depth then this game will be great. Its extremely hard for simplicity and depth to coexist. What we can agree on is that we want depth in this game. As soon as you focus on making the game "simple enough" you ar
EDIT: Pigeons *sigh*
The problem with caravans is that if they become so dramatically important, then we need ways to defend them. And choosing WHERE they are built would be an absolute must-have feature.
At the moment you can train "veteran" units or "elite" units that get just more hp. I also think they should get more "skill slots". For instance a barely trained peasant has no skill, a regular unit has 1 skill, a veteran 2 skills and an elite 3 skills. And if some skills need 1 or 2 prerequisite, then they automatically are reserved for veteran or elite units.
Yep it's a bug. Each game I play, I research civilization first to be able to build farms on turn 4 (or 5, I don't remember), and I always can build them the turn I get the tech.
And you can always ask on the forums. We always answer as fast as we can :) The community here is really good.
[quote who="wickedmurph" reply="42" id="2579730"]I'm a little curious about why all the rock/paper/scissors bashing is going on here? It's obvious that the game is going to be considerably more complex than: infantry better than archers better than cavalry better than infantry. But some weapons and armor DO have advantages in some situations. They MUST, or why build anything except the cheap knives and leather armor? Managing trade-offs is what makes games
How will be handled perishable resources ? A max/turn ? (I mean you have for instance 10 food. Each turn you can only use 10 food because any amount over that number would be lost) What about caravans killed ? Does it only lessens the resources income ? EDIT: and I hope there will be bear cavalry instead of space pony :P
The real question is : what will be the use of caravans ? What would happen to a city whose caravan has been destroyed ? Does it have still access to "global" resources ? City A has iron, City B has horses. There's no caravans between them (maybe it has been destroyed, or there's no road). What are the consequences ?
[quote who="imbiginjapan" reply="20" id="2579263"]Frogboy, you said that you want to allow as many damage types/resistances as available to be stacked on an item but I don't care for that and hopefully I can explain my case a bit. Some will likely disagree with me there but I don't want to have to sort through 7 different modifiers when I'm being attacked to figure out what this new weapon that the enemy is fielding will do, and then again to figure out if I can hurt
[quote who="Greyclouds40" reply="12" id="2578969"]I like the combat speed modifier concept! Makes it so that there is a hierarchy of weapons: daggers attack faster than axes; axes attack faster than bastard swords; bastard swords attack faster than great swords, etc. That is a very good idea, and I think it would balance out weapons in terms of damage vs speed. Like, a melee unit gets a 2handed spear with a -5 speed modifier and a 2 tile range. He faces a dagger wielding melee unit
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="64" id="2578389"] Now are we screwed like in civ 4 : "Need horses ? Too bad ! You can just build warriors and archers" ? Not quite. In Civ IV, they had the concept of strategic resources that you either had or you didn't. What we are discussing here are resources that go into a pool. You don't control your own horses? Then you'll need to buy some. The key difference being that there isn't that much abstraction here. If yo
@Rising Legend. And what about clever implementation like in FFH ? It's not a war of "realism/gameplay". It's about what a player can do. Some options should always be available, even in a less efficient way to player. What I'd liek is that every resource could have a rarity level, and that with a low level of rarity can be find everywhere with some "work".No iron mine ? You can stil get some in your city if you build some unit that will find some for you. Or ma
" Yes I intend to test under Beta 2" -vieuxchat
No, nothing like that : your cities need to be at level 4 if I remember right.
@frogboy: oh ! ok :) I didn't know that (maybe you said it in the video, but my english skills aren't high enough to completly understand spoken english) One other thing I hope that will be enhanced : the look of rivers. At the moment they just seem like some thing thrown upon the map, not blending with it.
An on/off switch in "unfun" because you get ripped of from options. And I always hate when I have less options to get with. If I need some cavalry for my units, even a few I want to be able to get some. And if a "horse resource" is the only way, then that's too bad. What I mean is that we need options to get things done. A horse resource shouldn't be the only way to get cavalry. And even some bear cavalry isn't acceptable, because the problem is still the same. Like tiavals said, in F
Can't wait :( A little thing I don't like : the "un-smoothness" of the zoom/unzoom. Things I like : it remembers me the time when I mapped for starcraft. All those triggers to create a story ... And last but not least : the transition with the cloth map. It's just excellent. The more I play the game, I more I say to myself that I will probably play the game in "only cloth-map" for some time. I find it to be more informative than with flashy graphics (even if I like the