[quote who="Goontrooper" reply="35" id="2989150"] Quoting Alstein, reply 34 Quoting Frogboy, reply 27I was easily able to smack down the AI. For some reason, the AI units being sent home are not being put into the city, they're outside the city so their sovereigns can't defend. Also, in tactical battle, the AI unit isn't using spells. This has been a problem ever since you changed the magic system in
[quote who="XATHOS" reply="78" id="2987041"]Three things: 1. Will there be LAN? That is required for me to be interested in the game. It's a deal breaker, for me, as I know too many games are going away from it and relying on crap like Steam. You want the game to be a classic? Don't deny what made PC multiplayer gaming great to begin with. 2. Will there be a simultaneous turns option (ala CIV)? <br
[quote who="seanw3" reply="274" id="2986179"]I will play on maps that I made. They are balanced and allow for a variety of strategies, if you have the will to power to use them. I agree that random map users will not be as lucky and I hope they fix that for you people. [/quote] Personally I perfer a bit od randomness from the random map generator with the abillity to put player/Dev made maps into the roster to be randomly picked as well.
[quote who="larienna" reply="57" id="2984133"]People will not play a multiplayer game that takes 50 hours to play. Especially considering there is only 24 hours in a day. So if you can manage to create a game mode where a game last between 2-3 hours, people will play. It worked well with Civilisation revolution because a game last in average 5 hours in single player. There was even lightning mode that made the game progress faster. [/quote] I'm sorry but ther
[quote who="Tridus" reply="19" id="2982647"] quoting post Multiplayer Since I don’t want that dangling out there, multiplayer matters to me personally but we know the hard statistics on the % of people who play turn-based strategy games MP (and I mean industry wide). The word tiny comes to mind. That said, Elemental will be receiving multiplayer love anyway. By "Elemental" do you mean FE or WoM? And by "love" do you me
[quote who="Campaigner" reply="30" id="2984037"] But Line of Fire, wasn't that done in Age of Wonders ? [/quote] Yes it was and done well I might at.
[quote who="Das123" reply="12" id="2982154"]No, War of Magic is playable in the opposite way Dwarf Fortress is. Dwarf Fortress is a fully engaging game with an unbelievable map generator where lots of different aspects lead to different games every time you play it - but it just looks like crap until you get used to it. On the other hand, E-WoM is not engaging, has a very shallow random map generator, and no matter what the world generates it plays the same way every sin
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="16" id="2981605"] Quoting mastroego, reply 15 Quoting Frogboy, reply 13 The difference, of course, was back then, no one had high expectations so GalCiv I's relative...crumminess didn't create the kind of nerd rage we have today (though with the difference being that GalCiv I's AI was a lot better). Of course, let's keep the denial mode and blame the "raging nerds" who are actually "nerds"
[quote who="Sir_Linque" reply="19" id="2981379"]Tridus, WoM is a mess. You shouldn't use it to compare FE and AoW. That's what I was trying to say. FE is being developed completely differently compared to WoM. They don't compare. [/quote] People are going to compare the two games no matter what anyone says, as they should. I keep hearing that FE is completely different than WOM but if both are TBS games set on the same world and Sandbox then they can't
Stardock Forums
[quote who="SumoX" reply="4" id="2981463"]I agree with hearing more about the strategic layer, as I never really got into TBS for the combat. And I really would like to hear more about WoM 1.4- perhaps I'm the only one, but I really like the game (AI issues and some graphical bugs aside). I played for nearly 5 hours today and had a damn good time. I just wish the AI generally put up a better fight...though I did manage to have an army or two wiped out by the AI at the same time
[quote who="seanw3" reply="9" id="2981075"]Don't lie Tridus. AoW sieges were good, but the AI couldn't use walls correctly. They come out and are easily tricked. I remember I was halfway done building my Trojanic Horse when they just came out to fight me. AoW is one of the greats, but it has very different core rules to work with. And the AI for this game has much more complexity potential. That is kind of Frog's selling point as a person. That and the B
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="269" id="2981117"]The real problem is there's 10 000 people who are waiting for FE, and 10 000 opinions on what they should focus on developing. All anybody can do is make their case and hope. [/quote] I have an anwser to this delima. Just say that my opinion is the only one that count and everything will be right as rain. :)
[quote who="jpmcconnell" reply="3" id="2981046"]True, all of this depends on the AI being able to handle it. But in all honesty, if you just keep tactical combat as basic as it is now in WoM whats the point of having it anyway? Two armies in random configurations march at each other, wail away for a few turns, outcome is primarily determined by armor and attach ratings. Why not just autocalc? @Goontrooper Completely agree on all those things, LoS, Better terrain, Siege w
[quote who="seanw3" reply="2" id="2981039"]All these things seem to be hard to get the AI to do. If we could absolutely know that the AI is not going to be able to use most of these features for a few months after launch, would you still want them? Keep in mind that multiplayer will not have tac battles. [/quote] Hold on. Is that official that MP will not have TC? If that is the casre then there is no point in playing MP.
Stardock Forums
You all should not criticize the policies of his Highness the Grand Wizard or you will be called a racist by his Demon liberal horde and cast into the 666 layer of the Abyss to rot for eternity.
[quote who="tanafres" reply="260" id="2980303"] Quoting stevelamperti, reply 259 Speaking from a make the game interesting point of view, I quite like the idea of specializing in different elements. For example, as in a previous post, you've been researching fire magic, have a couple of heroes who specialize and then you get a few air shards. Great! This will make you have to adapt to the conditions of the world. The player will have to
[quote who="Gwenio1" reply="24" id="2980221"] Quoting seanw3, reply 20 Great news Magog! You are the only thread the devs read this week and they have already added your request. Its called the Cartographer's Table and you can find it with the other editors. Lucky The editor for Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic allows for far greater control, allowing for significantly better maps. +1 for a decent map
The game is playable but the graphics are bland. The game play has many issues which makes it some what boring to play escpecially when combined with the graphics. The game keep having potential but never amounting to this potential. I would recommend not getting it and wait for FE.
I would like to see multiple levels like the Underground/Shadow levels in AOW:SM except with the ability to adjust the realm to what you want with any bonuses and penalties for that realm. For example if I have the D&D Forgotten Realms and I wanted to attach to it the Plane of water/Fire/Earth/Air etc then I could with adjusted penalties and such for traveling the realm. I also want to see all sorts of movement abilities/spells for units and heroes : Walking (for ground move
[quote who="seanw3" reply="13" id="2979730"]All this talk of facing reminds me of my board game Lionheart. Anyone play that? If the battles could be as good as that, I think we would all be happy. [/quote]I Actully it reminds me of pen & paper Dungeon and Dragons 3.5 combat system that we play. Loved that combat system
I didn't agree with OP. This is suppose to be represent simultaneous combat. Unless there is a First Strike ability then when a unit attaks another the one being attack should be able to fight back
[quote who="seanw3" reply="9" id="2978075"]I think SP AI is far superior to MP people. The fact is that at my level of strategic excellence, humans are as predictable as a good AI, if not more so. Humans have a habit of needing food and sleep. They have this concept called time and they seem to think its a precious commodity. AI's will play a game to the bitter end with honor and dignity while humans often crash to the desktop after the first battle doesn't go their way. Humans refuse
[quote who="Black-Knight" reply="8" id="2978049"]No idea if FE multiplayer will force us to just auto resolve all combats. In Age of Wonders MP is autoresolve only when player meets player, which still makes for a fantastic strategic\tactical game, where you still get to deal with the (not so) dumb AI during battles, while you have to compete with real people on the empire management and also when dealing with the many strategic and magic options that the world map offers. In fact being AOW m
[quote who="LightofAbraxas" reply="7" id="2978022"] Quoting Emperor_Nero, reply 6 I just want to know what to expect if it does happen. I will probably kick an orphan. Beyond that, it's hard to tell. [/quote] Well orphans do tend to turn into demons, psycos, possessed or the children of Satan, Baal (insert favorite evil bad guy supernatueral dude here) according to Hollywood. So kicking one may not be the b
Can I create my own races/empires like in Galciv 2?
You're about to visit an external site:
Sign up here to get the latest news, updates, and special offers delivered directly to your inbox.
