[quote who="Frogboy" reply="105" id="3093145"] This is something I have brought up too. But here's the thing: Do you WANT dwarves and lizards because you want to see different visuals? Or because you want races you relate to or because you want them to play differently? Don't say "all of the above" since that's a cop out. But what specifically are you looking for? The Empire of Yithril ARE elves. Even Tolkien hated using the term Elves. They were the Noldor a
Kantok
Allowing queue management within one production queue is the way to go.
Can I borrow a stick from someone? Beating dead horses is fun!
I really would like to see the GalCivII starbase system adapted to Elemental outposts. As long as they were balanced properly and costs increased as the power of the outposts grew you'd have a great & flexible system for expanding trade, military power projection, etc. It would be more to balance, but would be a great addition. The current outpost system for resources gathering makes a great foundation for just such an addition.
[quote who="MrDestyNova" reply="12" id="3092739"]And while we are on this topic, is there a way for trading to create roads to the outposts as well as between the player cities?[/quote] Research economics.
[quote who="Tasunke" reply="9" id="3092689"]I still think factions should have at least one piece of equipment that is stronger than all other equivalents Whether absurdly cheaper, a bit buffed, a bit higher initiative ... something. So that different Factions can have truly unique "unique units" Also, I feel the economies of factions should be able to behave differently ... maybe unique national wonders galore for certain
[quote who="seanw3" reply="70" id="3092365"] There is so much room in the Path system for improvement. Now that I think about it, I am a little worried that no new content was added in .86 to this part of the game. The endgame should be all about turning those basic Paths into proper classes. Trained units are far superior in the endgame. The balance should be by making the Paths more diverse and powerful. There should be at least 12 Paths branching off of those main three. [/quote]
[quote who="Neilo" reply="190" id="3092143"] At the expense of alienating every loyal SD customer, that without which, SD would not exist? I see your point though, it's a shame profitability is the new focus of SD.[/quote] I won't be alienated. You don't speak for every loyal SD customer. And it's a shame that a privately owned company wants to turn a profit? Really?
Even assuming they get the bugs worked out and you were forced to do things in the right order the spell still needs work.
It's not all caravans and it doesn't always happen after a trade treaty. It was a new game started in .86. They eventually went away, though I'm not sure when. It was at least a dozen turns because I checked every turn for that long and then gave up checking. I noticed at the end of the game that they were gone.
So I played a magic heavy game on normal with a caster sovereign. I lost two battles early where I was just over matched by wildlife. I lost one late game where I underestimated Kraxis and sent a second-tier hero and army after his capital. Otherwise I steam rolled with caster heroes surrounded by mage troops and 2 or 3 front line soldiers in chain armor with the flaming battleaxes. I ultimately won via the Spell of Making. A few things about the leadup to cast
[quote who="Winnihym" reply="4" id="3091684"]Yup, I agree that spells would be better on traits than items, but it may be that the engine can't do it that way. So far, the traits all seem to affect only stats, not combat abilities (ie, there's no stats that give a new ability to a unit, just affect the existing abilities). May be a limitation of the engine.[/quote] Most of the hero special abilities, like Crushing Blow, are trait driven.
I've routinely had non-aggression pacts, peace treaties, and alliance produce an expired message 1 turn after I signed them. For example, the turn after researching alliances I signed an alliance with the next three largest kingdoms only to receive the "Alliance with xxxx expired" message on the next turn. However, under the kingdom report screen it shows all three to still be my allies. The two images below are from the same turn in the same game. <p
[quote who="Alstein" reply="53" id="3091822"] Units should start out garrisoned in the city, unless the city's garrison is full. city garrisons should always be up to 9 units. [/quote] This is an option under gameplay options. I think it should probably default to auto garrison, rather than having the units pop out of the city on creation. Overall I voted good largely due to the reasons Brad already posted a few post back. </p
Sent it in to [email protected] too. Debug.err Crash.zip
A caravan suddenly showed up in my unit tree. It's selectable but I can't do anything with it. It continues on its way when I hit end turn. It stays in the unit tree from the time it shows up on.
If I fight a battle the action of clicking on an enemy and fighting the battle does not use up any movement for my army. If I start the battle with 2/3 movement, for example, I end the battle with 2/3 movement. However if I use auto resolve to fight the battle I lose 1 movement. If I have 2/3 movement prior to clicking to attack and then use auto resolve, rather than fighting the battle out, I only have 1/3 movement left even though my army has not moved.
Aside from very early game maul on a bear is irrelevant. Early game when you have three guys with spears or a level 2 hero with a club a bear SHOULD be dangerous.
I have access to the Steal Spirit spell. When I open the strategic spellbook and turn to the appropriate page it sitting there to be cast. When I turn to the last page in the spell book and then turn back to the page with Steal Spirit the spell is gone. Turning back to the first page and then back to the page with Steal Spirit causes the spell to return.
I think unlockable traits that add specific spells is the best way to go. Don't tie the spells items. Keep the staves as the ranged attack and have traits that allow you to customize your units with the set of spells you think best.
[quote who="Thoumsin" reply="66" id="3091654"]If the serial is a steam serial, there will be no problem at all... my concern was only about people who have pre-order ( and will pay ) on Stardock store... a redemption code will be needed from Stardock for redeem the game in the Steam client... will be these redemption code for free or for a fee ??? As for the 30% taken by Steam, it is not a Golden rule... it is a case by case... it is very possible that because soase have sold very
I've seen this as well.
Am I missing the screen that lets me see what treaties I have with each kingdom/empire? It's not in the Foreign Relations UI. If it's not given somewhere,it needs to be included. Edit: It may be good to include any active agreements in the tooltip that displays when you mouseover the faction power screen. Currently there aren't enough multi-turn agreements to ever make that tooltip cluttered.
I think there just needs to be a way to set army groups. If I make six individual units an army I can always select them with one click on any unit in the army or from some sort of army management UI. They stay as an army until I disband the army, at which point they go back to being individually controlled units. Armies should also be nameable, so we can have good fantasy names for each of our armies. As for the other point, I think if they implement
Debug.err Crash zip file I was selecting an army that was standing around the world map. The only other insight I can offer is that on the previous turn I gave this army orders to move a good distance across the world. I noticed that the path w