[quote]graphical glitches like this.[/quote] The game really is in black and white!
mqpiffle
I just bought the ATI 6770 for about $135us and it runs Skyrim smooth as silk on ultra, and all my TBS games just fine.
[quote]Lots of UI stuff is not in still We have a victory screen still to go in that’s a pretty big deal. There’s a bunch of other stuff that will go in but by all means, if you have a UI request, post.[/quote] Sure: Make the UI easily moddable.
[quote who="TorinReborn" reply="35" id="3057566"]I enjoy building stuff (if it is done well), and have done so manually in every turn based game. Because of that your No3 I don't agree with. Having options to automatize building stuff is good, but we should be able to do everything manually if we so feel even if we have 100 cities (and that doing so can give a slight edge).[/quote] I agree...just having the city "run itself" because it might be inconvenient to the player is a high
Confetti. Lots of confetti.
One thing I notice in the screenshots of the generated maps are that all of the coastlines are cliffs...I don't see any 'beach' coastlines. It kinda makes the landmass look a little like they're floating. Maybe the map generator could incorporate both somehow?
As for the quest conundrum, how about a fairly typical rpg quest log, which when you select a quest that you've started it centers the current destination on the map.
SD, this looks amazing. The faction differentiation and other game elements remind me of Alpha Centauri. Bravo if it plays that way as well.
[quote who="id_est" reply="19" id="3054692"]Ok Stardock, you do the incredibly hard thing - divide attributes and combat stats! But, you have another, more dangerous mission - show us dependence of the stats of attributes. Come on guys, you have no ui designer at all? Imagine that you see this game for the first time, and you need to answer the question: what does each attribute do? If Strength affects the Attack, then why Attack stat is under Dexterity? Why is the history window is in the mi
Everything looks great! I'm especially liking the look of that tactical scene. Better than 'the brown' we've been getting.
Yes, yes. And pretty much the general consensus here. Good gameplay is what I want from a game, yet pushing the envelope with the technologies available help to enhance the gameplay experience, as well as to continue technological advancement, would absolutely be an added incentive to purchase it.
This news leaves me thunderstruck.
Great work Brad. Me and my significant other were just talking about solar-powering the next farm earlier today, and also the possible harnessing of potential wind energy as well.
Nice feature to add.
I dig the icons. I will second that the rivers could some major tweaking. Looks like they begin and end in random locations, instead of being at least semi-realistic, ie start in mountains or hills, end at large body of water; not to mention their graphic quality.
Raise/lower land is a great concept it just needs to be balanced in terms of spell difficulty and mana cost. No need to remove it.
irony is iron-y
Potential buyers who know WoM was a 4 and hear that FE is a 9 will say "Hey, SD turned that ship around! Now I'll buy the game, AND tell all my friends!!" Potential buyers who have not heard of WoM and hear that FE is a 9 who then research SD and find out that WoM was a 4 WILL NOT say "Oh my, the first game in the series was mediocre, so I'm not going to buy the second one which is great!" Why would SD want to spend all their time, effort, money, etc rebranding a perfe
How about something like The Elder Scrolls series. Same world and lore, different 'feel' and rules. Some of the same stuff, some new and innovative ideas. Elemental 2: Fallen Enchantress.
[quote who="Alstein" reply="17" id="3048969"]Whether a champion is defeated, captured, or killed should be RNG, maybe with modifiers based on promotions (bloodlust might mean they are more likely to kill champs instead of capture or defeat)[/quote] Good idea here. Perhaps "Normal units" cannot kill champions, under any circumstances. They can only drive them away. Champions can gain skills that would allow them to potentially capture (Kidnapper) or kill (Bloodlus
I agree with Murteas. Champions should be few and far between, which seems to be the case as the game stands at the moment. And yes, a high level champion may very well be able to take out a powerful army (and a lower level champion a smaller army) - or at least decimate it - before slinking back to the fortress, badly beaten and broken, needing time to recuperate, but somewhat martyred in return for a job well done.
You already have the masses rattling their cages in fear, Frogboy. That must mean you're doing something right! I say, give me the best you've got!
I think trading with resources would be simple and useful, if not necessary. IE: I need metal and I have plenty of gold. My ally needs gold and has an abundance of metal. We trade one for the other. Why is this so difficult or unsavory?
[quote who="Das123" reply="5" id="3046436"]With regards the video, will there be any zones of control on the Tactical Battle map to stop the horsemen breaking past so easily? It appears they could just waltz past without an issue. Having at least a movement/initiative penalty would be good to force players to play formations. Even better would be adjacency bonuses etc.[/quote] The way I see it, mounted units should have an advantage on the turn they plow into a fray (perhaps via a 
[quote who="Vaul_Darkhour" reply="39" id="3046200"]One thing I don't understand is how you can develop and reach conclusions about the AI before all the AI is actually working and hooked up (AITraits)?[/quote] Agreed. This seems like it might be an important step in the process.