I would like elements of this to be taken seriously, even if we don't get something as complicated. Imagine having to make choices that would lead to two otherwise identical factions fighting in very different magical ways. One with area spells with buffs and the other with single target spells with long duration (as an example). Take life spells, group buffs/army healing with short 1-3 turn duration vs the other approach of boosting a hero with powerful "vengence", "invulnerable" spells with
Dr Franknfurter
Just thinking... I'd love to craft " cursed " onto an item. An invisible attribute that allows you to choose another say 4 slots that only apply to the item if it transfers ownership. They'd be invisible and have an activation. or passive feature. Imagine looting the one ring, equip it and get 'cursed' and 'passive wraith transformation'. And now you have to decide, it gives +++atack, ++health, ++def etc but you have to gamble with it... you already know that after 'n' turns it
I liked the concepts in FfH2, including the armageddon counter, worldspells and traits. I'm sure everything could be implimented and balanced better in elemental though. Certain worldspells were really really annoying and unbalancing if you played the wrong race. Pick Scions and struggle with population and lose it against a few vampire worldspells that give -2 pop per city, vampires were a little OP with vampire units eating population for exp, very cool mechanic and fun, nice to inclu
How about a 'specialist bonus' given to an empire that has the same (large) building in each city? therefore if you have a small empire , 3 cities with lots of buildings they would get an empire wide bonus to a few areas while an empire with 50 small or different cities all with only a farm in common would get empire wide farming bonuses but no empire wide research bonus. If the large empire used farming cities to support the rest, and had the rest with alchem
diplomacy as a last expansion should be about filling in the missing features. Yes I know it's a stretch to tie supercapitals to diplomacy. I just find late games unbearably dull in sins. I like the first few mins, the first starbase, the first big fight... which is all fun, but after a while it starts to get tedius... your unique capitals turn into swarms of capitals that swamp enemy planets or go pop against equally large fleets. I'm just wondering if there's any way the idea for su
I am curious as to when or if the caps on bonuses will be removed or increased... or be related to techs (specific 'understanding type techs' or your race relations imposing the caps or current diplomacy research level (+1 to cap for each diplomacy tech). At the moment I think res donation bonus has a cap of 1 (which is tiny). Mission bonus is for the last mission, not cumilative missions (which it should be, up to a high cap of +/- 20, to potentially negate the team bonus). The negat
I wasn't planning on supercapitals being overpowered and being able to take out other capitals instantly. Still lose when outnumbered, but improve the survival time (to stop them going pop at the start of a battle) because they would be more of a focus fire target. I doubt it'd be hard to think of a way to make them fit in diplomacy: Make them carry a Liason from another empire with a 25% cut in (envoy) diplomatic ties if lost, say going from 130% with pacts to 110% and losing *al
I'm just curious, capital ships are the reason I play sins really. I wondered if adding super capitals into vanilla diplomacy is an option. I'd really love to be able to upgrade 1 lv10 cap to a lv1 supercap with one of the later fleet capacity researches. Imagine if it lost an ability and gained a new, overpowered one and gained a 50-100% health and stats increase. Or better yet retained it's old abilities and gained a new ability and new lv6 ability. You could keep the same models, j
I think that's a very interesting look at things. I have to say I did enjoy Homm and sins of a solar empire, but fighting stacks of 1000 dragons is insane and the ability micromanagement in sins seems to be turning on and off autocast, which is almost but not quite like setting the behaviour or gambits. (micro option for automation, to set gambits for ability use or actions... in sins it'd be for retreat at low health for delicate ships, to adjust highest threat targets...something to make it
[quote who="Scoutdog" reply="1" id="2468400"]Looking better...... one small nitpick though: ugliness should decrease the liklihood that somebody will want to marry the soverign in the first place, not how often (s)he will procreate.[/quote] maybe both... afterall there would be less activity in general... just a thought
that does sound quite nice. I like the attribute trade offs and the % benefits. Not sure about the traits... more of them and more magic related ones. I also liked master of magic's traits that required other picks to be enabled. Perhaps each trait could have a stat requirement?
I'd like some to be gameplay changing. Maybe some that use all but 1 or 2 points to choose. Or had massive penalties. Like playing master of magic with no magic. Necromancy -15 points to start with (more than you have to spend). So to pick it you have to give up all the good traits and pick 5 bad ones, like repulsive... it could be as unbalancing as you like in the end game if it made you relatively weak against rushes at the start. Or it could be free but cause war w
I'm a biologist, I'd had a long day and it seems I wrote alot about living buildings... I hadn't realised till just now that all my suggestions seem to be alive. But I suppose that's the point. Anything else would be a purely physical feat. A library or tower or bridge... unless it was alive why would it need your essence to build? But just because it's alive it doesn't mean it can't be used quite simply to improve your food/income/production/research/weapons whatever... but it needs a story.
(Tiny Wall of Text Tm ) I like the Orcanth thread for ideas, but I was thinking of the mechanics of implementation. I like the idea of wonders that may or may not require essence, or some other cap or limit. I also like set building design pieces that require essence. To make an impenetrable wall you add 10 segments each 1/10 of a mountain high to bridge a gap between mountains. Ditto with the tower. What I'm wondering at the moment is: Should you build these wonder
I just wondered if anyone at stardock had seen googlewave? I know it's only in a preview form right now, but since you can make your own version when it's out, any thoughts of using it, or features of it for the forums? I'm playing around on the preview/beta but I think it'd work well if it was used in part for the forums. You'd be able to see people typing and have instant conversations about a topic, or use it for developers conversations and post the results as a new wave for us to
I suppose without any fiddly software you could manually set it. When you are about to leave your computer for a while click an "idle-automate" or "away-automate" button in impulse and let it do stuff for you. I wouldn't want it to be automatic as I sometimes use mobile internet connections and there's a useage limit. To be honest it's not a problem with a high speed connection but if your connection is slow or the demo is in GBs, like demigod or higher, then I wouldn't mind the computer
How many years before that actually happens? or better yet your computer playing on the stock market with loose change, (or your savings) and saving up to buy you a game it thinks you'll like? I can see preload prediction working: If you've got a TB free it'll download every game on your 'games you may also like' list when the network's quiet. Then give you subtle reminders that you haven't bought the game yet but should. Things like: Computer: "did you know: With your computer you coul
I'm just wondering if these should be done as: initial traits at setup, with balanced positive and negative like +1 attack in biome, -1 outside... +speed inside -speed outside, +production -production etc. or should be pure positive (magic or essence to enhance troops/things in selected biome) or pure negative for opponents in selected biome you control (you still wouldn't want to follow them into their fores
I think the problem is we haven't seen all the planned options for essence and there have been other building discussions. Still I'd like to know if people think it's: good , bad? and why. (Like... underpowered, overpowered, few uses, too many uses...) I'd like the idea of a builder sov having wonder-like unique buildings while goin
[quote who="Ratya48" reply="5" id="2454165"]What if in addition to mountain towns you could have underground cities? How cool would that be? Of course I have no idea how you implement such a system and it probably wouldn't be worth the myriad difficulties that arise. But it would be awesome.[/quote] I think you could do it in a simple way by having invisible buildings, just as markings on the ground or small holes as entrances - fairly indestructable but providing no impedence to a
It's definately a nice idea to me... although I think the more details worked out or suggested, the better. Especially since however nice a feature, it would require a little interface work and some artwork. Not sure if the devs like it, or enough for that. (since without the art it'd look a little daunting as a list of conditional statements or choices). I'm not sure how else to do it though... I suppose the bare bones could be a divination spell for minor and major critical events and
Also, maybe you could choose your deck at the start Choose Fire only and you have 10 fire mana, you can pull off a lv 1 spell, have 100 mana and you can safely pull off a huge spell lv 10, or risk something very large... not sure how the court cards would work, or where and how special cards should come into things. I suppose it would make more sense if certain aspects of divination required certain mana types... trying to divine the weather with only death mana wouldn't make
Any other ideas for how to work it and costs? I can almost see how AIAndy's version would work. But it feels a little hard to pick up. I do like the idea of a simple interface with elemental choices and the cards having life, death etc. built in, perhaps that would allow different and interesting twists in what you could divine. But it would need clear descriptions alongside each choice. Maybe if the choices you made were of obvious cards for target and realm... everything already mentioned.
I suppose the only difference is what you call it, wild magic/divination. Maybe wild magic for creating events, divination only when you're finding out, or alteration for changing... they're just names... i still like the tarot interface idea. And the mega events being created or changed or anticipated, any or all.
With the number of variations of these spells... at least 4 headings: divination, target, social area target, positive/negative... perhaps it would need a special interface. Otherwise even with just 2 targets, 4 areas and 2 outcomes you'd have a list of 16 spells. (if you had 5+ targets (self, ally, enemy, all, none) N areas (economic, military, weather, events, wild/random, romance...) and say 5+ outcomes (divine, improve, harm, remove fortune, change fortune, wild/random) you'd have a list