mqpiffle

On a side note, Heal should also scale by level. Maybe +1 per.

They may have mods disabled until release. Stardock usually does this. If you want to mod you may have to mod the core files directly.

This "feature" is still existant? Really?

The current system seems really clunky and convoluted to me. I would prefer: ITEMS are used to CRAFT SPELLS/SCROLLS (ie MAGIC) is used to ENCHANT or ENHANCE. It would be nice if the base items used in crafting also determined what kind and the maximum power of enchantments that can be used on a particular item.

I thought Henri was suggesting that each victory with a particular sov would then unlock a new power for that sov. Maybe I read his initial post incorrectly. I'm not a fan of what Frogboy was suggesting.

I like this idea. This incentivizes players to play and finish games with just a little 'gift' of in-game content.

Civ does it right, and now SD has some Civ artists on the staff...I don't understand why it is such a big deal to do it the right way.

How about a one-time favor which turns all Thralls back into useful Logistics.

[deleted]

[quote]But co e in, suggesting that here's some huge list of issues from WOM that are present in SK is ridiculous. [/quote] Just because you can't see them or refuse to see them doesn't mean they're not there, nor does it mean they haven't been reported before. I don't doubt that you see the game on a completely different level than we do, but imo it's bad form to be so utterly dismissive of your paying customers who are emotionally invested in your p

I really like Stardock games and the way Brad and crew treat the customers, but the bugs that have been around for 5+ years just make the company seem lazy and ignorant in many respects. If some of these silly bugs were fixed I would easily spend many more hours on these games, because the game design is really solid. Last night as I played through Beta 2 I was truly frustrated at the bugs that plagued the game (I know it's a beta, but these bugs have been around forever) and had to

[quote]Unit moves displayed incorrectly. 1. The Group has 0/3 moves remaining. 2. Naphaz is reduced to 0/4 (not 1/4 as you may expect) 3. Other units in group are displayed as 3/3 but actually have 0/3 and are unable to leave the group.[/quote] These movement issues have been around since WoM. It's unacceptable that they still exist.

[quote]Rounds. That is, a general timer that goes off after 20 time slices (an initiative of 20 would be the same as getting 1 turn per round) so that we can tie some things to an agreed upon timer.[/quote] This. I also think spells should have their casting time in 'ticks' rather than 'rounds.'

Ogres should have a special head-butt attack, when they can grab their foe, pick em up, n give em a good ol coconut crunch. For damage and stun, of course.

[quote]mqpiffle - I agree that swarming isn't mentioned in any of the damage tooltips. I think Frogboy would argue that as you see the other units move you know that *something* is going on. Though I think what many people assume is that all surrounding units are getting a free attack in.[/quote] I understand your point, but the way I often like to make a point is to be over-exuberant about it to the extreme. I actually don't mind the swarm mechanic. I just don&#

[quote]In the 'on tactical battles' thread, mqpiffle mentioned the game Titan. I've never heard of it before today. But here are the rules from the PDF concerning terrain effects (for those who are curious but don't have the time to go hunting for it):[/quote] [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]

Good call, Frogboy! Simple and elegant mechanics which keep the game strategically and tactically sound. Just enough interesting choices to make without feeling overwhelming. The tactical combat is almost better because there is no movement involved.

[quote]Concept of having environment overall effects (desert vs. ice vs. shadow)[/quote] Have you ever played the old board game Titan ? I would suggest doing a lot of research into this game, and use their tactical battle system as inspiration for how different battlefields (in diverse biomes) can play out.

[quote] Re Communicating it to the player: This is, by far, the most common issue that people ignore when suggesting new game mechanics. If something can't be communicated to the player then it becomes frustrating. [/quote] Then how do you explain the swarm mechanic? It is absolutely NOT transparent; it is passive without any sort of iconic indicator or a statistical representation in the unit details; there is no indication anywh

Is this archived anywhere? Youtube?

Level caps are unfun and archaic. I for one won't bother with this game if the devs are going to implement something that lazy and unimaginative.

If that's your "good recipe for a sequel", then Civ IV and Civ III were poor sequels, because they completely changed the game franchise from their earlier versions. There were a lot of vocal Civ IV haters when it released who completely refused to purchase the game because of these same reasons, just check out the CivFanatics archives (if they still exist) and you'll see what I mean. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy discovering my shiny new toy

[quote who="Alstein" reply="20" id="3502906"] Just saw Tom Chick's review. [/quote] I guess what I've been experiencing is the early game portion of his review. We'll see how it goes.

Detractors will always be more vocal than others. Beyond Earth is definitely more than a simple reskin of CiV. Those who haven't even played it ought to relax until they actually play through the game. Personally, I'm enjoying BE so far (only about 200 turns into my first game.) I really like graphics. The UI is average, I really miss the 'right click to close' feature from Endless games. The satellite idea is great, and I like the way the

I stopped playing the beta once I completed a game after the last update. We need some more content at this point to really balance/suggest properly.