Slainangel52

Slainangel52

Joined Member # 2867293
18 Posts 190 Replies 461 Reputation

[quote who="Goontrooper" reply="1" id="2803506"]Sounds like some good ideas and I also enjoy the setting. However, it is kinda hard to go into an established setting like this using the standard 4x mechanics. It seems silly to have a big tech tree or growth of civilization model when you have an established world full of cities and societies. That is why so many 4x games use a new world / reborn world setup, because otherwise it really doesn't make much sens

3 Replies 5,760 Views

[quote who="solidsmooky" reply="4" id="2802536"] Quoting mentalinstra, reply 3Some people seem to have a hard time figuring out these decimals. lol The American school system is awful. I apologize.[/quote] [e digicons]

15 Replies 9,935 Views

Initially this started as my desire to mod the combat of elemental into something a little more complex. I also wanted to see a more extensive spell system and some more variation in the races. As I was setting up my custom tech trees in concept I found myself really wanting to branch out and make nations and races that played very differently from eachother. Forgotten realms is a setting many are familiar with and one I particularly enjoy so I began researching a good time period in

3 Replies 5,760 Views

[quote who="DeadlyShoe" reply="101" id="2771990"]Nothing more pissant annoying than someone pretending to speak for me. Please dont.[/quote] I figure if enough people all get together and request/demand that Stardock live up to this picture then maybe they'll re-balance the numbers to make this possible. Food, Gildar, Housing, and a few other resources will need to be adjusted. The animations will need to be adjusted. But with a whole team of super

420 Replies 1,130,038 Views

I've outlined bits and pieces of my ideal combat system in other threads, I think I'll pull it all together here. That said I'm in favor of a detailed and complex system of combat which might not be popular with some people so assuming it's all possible I've got a goal for modding. Battle Setup: -First things first I'd like to see larger army sizes, right now the maximum is 12 units per army. Ideally this would be able to scale up to 100 or so but that would req

140 Replies 327,885 Views

[quote who="Dust-n-Bones" reply="58" id="2771539"]I dont care about epic feel so you speak in your name only. Tactical combat is absolutly boring now, and it would be even worse with large numbers. To make tactical combat intresting Stardock has to make us THINK to win a battle. To make us think, play tacticly there are few things to be improved - spell are all the same, mana is extremly limited, heroes are useless and units do not have usefull unique atributes. If you enjoy moving 100000 uni

420 Replies 1,130,038 Views

[quote who="VR_IronMana" reply="55" id="2771543"] Quoting Slainangel52, reply 54 This system will still heavily favor lightly armored fast units with powerful weapons. Without changes to the attack/defense/hp mechanics I don't think this change will fix all that much. It's definitely a start, but without the whole picture of changes it's difficult to judge. Unless those powerful weapons end up having significant -speed modifiers. A big

57 Replies 110,551 Views

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="50" id="2770728"]This isn't set in stone but this is what we're thinking about: New Tactical Battle System A turn is made up of 10 phases Combat Speed determines how often a unit can take an action: Speed 1: Unit moves at phase 5 Speed 2: Unit moves at phases 3 and 7 Speed 3: Unit moves at 3, 5, 7 Speed 4: Unit moves at 2, 4, 6, 8 Speed 5: Unit moves at phases 2,4,5,6,8 Speed 6: Unit moves at pha

57 Replies 110,551 Views

/signed I'd like to see larger army sizes than 12 with larger tactical battle maps to fight on. The maps should also have the special tiles located in logical places to add even more depth to the battles. With regard to the unit sizes, champions would need a re-balance to be viable in an environment with larger soldiers per unit. They'd either have to become extremely powerful or be able to get attached to a unit group. Obviously the control for battles would ha

420 Replies 1,130,038 Views

I'd like to see a tactical map large enough to hold two opposing armies of ~40 units apiece and if possible a way to choose larger maps based on the total number of units in the battle. So a 12 v 12 battle would use the current maps, 20 on 20 a larger one, 30 on 30 even larger, etc. etc.

154 Replies 398,704 Views

I've already confirmed with frogboy in the IRC channel that you could mod the stack size for larger armies and you can change the size of tactical battle maps as well to make them large enough to be able to take greater army sizes. In this way you would be able to have large epic battles while not making a unit with a single member like a champion completely worthless. Since the balance issue was due to unit sizes ranging from 1-1,000, not having larger army groups. Combine this with

72 Replies 54,074 Views

[quote who="Hybridvitae" reply="19" id="2762071"]there was talk of giving units a patrol or waypoint script, but short of that there are several options for keeping enemies in place. You can put down "objects" that need to be destroyed so you can move further. If no such object exists you could just make a new unit like "stalagmite" (or stalagtite? I forget which grows up and which grows down) and give it either zero moves or negative moves to keep it still. Make them

24 Replies 34,838 Views

[quote who="Tormy-" reply="98" id="2761626"] Quoting falconne2, reply 93 Quoting Tormy-, reply 52 There's no tactical combat in the Civ games. The ATT/DEF -> DMG system is way too simplistic. [...having unit unit counters is not enough in my book.] I don't want to mention more stuff like dmg/resistance types etc., because I prefer to play with fantasy themed games anyway. It's a strategy game, not a tactical game. The battles

402 Replies 1,304,381 Views

[quote who="Annatar11" reply="13" id="2761735"]It is possible for a quest to load a specific tactical battle map. It wouldn't be a true dungeon crawl (at least for now) since the AI just charges you, and there may be a limitation on the size of the tactical maps as well as difficulty finding good cave-y or dungeon-y tile sets, though I imagine some more artistic modders can create them. The other limitation is that creatures don't really "drop" stuff. Loot just gets assigned as part of d

24 Replies 34,838 Views

[quote who="the Gorgon" reply="10" id="2738450"]@ Slainangel: I wouldn't say forced, if you followed the development you know they chose between now and early next year. Like you I love the dedication shown by the SD team. I love their stand on long-term support. But this is also a private company selling a game for 50 bucks to real paying people. Actually, there are a lot of dedicated people out there with great ideas, not just at SD. So when you launch a project you must accept to be evalua

35 Replies 37,472 Views

[quote who="LikeTheWhirlwind" reply="76" id="2738296"]I'm starting to think that squads having DEF equal to (individual unit DEF * NumberOfTroops) is a mistake. What do you guys think about this?[/quote] Well you can't really change that without altering the attack formulas too otherwise you'd end up having high attack units just obliterating those groups because they'd have no defense anymore. To be honest I'd really like to see the stat system completely overh

114 Replies 214,184 Views

[quote who="charon2112" reply="55" id="2738405"]Elemental isn't just a turn based game, it's a 4x game. 4x games are about world building, they are not about tactical combat. Think for a moment about how horrible GC2 would be with tactical battles. As it is now, you prepare a fleet and send it against your opponents fleet and watch them fight in an awesome cinematic battle. Imagine instead if you went into the battle and saw a little line

73 Replies 148,213 Views

[quote who="Dewie" reply="16" id="2738345"]The amount of resources on your map as a whole is tied to world difficulty. The amount of resources by your starting position is random, just like the rest of the map. The only resource guaranteed to be near your starting position is a fertile land tile.[/quote] Is there any chance we could have the resource density set as it's own option. I like to have the wilderness as a dangerous place, however I don't want the map to be de

20 Replies 15,880 Views

I think challenging is the first one with 100% AI without cheating. They get a minor starting resource bonus but that's it.

4 Replies 4,950 Views

[quote who="ozzlok" reply="6" id="2738318"] Quoting Slainangel52, reply 5 Quoting the Gorgon, reply 3 It's not like this was in any way a force majeur event. They knew very well what they were releasing. They did not indicate in any way in advance what we should expect. That is why trust is running very low at the moment. Had an earthquake struk and obliterated their servers or something I don't think many peple would have complained if progress was not

35 Replies 37,472 Views

They aren't usually tied to terrain features either. If you open up tactical maps in the map editor you'll see that they generally put those tiles in a pattern that gives both sides an even amount of the bonus tiles in a symmetrical pattern.

2 Replies 2,119 Views

[quote who="the Gorgon" reply="3" id="2738155"]It's not like this was in any way a force majeur event. They knew very well what they were releasing. They did not indicate in any way in advance what we should expect. That is why trust is running very low at the moment. Had an earthquake struk and obliterated their servers or something I don't think many peple would have complained if progress was not what we expected. But this? [/quote] Except it is forced, they set up the r

35 Replies 37,472 Views