alanschu

But I don't.... You've already stated that you would "rather just suffer te indignity of having Magic dropped by a headshot and reload rather than a goofy *Magic looses 29 agility*" In that same post you mention "what's the point?" You certainly do NOT give off the impression that you keep playing when a guy dies (since your situation explained reloading the game after Magic dies), nor do you give an impression that you keep playing if a guy suffers attribute damage. I don't understand why they implemented it though. It doesn't seem to make any sense. True, Deiranas forces take attribute damage also, but that is an essentially infinte supply of replaceable generic troops. I could see it make more sense in a game like XCOM. To make the game more difficult? To add a bit of variety? hmm. I don't reload when a merc dies. But you completely restart the game if a guy takes attribute damage And it's irrational. Especially when a merc that has taken attribute damage is not as bad as a merc that is dead. Especially when, as some sort of "explanation" you cited the finite number of mercs, here: "You've got forty mercs at AIm and another 6 or so at MERC. Once a few of them get cracked down from 80 or so agility to 30 or 40 agility, there' not much point in playing anymore." But I'm sure if a few of them just get outright killed, somehow that's not nearly as bad Most of my campaigns end with a few dead mercs. It doesn't bother me. I never complained about mercs dying. WHy do you keep bringing it up? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Because a dead merc is worse than a merc that has taken attribute damage. Which is something you completely restart the game over. You shouldn't have mentioned reloading after Magic dying either.

WHat does that have to do with anything? I have no problem with mercs getting killed, injured, requiring healing. What are you talkign about? Obviously you do. Otherwise you wouldn't completely restart the game every time it happens. Obviously you're seeing what you want to see. I never reload for any reason. I quit and start a new game from scratch rather. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Still a silly gripe. Especially when claiming to play the game the "way it was intended." (which is a statement I particularly enjoyed, as they obviously intended for you to be able to take attribute point damage). If you feel like reloading every time a merc dies, then that's your own perogative. But when it's an atypical way of playing it, there's not much sense in you criticizing it. Try playing the game through without restarting. It doesn't HAVE to be a flawless playthrough with zero people dying.

Probably. Ovechkin for Calder though!

Many games do that.

Again...might as well play with God Mode on. At least with your IMP you can rationalize it as a retirement though. Odd though, that you have no problems continuing on when a Merc dies, but if one takes a stat penalty, you reload. Clearly playing the game as it was meant to be played.

So because one guy is no longer combat capable there's no point in playing the game anymore? Do you quit or reload if a Merc dies? Might as well play with God mode on. I pretty much beat the game with only 6 guys. I had a handful of other mercs take care of training militias and whatnot, but I had one main squad of 6 that did almost every fight in the game. The only time I would really change it up is when I would use Shadow to go around at night and have him single handedly kill entire squads without being seen ( Shadow)

Just zip through the Roman campaign. Does it matter if you play on hard difficulty in that campaign to unlock the other factions for hard difficulty?

He wasn't talking to you, in the post that you quoted.

It's not a forced reload. You could either chug through or get a different merc. It'd make a bigger deal if it actually handicapped your ability to play the game.

I was only able to play the Roman factions, probably because I hadn't been able to finish the game (I had to cut myself off cold turkey, my school depended on it). To be honest, while I really enjoy the game...I haven't played it all that much If my German invasion of Poland doesn't hold my interest, maybe I'll give Rome another go. I don't have school at the moment, and my Civ4 addiction has been satisfied for the most part, so it'll be easier to play.

You can manually order them to retreat (not rout) as well, so that they don't cause panic.

Ok. Some detailed strategic analysis, complete what you think your weaknesses are, followed up by an MP game would be great too Hey Llyranor, (and perhaps Deraldin as well), have you let the Total War guys know how much you would just a multiplayer campaign?

I considered picking this game up again....but Hearts of Iron 2 stepped in and said otherwise :D

I knew once I saw the season that our division stood the best chance of having our top team be third, on account of us beating the crap out of each other

I think I preferred the Dominance skill over the Dementation skill in combat. But Dementation was great in dialogue.

But if many more people rent action movies over drama movies, a conclusion that action movies are more popular can be made. It's as empirical as we can get. I think it's more presumptuous to assume that people request lightsaber colours because they all understand that creating a more dynamic world is difficult. I understand that there will be exceptions, such as the example you describe with renting a movie. But that's a single instance. I was being more general. And I never said that the failure of the game should depend on a timelimt. However, I don't mind it if it is transparent, as is the case in Fallout. Though the game probably shouldn't "end," except for the fact that the game really isn't all that good when it comes to separating you from the Vault people. This covers much more than just the timelimit though. Once the Vault is gone, the game is over.

It doesn't necessarily have to be a "time" thing (and if it is, it does have to be smart about it). I like the fact that Minsc got pissed off at you in the original BG if you picked him up in the party to go looking for Dynaheir, then never did that. I don't like that he would still get pissed off when the timer ran out right as I entered the Gnoll Stronghold map. The quest probably would have been better served if the timer was ignored the closer you got to the stronghold. Or perhaps if it was abstracted that if you started going in the opposite direction, then he'd get mad. People can bitch and moan about something like this, but to me the solution seems obvious. If you would like Minsc in your party, then you're going to have to do what he is asking of you. It seems absolutely retarded that you can assure him you will look for Dynaheir, and then never do that, and have him still follow you around. If you don't want to be "burdened" with looking for Dynaheir, don't recruit Minsc.

"He" being ferret?

How has the pathfinding been rewritten? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I am not sure I understand the question or what isnt clear. The pathfinding AI has been gutted and been re-written from line 1 by the kommander. I am not sure how else to be clear on that. heh. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was curious if there was any information about how they were implementing their pathfinding. You say it's been rewritten.....and I'm asking in what way.

There are two types of people in this world....those with loaded guns. And those that dig.

Can you watch your favorite movie over 100 times? I can't do that either. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yup.

How so though? YOu'd need one for each planet.

Or people were hesitant given that the game didn't exactly ship in stellar condition, code wise.

How has the pathfinding been rewritten?