Sarex

As I said, I get that and wouldn't mind if it was left for the sequel. As for Josh, well he had it in IWD2, I don't see why he can't have it in PoE2.

So because a game has the HA you can't enjoy it? Lol, that's like a kid seeing some other kid having toy he doesn't have and throwing a tantrum. BG2, IWD2 and NWN2 all had the HA and it didn't make any of those games any less for having them.

There is already a thread about Banished. Also it's a far cry from the Civ games.

It's a single player game...

I have never seen the point of custom background story. If it doesn't impact the story or character interactions, then what is the point of it?

Glad Brazil won, they put so much money in to this and the people suffered for it so much, it would be devastating for them to drop out this early.

Oh I won't be disappointed if there isn't one in PoE, but I expect/hope there will be one in the sequel.

Almost but not quite. If there is a good explanation/story behind it I don't mind those kinds of things.

Why not, if it's appropriately hard to get it, then hell yeah it should be awarded. It doesn't have to be class restricted, it can be an ordinary sword in the hands of non Paladins. Also the HA is kind of an iconic weapon of the Paladin.

Why would you say that?

Those areas are blank canvas for modders.

Probably. The time they invested for a feature that almost no one used could have been used to make the single player game even better.

Paladins just need their trusty Holy Avenger and they will laugh at all the other classes.

Pro: -Iso, RTwP game, from the maker of my favorite IE game (IWD2) -Has Paladins (I don't care that they are supports) -Stronghold. I know most people dislike or are on the fence about it, but I really, really like these things in RPGs. I liked it in NWN2, I liked it in DA:Awakening, I liked it in so many other "RPGs" that featured them. The more complex and integrated in the main game it is, the better it will be for me. I really hope they make a feature out of it in PoE. -I like that it's an Obsidian IP and that they have room to let it grow and learn from the mistakes they make (if they make any mistakes at all). I like that it doesn't have to sell impossible numbers for it to be considered a success. I also hope that Obsidian won't be stuck in their ways and that if things don't work in the first game (*see cons) they are willing to change them in the next (this has been the bane of Biowares game in the recent years). -Did I say it has Paladins? Hmmm, I like that it won't hold punches and it will be hard, when so many games today try to hold your hand and are mind numbingly easy. Cons: -No combat XP, I can't for the life of me see why they would take it away. Their rationale was to make no combat solutions viable, by killing combat solutions. In a combat centric game this strikes me as very strange. While it doesn't kill the game for me, it will certainly take away from it. I hope I'm wrong and they make it work, but right now I'm skeptical. -Stamina/Health?!? I don't get why they had to take a straight forward, foolproof system and complicate the **** out of it. I guess it had something to do with there being no resurrection in game, but I still think it was very unnecessary. Doesn't take away anything from the game for me, but I think it will just be a bother to get used to, for no benefit at all. -Rogues as the main damage dealers while Fighters/Paladins/Barbarians just face tank in comparison. I think that they should at least rename the rogues to something else. -Level/xp cap. No need for it. You should reward the completionist. -Last and least, no multipass... I mean class. Adds so much variation to the game and so much to replayability.

ROFL!

On the flip side, the amount of Obsidian white-knighting I have to wade trough to get to any meaningful discussion.

So did the Americans pay the Germans too?

I would hazard a guess that he was talking about Biowares (who did BG) romance in DA:O, if you chose to ignore romance you would have lost a good chunk of xp, quest, items etc.

Uh yeah...that was my mistake. As for Franz Ferdinand being a swell guy who was just misunderstood and wanted to help the Slavs, well that is just revisionist history. There is already an active campaign to make Princip in to a common murderer who killed an innocent guy. I have no doubt that in a decade Serbia will be the bad guy in the history books.

No, no, it's always. We started wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Gulf, Panama, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya... Oh wait... But in the end it was for their own good, right? Not to mention that we paid the largest price in WW1 and still participated in WW2 when we didn't have to, unlike some countries. And if we look at the history it was Franz Ferdinand who started the war, you can't invade/annex a country without repercussions.

Giving Xcom:EW another go.

You missed the beginning, Austria-Hungary invaded(annexed) Bosnia. What do you think Franz Ferdinand was doing in Sarajevo, where Princip offed him.

Then we would just take over the world, that is not exactly fair.

That is exactly how WW1 started.

For my country it was fought to rid us of the oppressor. That we did and more.