Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

I think you forgot that flail doesn't ignore shield, it just gets +2 att vs shields to help get past the parry.

At least as far as I know.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Page 75 of manual clearly states that flail ignores shield. I do not know where you got your idea.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Ignoring shields is the old dom2 mechanic. Nowdays it gives +2 IIRC.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

The King had no fatigue, and there weren't that many units striking him any way. The Flagellants had a Fire 9 bless, so getting a hit through the defense was quite possible.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Scoring 10 sixs with one die is somewhat unlikly but if you uses 2 dices the chance is increase by a large amount.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Oh well, it is strange but it appears the devs have cast a charm spell om most players ...

It is difficult to accept players sayng "it is good Van is unbalanced", "It is good some nation have silly pd", "it is good ai spell priorities go over player script and mess up your battle", but in this case we have a true bug!
"It is good to have some bug, it increases unpredicatability" ... I have just to read this.

This wonderful game needs some major overhaul.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It is not alltogether clear that what you have reported is a bug. And the AI ignoring spell order is a a unhappy compromise, when in dom1, I don't recall if it was the beta or the finished game, the AI never ignored scripted orders and there were complaints about that too. The AI ignoring scripting is a feature that was added because It was a common strategy to deplete casters gem resources by making small needling attacks before big battles, for example you could cast a cheap summon before a big battle and htne your opponent would be unable to cast his big battle spells when the big battle hit. The solution was to make the AI calculate when a spell was not desirable to cast. It is sometimes annoying but the way it was earlier worked worse.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

Same place KO got the idea maybe?

I do love the way people quote the manual like it's holy scripture. It has many errors, believe me.

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

It's not "only" a matter of two "extraordinary" damage rolls.
Observig the fight very carefully, I realized that
1) the second succesful strike (the killing one) was the very first strike of that round (so, no multiple attack penalty occours to the king of flame);
2) the flagellant has a fatigue of more than 60 (-3 on the attack roll), and a "lost one eye" battle affliction (-2 attack roll). The +5 attack fire bless is balanced with the -5 from fatigue and battle affliction, and so the chance for that flagellant to hit the king of flame was less than 0.2% (Att 9 Vs Def 26).

Conclusion: the final chance to kill the king of flame was not "only" 1/6^10
(the damage rolls), but 1/6^10 * 2/10^3.

Do you really think it's possible?

Re: Very serious combat bug?
 

How does "unlikely" suddenly equate to "impossible"?
Get over the loss of your king and find some Markata (monkeys) to take out that overpowered flagellant. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif