Re: Dark Knight
 

I agree wholeheartedly with Aezeal.

It is an exploitation, not cheating. It is an action that is attainable within the game programming and not an external influence or prohibited by any rule other than consensus opinion. And since it is a known carryover from root/parent programing, it is difficult to consider it a bug, maybe a flaw in the programming, but not a bug.

As I read the thread, this exploitation apparently would only be known to Dom1/Dom2 veterans, and probably just a portion of them. It sounds devestating, but extremely unlikely and very difficult to achieve. It is available to only a few nations or specific pretender builds, but what powerful effect isn't.

Just my opinion.

Re: Dark Knight
 

I like the fact that the VIsitors, Bogus and his merry men, have the ability to target commanders.

I think it can be fun in an SP game to get hold of these ancient tactical skills. The older the better (in accordance with the creed of most new religious movements). These are dom-ppp survivals and ancient to boot.

I think it would be naughty to use these orders in MP, unless all players agreed to their eventual use.

I think it would be fun if assassins were given limited access to these orders.

Re: Dark Knight
 

Yeah, if it were made so that you can't copy orders into a unit unless he is actually allowed to do them (this would also stop yuo from accidentally scripting fire spells on a water mage.. etc), that would be extremely cool.

You know all those leadership 80-120 national commanders who really can't do anything that indie commanders couldn't do for cheaper (ferrying troops)? They're supposed to do be "tactical geniuses extraordinaire". Why not allow them to see with their tactical genius who are the opposing commanders/mages and challenge them in the battlefield?

Re: Dark Knight
 

We have speculated on the reverse. Disallowing some orders on lousy commanders, but that was a while ago, and will probably not appear in the forseeable future.

Re: Dark Knight
 

Sorry KO, but I cannot fathom the logic or reasoning behind the disallowing some orders on lousy commanders. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

Re: Dark Knight
 

Surely the reasoning is obvious...they are lousy commanders... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: Dark Knight
 

Thats good enough for me to ban the practice on games that I host.

Re: Dark Knight
 

and right you are http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

I guess you only mean the copying though.. using it with units that actually have the order themselves isn't morally wrong I think (and seems to be the general consensus)

Re: Dark Knight
 

You know, I was begining to support the "dont use Bogus orders" camp... But then I thought back to QM's point about archer decoying and there are some disturbing parallels. People are arguing here that you shouldnt use the Bogus commands because it was the intent of the devs to remove them from the game.

But clearly the devs did not remove those commands. And then you take the concept of archer decoying. The devs clearly tried to remove this tactic from the game by crippling the morale of small squads. But yet the tactic persists and no one really gripes about how it is an exploit of the archer targeting AI. How can you explain the imbalance? Will people start playing games with decoying banned?

Re: Dark Knight
 

Those aren't the only fuzzy areas either. For instance, abusing the sickle whose crop is pain with an ally, to result in a higher death gem income than well of misery. Or using quickness with magic items for double spell casting.