Re: Do you use CBM?
 

Well, I can't argue with your perception, but I think it goes without saying that that isn't the case.

Actually, I'm interested. A couple of examples would be good.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

Insulting my mother is completely unneccesary.

Sure. Give me a few hours, as I want to include Vanilla attributes for comparison. I'll PM them to you when I get around to it.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

I was referring to your nick. A bit Charlie Sheenish now isn't it ;).

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

It'd be nice to have them in the thread so people could discuss them--I know I'm interested in what changes people think are arbitrary :)

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

Here are few changes I have noticed, mainly from playing MP games. I think the great majority of options provided by CBM are positive, please do not misunderstand me. I just do not undestand why certain alterations were necessary. As I have only examined the differences of nations that I have played in MP, I can only provide a limited amount of data based on play experience.

EA

Kailasa (assuming mod references altered the specific unit type, rather than creating a new unit, these changes will be present in Bandar Log and Patala)

Atavi and Bandar archers have attack and defence decreased. The reduced attack score only matters when they run out of ammunition, or forced into melee. The reduced defence puzzles me.

Bandar swordsmen seemed to have reduced morale. At first I thought that all Bandar were nerfed, but on closer examination, it was only the swordsmen.

Naga have awe?


Ulm.

Big changes across the board, those that I have noticed seem to be thematic. Such as ambidexterity and berserk. Berserk on multi attacking, high damage, recruit everywhere units seems a bit overpowered to me, even taking fatigue into consideration.


Agartha.

Mountain survival?

A lot of the units seem to have slight increase to base protection as well as an increase to hp.


MA

Machaka.

Spider armour defence penaty increased and encumberance reduced by one. With alterations to weapon values, spider warriors and bane spiders end up +1 attack -1 defence and encumberance.

Black Hunter MR increase. Major increase to their Hunter Spider secondshape, results in an animal-type with above average MR.



Just a few observations from recent mp games. Many weapon and armour stats have been changed, of course resource and gold costs. Many of the changes made, make a certain amount of sense and are consistent with the Dominions 'mythology.' The intent behind other changes is not so clear to me. I can provide a more extensive list if you would like, but I do not want to appear overly critical.

No drama, sorry to be over-sensitive. The Warlock is my idol.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

That's a change from way back, 1.4 if not earlier. Most archer-types got reduced melee stats in order to make them less of all-rounders--if archers can hold their own against melee in a fight, then there's no real need to have normal troops except as arrow catchers. Also the change makes light cavalry and other flankers comparatively more effective.

Nagas...are bad. And Awe is thematic for other entities in the Kailasan mythology and give the nagas at least niche uses. The change is mostly for LA though.

I've seen some games with EA Ulm in it after the change and they've been useful but not overpowering--remember that basically nobody used those multi attacking, high damage troops before the change because the female troops were simply better. Now the two are each better in different situations.

Also a bit of strength. The mountain survival's only purpose was to give the map move 2 units actually map move 2 in the mountains(which makes sense, cuz they'd be using caves to get through). The hp/prot increases were to try and make Agartha's national troops actually worth it to use--Squirreloid has some math somewhere that basically says that even in darkness Pale One Militia still lost to indy militia, which is downright embarassing. This should help a bit with that.

I'm honestly not sure why the spider armor defense penalty increased--that change was from a long time ago and I don't quite understand it. The encumbrance reduction was part of a global change to make heavy armor less bad by lowering armor encumbrance values.

Black Hunters have been a trap to actually use for a long time--and the Hunter Spiders especially have been more or less useless, not least because of their abysmal MR. As long as their MR is so low, you basically have to leave them behind in any late game engagement, just like Machaka's other spiders. This differentiate between the two role-wise, which is nice. They still aren't worth using a bless on, but they work well for several uses even without the bless.

A more specific list would be great--it's always nice to get people's impressions of these things.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

im a fan of CBM and i never play without it.

i recall in a cbm 1.8 game, ma agartha got some auto-darkness added to its PD, but i did run some tests and now it seems non-existent. what happened?

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

I think it was removed, and made into a spell.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

thanks, i got it now: avatar of darkness.

i think the ma agarthan auto-darkness PD was way OP, im glad it got changed.

Re: Do you use CBM?
 

The awe was indeed an attempt to find a thematic way to buff the previously alnost-useless nagas. Their uselessness seemed a shame given that they are the focus of the nation (Patala). If you read their descriptions it says a lot about how they are otherworldly, and bedecked in glittering jewelry. Snakes are also well known for their (mythical?) ability to hypnotise weak-minded beings, so the change seemed to me to fit in very nicely.

All Pale Ones got general buffs to hp and strength, and very slight buffs to natural protection. Pale Ones are pretty awful all round. One option would be to up their attack and defense, but I really didn't want to do that - their rubbish combat skills are part of what makes them unique. It's even a part of their tragic theme (they *really* shouldn't have emerged to fight a war on the surface). But they are already thick-skinned, tough and strong, so emphasising those traits seemed like a good approach to me.

The mountain survival was before my time but seems to make sense to me. They live among rocks and caves, and you could generalise and say lots of mountains have caves, and wherever there are caves the Agarthans have a big mobility advantage.

All the other changes are from before my time, but kianduatha's explanations sound good to me.