.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)
-   Multiplayer and AARs (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=145)
-   -   Casual PBEM (Full & playing) (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=32855)

Sir_Dr_D August 6th, 2007 11:39 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
But that was some good attempts the last turn Morkilus. I am surprised that the golem that you telported in did not do better. The golem that was in the 'great elephant heist' as you put it fared way better. It ended up single handidly holding off for quite a long time a whole army of hydra and stolen elephants.

Morkilus August 7th, 2007 12:34 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
I definitely don't know wtf I'm doing; I've never played a multiplayer game in this late stage with such complicated mages. I had no idea that a teleport squad wouldn't fight the siegers of a castle you own. What a waste. I'm learning plenty, though.

RicoRico August 7th, 2007 02:16 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
I only just found out that particular point in a SP test game this week... quite important information indeed!

Sorlakind August 7th, 2007 04:33 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
Quote:

Morkilus said:
I definitely don't know wtf I'm doing; I've never played a multiplayer game in this late stage with such complicated mages. I had no idea that a teleport squad wouldn't fight the siegers of a castle you own. What a waste. I'm learning plenty, though.

OK, now I am lost here. What do you mean by this? If you mean:

"Your teleported (gatewayed, whatever) squad will join the defenders already there when the enemy storms (not break siege) the castle."

then hell, yes, it does work. Or, maybe I should say, I've never noticed anything strange -- and I have done it a few times this game with Rlyeh so if did not work I prolly should have noticed by now. Have I been mistaken all along? If you mean something else entirely than disregard my post.

RicoRico August 7th, 2007 05:10 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
I think he means that when you use a spell to get an army to a province in which a friendly fortress is besieged, there will not be a 'magical' battle occurring before any other. Actually, no batte at all, unless the fortress would be stormed that turn.
But if you would move there normally, you would attack the besieging army.
In a way it makes sense if you use Gate Way: it teleports you to a friendly laboratory, which is inside the fortress (enemy can't destroy it when besieging). I wonder, though, what happens if you use Astral Travel, Teleport or Cloud Trapeze, since it does not need a laboratory.

I'd like it if you could choose:
- teleport and defend, or
- teleport and patrol
or something

Actually I did not quite understand how on earth R'Lyeh suddenly could have so many armies in a fortress I was storming. I thought I could totally isolate a fortress by besieging it, and I found out the hard way that I could not.. A number of times.. Lots of pain.. losses.. agony.. Actually, I only figured it out this week in a SP test game..

Micah August 7th, 2007 05:31 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
The default order after a spell is cast is "defend." (Or siege if it's at an enemy fort). So going to a friendly castle will land you inside, and you can't teleport in and be stealthed either.

Also, getting max-cast rituals overwritten sucks. Guess I rolled a lower random number...

Sorlakind August 7th, 2007 05:55 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
Quote:

RicoRico said:
I think he means that when you use a spell to get an army to a province in which a friendly fortress is besieged, there will not be a 'magical' battle occurring before any other. Actually, no batte at all, unless the fortress would be stormed that turn.
But if you would move there normally, you would attack the besieging army.


Ah, OK, if it is that, then we're understood.

Let me add that this must be stated somewhere in the manual, since I personally can't remember ever having any confusions or doubts about this issue. Or maybe I have read it somewehere in the forums a loooong ago.

Sorlakind August 7th, 2007 06:00 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
Quote:

Micah said:Also, getting max-cast rituals overwritten sucks. Guess I rolled a lower random number...

Max number of gems on a ritual sucks, period. One among another number of things that suck in an otherwise wonderful game. This is off-topic so I will refrain from posting my personal pet peeves.

RicoRico August 7th, 2007 06:05 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
Well, that max number of gems thing.. I guess the world was a bit lucky then! Apart from Abysia..
if that overwrite would have failed, that would have spelled doom in capitals.. I guess we would have had to kill the caster.

Sir_Dr_D August 7th, 2007 08:02 PM

Re: Casualness warning
 
Quote:

Sorlakind said:
Quote:

Micah said:Also, getting max-cast rituals overwritten sucks. Guess I rolled a lower random number...

Max number of gems on a ritual sucks, period. One among another number of things that suck in an otherwise wonderful game. This is off-topic so I will refrain from posting my personal pet peeves.

Personally I don't like the way the globals work at all. You can spend all game collecting gems, and then lose them in an instant. I would prefer it if you coudln't put extra gems into rituals at all.

And how did Abysia a non-astral nation succeed in getting 999 pearls, considering that Pythium was doing nothing except collect pearls all game, and was very lucky in finiding astral sites, and was only barely able to make the 999.

Next time I will know to be on the safe side and dispel instead.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.