Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I very rarely see my Jotuns rout. Even their militia has 11 morale, and the other units all have at least that much, most have more. That combined with their high HP and extreme ease of routing the *enemy* by causing massive casualties means they rarely retreat, in my experience.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

Then why is it that Jotun militia, especially, is widely reputed for its cowardice? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

I'm sure Arryn has run into this at some point before: Jotun militia, I've found, is notorious for its tendency to break and run from battles that it could have otherwise won. Jotuns generally are more susceptible to morale failure, despite their individually higher morale, for several reasons:

#1: Their high hitpoints mean that they frequently survive hits, which force a morale check for being injured.
#2: Their higher cost means you'll have less of them in the squad, so they don't have the same level of large-squad buffering.
#3: Their large size means that relatively few Jotuns will form a line compared to the masses of smaller units that swarm you. A single Jotun will end up fighting at least 3 humans.
#4: Last but not least, large units running in terror are more noticeable. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif It's easier to gain a reputation for cowardice when all eyes are on you as you bravely run away. And when they run, they take a larger amount of fighting power with them.

So, as a general rule, given units of equal morale, say, a Jotun with morale 11, and humans with morale 11, the Jotuns are more likely to cut and run.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">About all I hear about Jotun militia is that they have the best militia in the game. EDIT: And I can't believe you'd say they have a reputation for cowardice when compared to, say, Machaka or C'tis, whose militia have a reputation for running away before the fight even starts sometimes http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Jotunheim is my second favorite nation. I play it A LOT. It's much more common to see my 20 PD beat 60-80 attackers than it is to see them run from them (Barring fear units/spells, of course, or SC's etc that you can't depend on non-scripted solutions for).

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Ah, I see, so dieing is preferable to living because it doesn't force a morale check. Gotcha.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">And their higher HP and STR means they kill more of the enemy than the enemy can kill of them. Enemies break VERY quickly when being faced with giants.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which has nothing to do with morale.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'll give you that point.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Not this one though. A human with morale 11 is EXACTLY as likely to run as a giant with morale 11. The giant, however, will do more damage and Last longer in a fight.

[ March 05, 2004, 07:10: Message edited by: Zurai ]

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"> <font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It does have something to do with morale. Since you force a morale check every time you are attacked. A square can only have up to 6 in size in it. Each attack lowers defense by 1, so there is a greater chance of an attack going through. Also each single large unit has more morale checks since more units can attack it per square. Though the primary reason that Giants seem to have poor morale (to the uninitiated) is because of their lower than average squad size which would give them a lower base morale than a similiar group of human milita (with much less survivability).

And in response to Fliers Routing, they rout much more not because of any inherent 'ability' but because of their deployment (when attacking they move in a circle around an area) which allows each and every unit to attack and be attacked (as opposed to front lines clashing). With the fragility of the units, lower average armor (even with Iceclad/SGuard) they tend to rout easier than other units of the same variety.

This is why losing a Holy3 priest by RotR is even more annoying.

[ March 05, 2004, 07:28: Message edited by: Zen ]

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

Thematically I like the way it is. Raptor ruling class and old prophecies and so on sound very nice. The distiction is quite enough at the moment (propably most of you disagree with me). Usable strategies differ well enough.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Note that the only useful skill on the unit there is the 1 air for orb lightning. Everything else has no useful rituals, and giving a mage ironskin isn't that impressive.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">It actually doesn't have much lower upkeep, High eraphs are 11.7, Harab Elders are 9 per turn. The 1 earth is just as useless here as on the Harab Seraph.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I doubt this. High seraphs are hard to beat for research.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I _really_ doubt that RotR is anywhere near as effective as base Caelum. They have less magical versatility with no random picks, less research ability with harab seraphs having the same research ability as default Seraphs and only costing 10 less, and far more expensive mages. A mage that costs less than 200 can be bought one per turn from about turn 3 or 4 onwards. One that costs 270 is going to be every other turn at most. You also have far, far fewer of the harab elders than the high seraphs, since you can't build them at every fortress. Their magic skills also have little synergy. The only notable death/air skills are summon valkyries and death wind, both of which are quite high level. That plus the fact that a mage can only cast one spell at a time, no matter what skills they have, severely weakens them.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Ironskin is still good to have. You'll understand that the day someone casts Rain of Stones on your Seraph-heavy army.

Quote:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Raptors are a bit faster researchers than base the theme

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I doubt this. High seraphs are hard to beat for research.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">But he's right. 2 Harab Seraphs cost about the same as a single High Seraph and give 2 more RPs with a flat magic scale. This edge gets even sharper with a +magic scale and when you factor in experience.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">[/quote]

Only Vanheim, Arco, and Pythium if they get lucky, can reliably expect to be able to cast rain of stones, so you'll have to change your tactics for them. The weightless armors and rainbow armor and so on should be able to help a great deal there. Losing quickness and air 2 to gain ironskin for a few rare cases isn't that much of a deal. Especially when those seraphs will have likely cast mistform. Then there's also always murdering winter if we are talking about level 7 spells.

Quote:

[qb]But he's right. 2 Harab Seraphs cost about the same as a single High Seraph and give 2 more RPs with a flat magic scale. This edge gets even sharper with a +magic scale and when you factor in experience.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Those two harab seraphs are only good for research though, while the high seraph that you bought for the same price can also cast spring hawks, forge the air boosters and staff of storms, cast wrathful skies, etc. Plus, High seraphs are available in large numbers, unlike Harab Elders.

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Cool, now this makes things interesting... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Well, if you could play them in the same way, then it would be boring. I think a theme should always require a change in your strategies...

That said, I do not understand how the raptors manage so well with Cold 3, as the raptor-troops are not cold resistant, or is the encumbrance factor only important for mages and commanders?

So this forces you to drag your dominion behind rather than pushing it, doesnt it?

Re: Caelum questions, both themes.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Rain of Stones is an extreme exemple, there are several other ways to inflict hideous losses to a bunch of unprotected mages who would survive with just Ironskin.

Quote:

The weightless armors and rainbow armor and so on should be able to help a great deal there.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's an expensive way to protect a horde of 90 gp mages.

Quote:

Losing quickness and air 2 to gain ironskin for a few rare cases isn't that much of a deal.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On that I agree. Just wanted to point out that Ironskin is still far from useless. 90 gp mages are expendable if need be, put a dozen close to the front line and try (Ironskin)(Summ. Storm Power)(Mistform)(Mirror Image)(Resist Lightning)(cast spells) someday, works wonders if you can get the timing right so the enemy troops close on your mages as soon as they've finished casting their buffs.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Those two harab seraphs are only good for research though</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">That's another matter. The point was : "Raptors are a bit faster researchers", and you followed with "I doubt this".