Re: Exploit question
 

Hey Rdonj, tone down the nerd rage. I brought up MoD to sate my appetite for tears. K didn't bring it up.

It's pretty obvious that Bogus's dudes orders and MoD are completely different. You guys should be ashamed for trying to gang up on a forum member because of what ultimately boils down to a difference of opinion.

Nothing said by anyone in this thread deserves nerd rage, except maybe for me bringing up MoD just to goad you guys (Sorry !:angel).

Re: Exploit question
 

In a slightly less antagonistic way let me argue the other side: the point is it doesn't matter what the devs think. There are so many undocumented features, quirks, bugs, and semi-unintended interactions its silly to picture this game as some divinely inspired piece of work that needs to be played in the intended perfection. It's an exploit because the devs didn't intend it to be there? To me that seems an incredibly silly position to take (though admittedly many do). Did the devs 'intend' that archer screens work the way they do? Did they 'intend' that water nations struggle with dominion just because of the way maps usually work? Did they 'intend' each counter for each unit in the game? Did they 'intend' for people to trade mages via hellbind heart/charm? Did they intend for clam hoarding to be required to be competitive in larger games? Or...did they just put a bunch of cool crap in here and tweak it until it was fun and had some semblance of balance?

Trying to play by what the devs intended is not only silly, it's pointless. If it's possible to do in the game, it's part of the game. In very special circumstances (the old mists of deception according to many) some aspect of the game is considered broken to the point it (semi) ruins the game to have people abusing it and it makes sense to agree not to do that. Trying to arbitrarily avoid things you think the devs didn't intend though is something I can't wrap my head around, and getting mad at somebody else for not doing the same thing is just wrong.

Re: Exploit question
 

Yeah except that isn't what's happening. Not much use apologising for trolling then continuing to do so in the same post :P

Baalz: 'If it's possible to do in the game it's part of the game' seems a pointless truism to me. Obviously the 'exploit' in question is part of the game. Is anyone arguing it isn't? You do the entire thing from within the game, without breaking anything.

The question is whether people want it in the game - when they don't and they regard its use as spoiling their enjoyment, they'll react badly to it being used. Maybe they're irrational, but it doesn't matter. It seems to me the reason people don't want the Bogus copy orders 'exploit' in the game is that it /feels/ like a metagaming exploit or unfixed bug. Certainly the fact that if you change Bogus crews orders they lose the special orders forever and if you want to copy them you can only do so through a couple of keyboard shortcuts makes the whole thing feel buggy.

Imagine if you could somehow script a 6th spell on units with a secondary form by getting them killed into their second form then the next turn copying their orders over to an identical unit that was still in the first form, or something like that. I'm certain people would have the same reaction. It may be a pain in the *** to do and only help a marginal amount and be hard to even notice when people are using it but it would still feel like an exploit to a lot of people.

Re: Exploit question
 

Sombre, there is the catch. You don't want it in the game, but I do. Just like I wanted battlefield enchantments staying the way they were. I haven't used either in MP and it is easy enough to detect when someone does and make house rules against it.

It is not fair that YOU can complain to a company that developed a game I paid a lot of money for and get the game altered. Now I am left in a situation where I can never mod in an intended fire and flee enchantment for SP use. If the Bogus thing were to get changed, I wouldn't be able to use his orders towards the end of a SP just to have something to do for fun.

The complaining from your camp alters MY game, not just your MP games. And that is not right. You guys should have used assassins against the MoD commanders, or Mind Hunts etc. You guys should be using amulets of missile protection against fire at enemy commanders.

Instead you guys just want a game where you make a bunch of stupid gargoyles and tartarians and cast arcane nexus. QUIT screwing up my game!

Re: Exploit question
 

So your argument is that the developers shouldn't respond to user requests or complaints?

Re: Exploit question
 

Let me agree with some very respectable people, but from a totally new direction.
I dont care who meant or didnt mean it to be in. If I can RPG it, then its part of the game.

Bogus and company is an important part of Illwinter history. Its based on the devs original DnD adventuring party. Bogus was also the companys name before they changed it to Illwinter. So I have no problem that its a soft spot in the devs heart. They changed the scripting option in all units but those. Maybe it just didnt feel right to nerf Bogus.

So..
if I can manage to capture the legendary Illwinter adventuring groups member named Bogus, then I gain the ability to have him teach a new combat skill to my commanders. There. Its part of the game. (well my games anyway altho I would of course abide by an individual game creators rules)

Its probably not hugely more beneficial than other random events in the game.

Re: Exploit question
 

Battlefield enchantments remaining after the caster retreats, when one is supposed to be able to end enchantments by killing the caster is clearly something that should have been fixed years ago. Leaving it as it only makes first round casting by the defender even more important than it currently is.

This is a ridiculous statement. Of course it's fair. You could have complained back and made valid arguments, but then, nobody really cares about SP balance in this game, because the AI isn't capable of putting up a decent fight.

Assasins? Those guys that can't kill even non-mage commanders and still eat up commander recruitment slots? That less than half the nations have access too? Or mind hunt? Which essentially means that you play R'lyeh, Bandar log, Pythium, or Arco, and only Arco if you don't want a bunch of expensive feebleminded mages sitting around.

Where are we supposed to be getting the hundreds of gems, and the hours of micromanagement needed for management of such items? Are we all supposed to only play air/astral nations so that we have your supposed counters available?

Stop assuming that the vanilla game is sacrosanct.

Re: Exploit question
 

I never once mentioned MoD. I was merely pointing out the various ways in which K was demonstrably wrong. So I have no idea what you are talking about.


I second sombre, on all counts.


Baalz - I would consider things to be an exploit if the devs consider them to be exploits. JK and KO do not always consider "undocumented features" and unintended mechanics to be exploits, such as for example reverse communions. But if they did consider something unintended to be an exploit, I would feel that it was an exploit as well. That is not the only reason I would consider something to be an exploit, though I feel it is a good reason to do so.

Again, I wasn't getting mad at K for having a different opinion, I saw that he was posting nonsense, showed why it was nonsense, and got on his case for attacking another poster (and everyone else who doesn't explicitly agree with him) for saying things that they clearly had not said in any way, shape or form.


And to foodstamp's post after mine - As far as I can tell no one is trying to get it changed so that you can't copy bogus' orders. OP asks a question. A bunch of people respond and state their opinion. No one says "hey this should be changed by the devs because it's buggy". House rules continue to decide whether copying bogus' orders is okay or not and life goes on. Especially since at this point I'm pretty sure the devs are done making such changes to the game.

Re: Exploit question
 

I think that most people prefer smooth and balanced game. Where your skill decides if you win or not. Without some bugs wrecking your game. And exploits are pretty much bugs. As game admin I don't want to list all possible things that should be banned [it'd be nice to create that list though] and as a player I don't want to worry if my neighbour is not using dirty trick, making him suddenly much stronger than he should be.

Most exploits are not vocally protested because they are very rarely used. Be it MoD, Bogus orders or VP ceding. Almost every good player is above strats like that. The problem is with that 'almost' and problems they create. And arguing that most of mp community spoils their fun is really selfish.

And yes, I am against tartarian spamming and whole mechanics behind them. They should be fixed. Same for some other things, like uber globals. Good thing clamming is gone.

Re: Exploit question
 

Foodstamp:

Ok, I used some time and did a proper search for Kristoffer's posts about Bogus as your reference was a bit untrue.

First post: [10-02-07]

"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."


Another post:

"BTW, you are not supposed to take Bogus' things from him. Especially if you think that you can make better stuff for yourself."