![]() |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Yes, but add this system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif
|
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Quote:
|
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Quote:
PvK |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
I see that you changed your avatar for a one which fit nicely with dominions. Does it means that the famous PVK will turn his attention toward dominions, and lessen his activities in SE IV forum?
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif join us - join us - join us - join us - join us - join us - ... |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Quote:
|
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
This is the first time I see PvK with avatar. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif
Not bad though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Heh. Ya, I didn't bother with an avatar for a long time. I was browsing Mr. Gervais' icons emporium and saw what I believe is the Black Knight from Monty Python and The Holy Grail, and couldn't resist. And hey, space emperors can wear great helms if they want to; theirs probably have life support systems and HUDs (cue Darth Vader breath sound effects). I am a big Dominions fan, but I'm sure I'll stick around the SE4 forum too. Needless to say, I'm very happy Doms found a home at Shrapnel.
PvK |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
I don't really like this idea.
Dominion units already have more numbers than your average RPG character. I don't relish having to grapple with a piercing, slashing and crushing damage and the corresponding armor types. More, if the unit has multiple weapons and armor. Not to mention items, special abilities, spells and afflictions. Pidgeon-holing weapons into different 'damage types' doesn't strike me as particularly realistic. Arrows are different from spears, swords are very different from whips, etc. And, as far as I can see, the only differences in armor are already modeled in the game, that is, strength, weight and cost. Any differences in armor versus the different damage types would be largely invented, and not realistic. It seems a bit too gratuitous an attempt to inject a blatantly obvious scissors-stone-paper model into the game. I don't like it when games designers do this, I much prefer subtler approaches which give you more choice, and are also more realistic. There shouldn't be a 'best' counter. The game already features certain variations in the way damage is dealt and the way that it's recieved, apart from the raw numbers. The pikemen moral check, the flail bonus against shields, weapons with a double attack, armor-piercing damage, the knight's hoof attack and so on. I like these, I think that they add more flavor for less complication than damage types could ever do. It would be nice if there were more of them, and they were better explained. I feel kind of mean for attacking Saber Cherry's idea, especially since he liked my idea about castle resources. Oh well. Sorry. |
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Quote:
|
Re: Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush
Quote:
No hard feelings. If you don't like it, you don't like it... your idea about resource priority is good regardless of whether your puny mind can grasp the more subtle complexities of damage types http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif -Cherry |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.