Re: Some more tests.
 

Why shouldn't Ulmish infatry be as uber as Priciples?

Pythium has Uber-magepower, extremely good national summons and Principles.

Ulm has a *much* worse magepower, no national spells to speak of and infantry that sucks when compared to Principles.

[sarcasm]Yeah, Ulm is fine as it is[/sarcasm]

Ok, I admit that might have been a bit overly-dramatic comparison since Pythium is a major MA power, but there is a problem when two nations in the same age cannot even be compared against each other. But the thing is, Ulmish Infatry should be able to do more tha just die slowly and "buy time". They need to be strenght of Ulm in itself. They have a huge weakness in sucky mr, they should get something to "balance" that weakness (being extremely good in non-magic battles sounds like a good strenght). Their high prot is already balanced by high encumberance, high resource cost and low def.

Re: Some more tests.
 

> > I know that, which is why I have divided them into kills and damaging hits, and
> > have displayed the average damage.
>
> But why even bother dividing it up in this way, unless you're trying to obscure
> the fact that the arbelest does the most damage against a range of common
> protection values, even adjusted for rate of fire?

You troll. Read the post that you are quoting. It answers your question. It shows
that once again, your 'facts' aren't. I'm done talking to you, retard. If anyone
still believes that you know anything, or that you can be made to understand
anything... Well, that person is on his own.

Re: Some more tests.
 

Tuidjy, if you think that CUUnknown is a troll, you don't know what real trolling is, m'kay?

Re: Some more tests.
 

Isn't the worst ennemy of mid ulm its morale, especially on commanders (10 for the basic one ?).I currently use CBM versions, and found their troops to be interesting, if they have a decent commander.
Heavy weapons can come handy against SC or big summons.Or giants.
And shouldn't we all be like a big family...Uh?..Were not on disney chanel...OOoops..

Re: Some more tests.
 

One can be a troll without being the worst troll in existence.

By the way, I am stuck at home, sick as a dog. Anyone of those who think
that Ulm is "not that bad" wanna play a quick one on one? I'll take any
human race. Ermor, Man, Pythium, Marignon, the rather underpowered Tien Chi,
you name it.

Re: Some more tests.
 

I...Well I would...But...Some work you know...Stuff and the like....May you recover promptly.
Ah, I know...I have an enormous map to test!!! Yeah this one is THE excuse.

Re: Some more tests.
 

If you knew what a troll was, you would know better than to attack one while having personal information stored under this handle on other sites.

One might call such an action retarded, especially for a programmer.

However, since I am not in the habit of calling people who disagree with me retarded, I won't.

Re: Some more tests.
 

Petar Ivanov, MIT alum, IT Director of a company for which I do not speak,
Bulgaria People's Army hand to hand combat vice champion for 1989, twice a
world finalist in the ACM programming contest, Volvo modification enthusiast,
computer game fantatic, amateur kickboxer, archery nut, ... which one of these
should I be ashamed of, and how could you use it against me? Buddy, if I had
cared to remained anonymous, I would not have used the same handle since 1993.

Re: Some more tests.
 

I'll try to stop myself from posting anymore after this one.. We are getting angry, on a topic that's sort of a side issue anyway. I just want to be on record for a couple of things, then I will shut up.

I know that Tuidjy would kick my a$$ in a duel, especially since he's done it before. If I chose Ulm as my faction, it would probably not help my chances one bit, admittedly.

I'm trying to defend Ulm as "not being that bad" but I know just like anyone that a small boost to their infantry, mages, or whatever couldn't hurt a thing, because they still wouldn't be in the top tier of factions even then.

I grudgingly admit that the power of arbelests is debatable.. since we've been doing just that. I thought that my simplistic analysis of "how much damage does it do?" when adjusted for rate of fire would convince people, apparently I was wrong. Tuidjy's more complicated analysis is probably more accurate for many in-game situations. But.. it subtracts away killing damage from the average damage of non-killing hits, so I think it is weighted against arbelests (since arbelests have a high % of killing hits), and I think this was done on purpose. But... yeah... if you start doing some complicated analysis and looking at it in depth, it is debatable. But certainly the arbelest is a good weapon, the best against heavily armored foes.

Re: Some more tests.
 

Why would you think I would use it against you? If you think I threatened you somehow, I apologize.

Edited to be less flamey.