|
Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
I recently made High seraphs home only, and got some reactions on the matter.
Contrary to what I believed there seems to be sentiments claiming MA Caelum is weak. I would like to know how Caelum is percieved, MA in particular, but also the other eras in comparison. Something to begin with: Mammoths only viable option Strategic move and flight Cold Easy to get shock res on a anti-caelum-SC |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
ME and LE Caelum are powerful, but not the most powerful of their eras. The Caelum with the biggest problem is EA, specifically the eagle kings.
There are many things eagle kings are good for, but what really stomps oppositions is their ability to thunder strike spam like no other, it's scary as soon as they get it, and once thy have storm and storm power it really gets nuts. Once they hit critical mass of eagle kings, there is very little that can stop one of their armies. Mammoths are another issue, but they are really not much different than elephants, which we beat to death in another thread. I will say though that archers are a viable supplement to their armies. Flying infantry though, especially the low armor ones, are a joke. For the purposes of combat, I would usually rather have a militia than a spire horn warrior. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Well, I've seen Eagle Kings make a decent show of it (for obvious reasons), but outside of them I personally haven't seen anything scary out of Caelum other than a Mammoth rush. This seems to be supported by the victorious nations thread.
Not a terribly large sample size, but outside of EA it looks like the best Caelum has done is a LA draw (nothing in MA). Perhaps somebody who as played/played against MA Caelum more might offer some other opinions. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Well, I am playing MA Caelum in the same game Kristoffer's playing MA Mictlan (Armadillo), and I suppose my success may be partially behind why Kristoffer thinks MA Caelum needs a reduction in power.
I am also the one who got the draw in a MP who Baalz refers too playing LA Caelum. I have never played EA Caelum as yet. My opinion for what its worth is of the 3 eras, MA Caelum is the weakest, LA Caelum has alot more going for it and EA Caelum is the strongest. In the Armadillo game where I am playing MA Caelum I have been hugely lucky in everyway, none of my opponents I have faced have give me a major challenge. None tried to counter my powerful air magic by spending 5A gems making rings of tamed lightning or copper plate. Even MA Man who has powerful air magic himself. I have also been very lucky in magic sites I have found, giving me easy access to every shpere of magic. I would have been in serious trouble otherwise, MA Caelum only has Air/Water really. Finally I have benefited by having strong reliable allies who are happy to trade magic items with me. So MA Caelum in Armadillo is only a yardstick to measure the nation by when pretty much everything goes its way. To directly answer Kristoffer's question, yes Mammoths are the easiest way to expand early on, at the start of the game you have few other options. Strategic movement/flight, those are Caelum's stongest abilities by far but only come into play mid game onwards. Caelum of all eras is the ultimate raiding nation. Cold? Not sure what you mean by this. Easy to get SR on a anti-Caelum SC? Very easy, 5A gems and a 1A mage will do it everytime with little to no research. Your gargoyle SC's/thugs with there 100% resistance to everything scare me silly kristoffer... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif So I think restricting High Seraphs to capital only would be a major blow to MA Caelum, making a ok nation at present a whole lot weaker. Finally, I frequent this forum alot and I have never read a thread complaining about any of the 3 era Caelum's. The only threads I have read about Caelum is how to play it correctly. New players tend to recruit the flying infantry/archers then cannot expand as it is too easily destroyed by even indies. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
I like early Age Caelum very much. They have many strenghts and strategies, and that for different times in the game. They can go mammoths early, they have air magic in early middle game, Eagle kings can be both battle mages and great fighters, and Harabs develop death branch. Cold scale is great to get points for a superb pretender - many paths on a Ghost King. EA Caelum is awesome.
Late age Caelum is OK, but both its air and death is underwhelming. Most nations have OK counters to mammoths, not enough to stop the rush maybe, but enough to make it costly, and once that trick is outgrown, and shock resistance widely available, the nation shines nowhere. Still, with death it is not a push over, because pretender can be good with scales. Middle age Caelum is crap. The guys who hooked me to Dominions tried hard to make them work, and got tired to lose. It's got nothing. Mammoths, but everyone expects that. Once that's spent, you have to rely on shock and cold, and that's easy to counter on a fighter. For a real laugh, use a well blessed MA Ermor against MA Caelum. I guarantee it, the Caelum player will be really frustrated. There is litterally nothing he can do - mammoths get slaughtered, his God gets bad dreams, his lightning is useless with a tiny little ring, and he has nothing else. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
> Well, I am playing MA Caelum in the same game Kristoffer's playing MA Mictlan (Armadillo), and I suppose my success may be partially behind why Kristoffer thinks MA Caelum needs a reduction in power.
Perhaps to some extent. Your success didn't refute the preconception I had on Caelum. I've actually heard stuff on Caelum in general (it might have been EA), not MA in particular. I just assumed it was a general tendency, since Caelum was powerful in dom2. --- If several people quickly argue against the home only stuff I will change it back. I made the change a bit out of a whim, when I checked what nations had access to higher lvl mages in the MA era. Atlanits, C'tis and Caelum struck me as the only ones with mages recruitable anywhere (there could be more), and I had the general pereconception that All caelums were strong. I was a bit uncertain (thematically) since Caelum is a magocracy, but decidet to go for it. Since we're conservative I'm not too bothered with sticking to the previous way of things. But, since the patch is about to be launched on the beta (once JK's comp starts working again) , I would like quick feedback on this. I will not make any further changes in this patch, apart from this one. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
Why on earth would you do that? I only know MA Caelum, and while it is a powerful nation it is by no means overpowered. Mammoths? Other nations have elephants and besides early expansion or against some dud nations (think Ulm) they become worthless. Try sending them against any nation with astral/death mages and see what's good for you. The flying infantry? Brittle. I tend to like the spire horn archers because of their shock and cold resistances can have a synergy with spamming lightning/cold spells, and the storm guards for the same reason. But they are resource expensive and... brittle. And lightning/cold resistances are easy to come by, especially on thug, SC's. I am not going to argue this business anymore, others have done it (and will do it) much better than I. I'm depressed http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/Sick.gif |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
> In the Armadillo game where I am playing MA Caelum I have been hugely lucky in everyway, none of my opponents I have faced have give me a major challenge. None tried to counter my powerful air magic by spending 5A gems making rings of tamed lightning or copper plate. Even MA Man who has powerful air magic himself. I have also been very lucky in magic sites I have found, giving me easy access to every shpere of magic. I would have been in serious trouble otherwise, MA Caelum only has Air/Water really. Finally I have benefited by having strong reliable allies who are happy to trade magic items with me.
Interesting. I consider my own career in that game luckier than anyone deserves. My luck has been manyfold: Strategical, weak/stong/entangled neighbours whose homes I could take easily. Magical, access to all magic but blood, nice sites. Random stuff, nice events, and other random effects. Bad events on my neighbors finishing them off or blocking them. Wonder if C'tis and Pangaea feels the same. Did they get lucky, or did they get stong by themselves http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
> I'm depressed.
Why? Don't you want the high seraphs recruitable anywhere again? |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Maybe it was an unrelated comment. He certainly didn't sound super chirpy.
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
FWIW, I'm not all that impressed by Eagle Kings.
Yes, they are an awesome unit, but the problem is the EA is the people who don't get crazy awesome units - not the people who do. If druids were twenty feet tall and breathed fire, this wouldn't be a game balance problem. My feeling is that every EA nation should show up and shout "grab your ankles!" to the whole world. I digress. One time someone brought a nasty choir of raiding eagle kings against me - I successfully guessed where he was going, and intercepted with an army of shadow-blasting communion-heading hangadrotts, and killed or paralyzed all of them on the first turn. This was obviously a crazy late-game situation (I had iron order tower and amber-clan mages to make the rune smashers, eyes of the void and communion gear, respectively. And enough hangadrotts and death gems to make four such interceptor groups.) So don't nerf eagle kings, either. Anyway, if you're going to rework MA Caelum, and part of the rework will put the high seraph as capital only, that's fine. As a standalone change it's a needless nerf. Here's a suggestion: give Caelum some national unit buffs that only affect their own stuff - makes sense to me that air magic could be used to buff a flying unit in various ways. An only-vs-flying bit in the #spec field would have some other uses, as well, but I don't know if there are spare bits or not. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
I have little experience with MA Caelum. I was playing them in Nuance till recently, but besides the mammoths (which chew indies and most PD to shreds, but are weak to magic), and the high seraphs (which are very good casters but old age was really hamstringing mine), I didn't really see a lot to recommend them. As I said, I have only minimal experience with them however. I would think that keeping the High Seraphs recruitable anywhere should be fine. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
"None tried to counter my powerful air magic by spending 5A gems making rings of tamed lightning or copper plate." I know personally that those wouldn't have helped in the slightest. I got beat by fog warriors being cast in multiple instances, and by a set of three raiding parties working over my borders. So I fail to see how either of these items would have made any difference. Jazzepi |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
I think MA caelum is fine as is. Fix the elephant thing and they will not be in the top 5.
I am playing MA Ctis in the big game, and holding my own against players and races reputed to be among the best. But that is because MA Ctis has good research capabilities, and I took a strong d pretender and my best troops are all death summons. MA Ctis recruitable units just do not hold a candle to lanka's. I basically have to use death summons. My castle bought troops are just impotent. While lanka is a different age, really the same holds true in the MA as well. With the cold blooded disadvantage, I would like to see at least 1 good MA Ctis capital only bought troop. Even if it is expensive as hell, just 1 that can be relied upon to hold its own in a pinch against the elite units of other nations. And MA Ctis pd is sad as well. If ermor gets a nether dart pd mage, I see no harm in giving ctis one that can spam a few skellies. But MA Ctis is an average MA race. So I would rather see MA Ulm fixed 1st since they are broken. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
I would like to see the flight/fatigue rule reworked (at least for Caelum). The current rules make their infantry nearly worthless. They invariably charge in, swing their swords ineptly for 2-3 rounds, pile up the fatigue, start taking heavy losses, and then flee like a bunch of cowards.
If you really want to nerf Caelum, I would suggest fixing the Hurricane exploit. The spell is supposed to only work vs. coastal provs. but works anywhere. Considering that Caelum has the best scouts in the game, it is very easy for them to quickly id an opponents capital and then Hurricane it to oblivion (shutting down production of all those cool cap only troops). Although if we were fixing spells, I would like to see the Wind Ride spell fixed. It would give Caelum a much needed boost IMO. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
Silly Meglobob... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
MA Atlantis is a terrible MA race as well. Someone mentioned them and the word "balanced" in the same sentence-I could not disagree more.
Their lack of any ranged troops and their slow moving infantry make them sitting ducks out of water when facing composite bows, longbows, xbows etc. At least Ryleh has precision 100 ranged troops and MA Oceania has tough fast moving cavalry units(with recuperation) that allow them to deal with land races. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Atlantis is not that weak, deep seers are an excellent value, and kings of the deep offer versatility and buffness. Also, well deployed lobsters are not to be underestimated when expanding or in an early war.
In the longer term they are actually better much better at fighting on land than Oceania. Oceania has almost nothing as far as battle magic, while Atlantis can do serious damage with falling frost. All that said, they have my vote was one of the nations with the least flavor, so some extra spice for them wouldn't be amiss I think. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
My pretender for that game was an astral fountain. That was the last game I played the "uber-scales". I'm glad I tried it, it just isn't effective is the problem. That era of man needs pretender magic diversity. I did enjoy rushing Argatha with a ton of A3 hags. Jazzepi |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
More seriously, I wouldn't say I've had any amazingly unbelievable luck, but my starting position was strong (corner of the map, but not tucked so far into the corner that other nations could cut me off easily), and I did find an enchantress province, giving me minor access to all paths I lacked (except blood), so I can't complain either. On a different note, while I don't think MA C'tis is particularly strong (not particularly weak either mind you), I do find them really fun to play. The swampy flavor is nice, and the Miasma adds a unique twist, with some serious advantages and drawbacks to consider. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Yes, I'd say starting position is very important. Coupled with some nice early sites and an exploitable enemy and you're set.
There is a definite need for more wraparound maps. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
I'd love to see "wraparound" as a random map feature. Infact, I'm surprised it wasn't included. Maybe it's a headache to code, or not a priority, I don't know.
Caelum's never impressed me as much as I wish it would when I play it, even Eagle Kings. I guess they just don't fit too well with my style of play, which is fine. It would be nice to see some specifically Caelum undead units, if only for the theme/graphics, but to me, even if they have raw power in the form of spells, they seem a bit lacking in interest. I mean, to me there's something disturbing about a nation of flying birdmen with all sorts of elemental powers, eldritch origins, and magical armaments, who's sacred unit is just a regular joe trudging across the battlefield so he can whack some other guy with a sword. Aside from that minor stuff, which is all personal taste anyway, it's really a well-designed group of nations that's fun in part because their are several good and obvious strategies for them at every age, and at the same time, plenty you can do with them outside of what's been well-established. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
Jazzepi |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
The problem I see with the impression of strength in Caelum is that its a hard nation to find anyone playing it AS Caelum. Many people tend to ignore the basic thematic advantages of the nation and play it was they would a Civ4 nation. Of course, in that mode its pretty weak.
Some boosts to make it better able to make use of flying armies, and cold, might help. But it would be hard to do that without making it too powerful for those who are properly playing it. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
It's widely acknowledged as one of the best raiding nations. That seems a fairly thematic use. But isn't enough to make it too powerful. At some point you actually have to take and hold land.
The problem with relying on the flying armies is that the flying troops are weak. Good archers, but there are cheaper good archers and archers are easy to counter. There are cheap counters to both cold and lightning, at least for thugs, that counter most of what the mages can do. If there's a proper, thematic way to play it, that will actually work in a regular MP game (not a tiny blitz map, but not one of your huge maps either) then it shouldn't be boosted. Can you suggest one? |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
What I would love to do with EA Caelum is take some Eagle Kings, kit them out, put them on orders to attack archers or attack rear, and then spam Shock Wave or something similar. I think that would be cool, but I am too afraid to potentially waste such an expensive unit that way.
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
With an E9 bless and a few buffs, Eagle Kings can be very effective when used this way. They don't really need to be kitted out, although reinvigoration items are useful.
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
//I haven't tried Caelum yet. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Its weak.
Troops are just bad. Archers are ok, though not stellar (shortbows). Infantry is crap. Mammoths are good, but lategame they are quite counterable. No reliable meat shield. Mages - not stellar. High seraphs are ok with thunderstrike, but regular seraphs are so-so, even when orb lighting is researched. Lightning doesnt even reliably kill 1 regular unit anymore, quickness doesnt allow to shoot them twice per turn, etc etc. Raiding - who said raiding?.. Decent flying infantry troops have movement 2 (not 3), take hellish amount of time to amass and dont fight that well. In fact, they die rather easily and rout all the time. And due to the fact they arent stealthy they are also vulnerable to teleporting and cloud trapezing responses, as well as global spells. Magic paths diversity - poor. Just 2 paths, both inefficient against SC's and thugs. Also, Caelum has difficulties equipping SCs and thugs itself. There are no AOE lightning weapons, and cold AOE doesnt hurt undead, constructs etc. So, bad troops, average mages, little sound lategame strategies I can think of. I'd rate Caelum as one of the worst nations atm. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Although I don't agree with Kuritza, I think Caelum is not as powerful as it was in DOM2, and that making the High S. capitol only is not the way to go.
On the other hand, while I'd be concerned about making them too powerful, I've always wondered, thematicaly, why they don't have a blessable unit that flys... |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
MA Caelum is not as weak as you make it out to be, it is true it doesn't have all that many possible angles in the early game, but what options it does have are very powerful. And it's true they can be screwed later on if they fail to diversify, but that's true of almost everyone.
The thing about raiding with Caelum is you really do have to just about ignore the flying infantry. Build your raid groups instead out of mages and archers, with decoy archers spread around. 20-30 archers and 1-2 mages properly deployed can deal with most reasonable PD. They also have a lot of other little bonuses, virtual immunity to unrest from spies, extra points from cold 3, a mage with a forge bonus, flying scouts, ashema spentas for late game. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
It sounds to me like the infantry need to get fixed up. Giving them +4 defence might do it. You want them powerfull enough so that they don't get killed so easy, but still weaker then other infantry. The slight weakness would be made up for by flying.
I have never played caelum in multiplayer, but if I did I would want to use the flying infantry.That is what is supposed to make Caelum unique. If Instead of using flying units you are forced to use mammoths, then a lot of the appeal of that nation is gone. Personally from a themantic percpective I think that the high seraph should be capital only, flying infantry made stronger, and mammoths made slower.Mammoths should not be feared as much as elephants. They should be a strategic option that is handy at times, such as Pythiums Hydra, and not the only viable strategy. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
+4 defense doesn't make a lot of sense by itself, you have to ask where it is coming from. If it's to represent the fact they fly, it would have to be added to every flying unit, most of which are already among the best in the game.
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
The +4 defense can be attributed to combination of being able to fly, of have extra brid like agility, and having gone through extensive training on how to make use of their agility and do hit and run tactics. Other flyers simpl;y woudn't have that same agility and training.
I see caelum ifantry as being very good at staying out of harms way until they see a momment to strike. I don't see units like draconians, angels or devils doing that. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
And to be honest, I'm not sure 4 more defense would be enough to tempt me on most of the infantry anyway. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
The stats for the Caelum infantry are not great to begin with, but flight just makes them suck.
They rush into battle where they are exposed to concentrated fire. They fatigue out very rapidly, making their sup-par stats simply abysmal. And when they inevitably take the heavy losses that they have coming to them, they fly away. Which means if you are playing Caelum and win a battle with an army that included infantry in its ranks, you are likely to be without any infantry for a follow up assault. You are constantly having to go back and round the cowardly infantry from all surrounding friendly provs. The elite Caelum infantry make descent bodyguards, but that is about it. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
How about another land-based infantry unit for Caelum? Not as defenseless as Wingless, not as resource-heavy as sacreds. Paul Anderson described such unit in the War or the Wing Men, when that trader convinced the Wing Men that controlling the ground is just as important as controlling the skies.
Some bulky non-ice armor that prevents flying (and can be mass-produced), like standard chainmail or scale mail, and a tower shield. Such warriors can make big 'jumps' thus moving faster than average, but they wont fly. Read what Quantum says - 'ignore the flying infantry'; exactly, it can be ignored. A nation needs some infantry that can fullfil its purpose. And in my opinion, cheaper Caelum mages (1W, 2A 1W) are baaaaaaaaaaad. As it is now, Caelum depends on mages heavily, so I think making their only real battlemage capitol-only will cripple an already average nation. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
You can get around some of that Saint_Dude by setting the flying infantry to be body guards of flying commanders. You then give the commander the commands to hold for 5 turns, and then attack rear.
The real problem is the flying mechanism in the game is not all that great. Just like for light calvarary there needs to be some sort of skimish command to make them usefull. If you ignore the limitations of the dominions battle engine, the Caleum race would use their mobility in battle a lot better. Archers would fire at the infantry until the infantry got close. Then they would take off to a furtor distance and continue to fire. It means that countering the archers with any sort of infantry or calvary wuold be pointless. You would have to use archers of your own, or magic. The caleum infantry in the mean time would mostly fly around out of harms way, until they see an a weakness somewhere in the army. Then they would quickly strike. As soon as resitance builds up though they would fly away and look for another opening. Still the infantry would probably not be all that usefull inside of a battle.They would be more effective outside of the battle. They would contantly be able to ambush small patrols, and break down supply lines. Even if the the flying ifantry is not all that good, there hit and run attacks would be deadly. I do not expect illwinter to ever improve on the combat options. It does not seem to be a high priority of theres. Therfore the only way to mimic any of that is with stats. They should be good at taking out PD, and small patrols, but less uselfull in big battles. The best way that I see to mimic this is to rasie their defense so they are harder to hit, and maybe give them sort of first strike abilty, where there first attack is extra deadly. (to simulate an ambush). The extra defense can be seen as inherent to the Caelum race. Just like C'tis has natural extra protection, Calelum can have extra defense. It seems unthemtic for me that Caleum's main strategy in the game is mammoths. For this reason, and to make Caelum more unique and fun to play, I would like to see their flying infantry improved. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Caelum does not need ANY bonuses. Period. They are one of the stronger MA races right now. The only thing that keeps them balanced is their horrible pd, and the liability of their fliers.
Better infantry? They have tough infantry already. They have mammoths, the best elephant tramplers in the game. Great research. Great battle magic. on to ma Atlantis.... With all due respect to QM, who has devoted his life to balance, I maintain MA Atlantis is one of the worst ma races. So what if they can cast falling frost? How does that help when your ground troops are slow and are being slaughtered by longbows or composite bows, which are out of range of falling frost? Many maps have very few water provinces so moving on to land is essential EARLY in the game. Every race has some possible solutions. MA Atlantis can cast water elementals in battle etc. But you have to be highly skilled imho to beat another player of decent skill when you are playing ma atlantis. And early in the game, MA Oceania cavalry and infantry are quite good against most land races' units. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
One small thing that would really benefit Caelum in any age, without making them overly more powerful, is to equip some wingless troops with harpoons. That would give them a nice little boost, but at the same time, harpoons aren't going to win a game by themselves. They're also thematic, since any nation's going to want to possess the ability to strike at it's own people-and harpoons are the best choice vs flyers. Nets would also be good, as would a winged troop that simply dropped rocks on opponents.
Personally, if I were leading a nation of flyers, I'd just send them up to about 500 yards in the air with bags full of marble-sized to golfball-sized pebbles and have them drop them on any troops they happened to come across, but that's hard to simulate in the game. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
My point Xieter isn't that Caelem is weak and therefore needs their flying infantry boosted in order to make up for it. My point is that because of the flying units Caleum sounds like a unique and interesting nation to play. It is dissapointing to find that to play completively caleum is not a nation of flying units, but a nation of mammoths. If I wanted to play as tramplers I would play as Acro.
My suggestion is 1) the raiding effectiveness of the infanty be improved and 2) the mammoths are weakened in some way. This will have the effect of making Caleum more themetic and playing like the nation and unit descriptions make Caelum sound. Plus it will give Caalum more of a distinct play style that is different from the other nations. More effective flying units would be fun. Caleum is not a very balanaced nation among itself, as only some of the units are viable options. I would rather play a nation that is less completive over all but every unit has a strategic use, then a nation where only a few units are usefull. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Quote:
|
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Giving all their infantry Javelins might do something. For some reason, fliers set to Hold&Attack Closest (and first firing their javelins) seem to stay in tighter groups, and Fire Rearmost also seems to work a bit better. I noticed this when testing the very promising Caelis Immolatum (sp?) mod, that was quickly discontinued.
Here's what would have to be changed. #selectmonster 129 #weapon "Ice Lance" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 130 #weapon "Ice Lance" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 131 #weapon "Ice Lance" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 132 #weapon "Ice Blade" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 420 #weapon "Ice Blade" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 421 #weapon "Ice Lance" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 358 #weapon "Ice Blade" #weapon "Javelin" #end #selectmonster 414 #weapon "Ice Lance" #weapon "Javelin" #end |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Rock dropping combat infantry could have a single-use attack(like lances) to simulate them dropping rock/s before charging in.
I also wouldnt mind a bit of a defense bonus. I hate spanish net cafe keyboards. |
Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)
Temple guards with a water bless are capable infantry-trust me.
Mix in those high morale wingless with the mammoths and you have an unstoppable early raiding force early in the game. Research evocation, and back those mammoths up with thunderstrike/orb lighting, and your opponent better be a skilled player or it is lights out. And if the opponent is ma ulm, it is likely lights out regardless of the player's skill level. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.