[Fyron]

Despite flaws like this, the game is exceptionally intriguing and well worth the effort of playing. So don't use archers. (I don't.) It's not an insurmountable issue.

It is for me. I like having realistic armies with combined arms. Having missile weapons so deadly to your own units greatly reduces the strategic options of the game.

I disagree. I've been playing Jotunheim exclusively, both the demo for about 4 days, and the full game for another 4 days. I don't think it's such a big deal. I only use 1/3-1/2 of the full variety of Jotunheim units. But that's my play style.

As it should be, unless your play style is to play weaker than you could.

Here is an example: Jotun Spearman compared to Jotun Huskarl with spear: 18 prot. vs. 15 prot.; 10 def. vs. 11 def.; 6 fatigue vs. 5 fatigue; 12 combat move vs. 13 combat move. Now for cost: 30 gold/32 res vs. 35 gold/23 resources.

That 5 gold extra has rarely been a determining factor; it is the 9 fewer resources that often allow more of the Huskarls to be built, which are roughly as strong as the Spearmen indivually. Not very balanced here it would seem.

The same sort of oddities appear with Axemen and the axe-wielding Huskarls.

The Hirdman are not that much stronger than the other melee units, save their longswords being slightly better than axes. And yet they cost a lot more, as they have high gold and resource costs.

I have not noticed the Woodsman or Neifel Giants being that much more effective when lead by a Gode or a Herse. Maybe those blessings just need much better priests or some such to be effective.

I think you're nit-picking rather than looking to see the myriad possibilities of what you can do with what's been given to you.

Well lets see.. nit-picking is vital to determining whether a game is right for you or not. The details are everything.

Now as for the other part... I have most certainly considered hte myriad of possibilities, and the bizarreness of how the unit costs work limits them.

Unlike many games that I could name, Dom 2 is excellent despite its flaws, flaws which in no way make the game unplayable or even unenjoyable.

For you.

It's also more interesting to play a game where a reasonable number of the defeated side are able to continue to fight in later battles, instead of being wiped out in all-or-nothing battles

I never said that a morale system was bad. It is a good thing for games to have. I have just said that the way the morale system works in Dominions 2 is a bit strange (or more than a bit in some cases).

It makes wars much more strategically interesting than if it were like, say, SE4, where entire wars are frequently decided by single to-the-death-despite-the-odds bloodbaths.

I don't know what kind of games you have played, but I have frequently seen people come back after losing such a battle, and have done so myself on more than one occasion.

Originally posted by Arryn:

quote:

---

Originally posted by johan osterman:
Units do get a morale bonus of +1 in their home province. And an additional one from their home dominion. This might seem like it wouldn't have much effect but it does.

I was thinking of something a bit more. Instead of +1 while in dominion, say +1 per 3 dominion levels (rounded down), but only in friendly-controlled provinces. No bonus at all if outside of your own "borders".

---

Yes... +1 does not make a whole lot of difference.

Another note on morale... please explain to me how half of my army routing AFTER the enemy had routed, save an infantry or two, is at all realistic, historically accurate, or good for gameplay. I have seen this happen more than once.