[Valerius]

I'll preface this by saying that I've only looked over the change log, not yet tested the mod, and that I'm in biased in favor of anything that reduces micro. At first I wasn't too enthusiastic about the changes (especially because they hit my favored glamour nations hard) but after thinking it over I think there are some good things here - though I do have some concerns.


SDRs: the thing with SDRs isn't the additional blood slave on a successful check but the fact that the chance of a successful check for a B1 mage is dramatically increased. So nations that are rely on non-cap B1 mages for blood hunting take a much bigger hit with the elimination of SDRs than nations that rely on B2+ non-cap blood hunters. Nations with cheap B1 mages (Mictlan) can more easily compensate for the lack of SDRs than nations with expensive B1 mages (Vanheim) but they are still impacted. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, though, as I'm in the camp that thinks blood magic is OP. My concern is with a blood nation like Niefelheim that relies on B2+ non cap blood hunters and isn't really hurt much by this - they actually gain in power relative to other blood nations. So I'd like to see what is effectively a nerf to blood magic applied evenly. The solution can vary depending on the nation in question. As far as Niefel/Jotun go I rather like the idea of changing Skratti paths from W2B2 +100%WDNB to W2B1 +100%WDNB (which has the added bonus of making it harder for them to cast thug/SC killing Life for a Life and Claws of Kokytos in the late game).

Note: I'm assuming the elimination of SDRs wasn't just intended to reduce micro but to nerf blood. If it was only intended to reduce micro then giving dousing bonuses to blood mages would equalize things again (though it would make a nation like Mictlan in particular more powerful by eliminating the need for the time/cost of making SDRs for their massed blood hunters).


Dwarven hammers: Just as with SDRs the elimination of hammers does not effect all nations equally. Sure, every nation ends up using them for forging but not all nations suffer equally from their removal. Nations that need to equip thugs or forge boosters cheaply are impacted much more than nations who don't rely on those things as much. Now of course, everyone eventually needs SCs but here I don't think eliminating hammers has as much impact. The additional forging cost as a percentage of total summoning/forging cost without a hammer is smaller than the 50% increase in cost in equipping a Sidhe Lord with a frost brand and vine shield.

Still, I do like this change as long as the fact that it hurts some nations more than others is taken into consideration. I think forge bonuses ranging from 10-15% to 25% on the appropriate mages of nations that are most effected by the lack of hammers can be both thematic and differentiate them more than hammers ever did. In cases where it really isn't thematic to grant a forge bonus another boost could be considered.


Fire/Frost Brands: I don't really get the nerf of these, especially in conjunction with the elimination of hammers making them more expensive to forge. Sure, they're popular multi-purpose weapons but I don't think that in itself qualifies them for nerfing. And this change, like with hammers, impacts thugs (especially human strength thugs) more than SCs. The frost brand nerf is particularly grievous since that weapon isn't even armor piercing. At the old damage level a Sidhe Lord's chances if they ran into a bane lord weren't good - with this change they are pretty much non-existent. Heck, their chances against any kind of decently armored troop go down sharply. And when a nation only has one trick having that trick nerfed is painful... Really, this change seems like it's intended to solve a non-existent problem.


Ulm's FotA: If I had to pick one change I think will not last this is it. Sure, Ulm has problems but giving them a level 0 version of one of the most powerful spells in the game doesn't seem the way to solve it and I think will just be abused. Though it will work against Ulm in one sense: the logical thing to do would be to dogpile them before they can get a chance to really start reaping the benefits of their FotA. If I were starting a game today this is the one thing I would definitely change.


Last thing: all of the above is intended to be constructive input. I certainly appreciate the work QM has put into the mod and major changes are always going to need some testing and balancing. And of course I've got my own biases: changes that hurt my favorite nations are going to prompt me to respond but when CBM 1.6 eliminated the clams I disliked so much I didn't have any complaints.