|
|
|
|
|
October 3rd, 2008, 06:23 AM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
As a sub-suggestion:
I believe (pending testing later today) that Jotun and Agarthan boulders are parryable, even by something like the machakan hide shield. Making them AN or AP won't change this and making them AOE-1 is basically too nuts.
However there is a way to make missile weapons unparryable by shields. I did it with the skink blowpipes to make them good anti skirmisher weapons and I also did it with the Warplightning Thrower of the Skaven, because it didn't make sense for AN warp energy blasts to be parried by shields. All you need to do is make the actual weapon do 1 damage, capped. Then you add a #secondaryeffectalways of something like 'Boulder impact' with an appropriate damage value. Voila! Unparryable boulders that aren't aoe.
|
October 3rd, 2008, 07:08 AM
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 5,921
Thanks: 194
Thanked 855 Times in 291 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
It'd seem harsh, though, that the shield protection wasn't used against the boulders. A heavily shielded unit should be at least somewhat protected against the boulders.
|
October 3rd, 2008, 07:23 AM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
This is true. A heavy tower shield should add at least something to your prot vs the boulder. However given the choice between a tower shield not adding any prot against a big boulder and a machakan with a hide shield batting it away like it's an sling stone, I know which I prefer.
|
October 4th, 2008, 01:15 PM
|
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florence, Italy
Posts: 1,424
Thanks: 740
Thanked 112 Times in 63 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
I don't think I would try to parry a giant piece of rock coming to my face, expecially if thrown by an enormous, strong cyclops it is dodge or be squeezed, in reality (sadly)
Oh, I don't want to become the "Fortuneteller guy", but I think from the description both the Lady of Fortune and the Lord of Plenty may deserve some Fortunetelling ability, as they both are supposed to "bring luck to the people around them"... yet they don't have the tag... so, maybe not the amount right for the Oracle, but some Fortunetelling would add some flavour
__________________
IN UN LAMPO DI GLORIA!
Last edited by Tifone; October 4th, 2008 at 01:17 PM..
|
October 4th, 2008, 02:29 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Well the lady of fortune increases luck scale iirc.
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Sombre For This Useful Post:
|
|
October 6th, 2008, 04:05 AM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastern Finland
Posts: 7,110
Thanks: 145
Thanked 153 Times in 101 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombre
Well the lady of fortune increases luck scale iirc.
|
Generates good events regardless of Luck scale, I think. Similar to how Doom Horrors make bad events.
|
October 6th, 2008, 03:55 PM
|
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: guess - and you'll be wrong
Posts: 834
Thanks: 33
Thanked 187 Times in 66 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
While updating the CBM Forging References, I found two small s.
The first is with the Evening Star. It is not working as intended due to 2 misspellings of the word "effect". Currently, the erroneous code is:
Code:
#selectitem "Evening Star"
#constlevel 2
#end
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryefect 0
#end
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryefectalways 305
#end
The second is with the 2-handed Bane Blade. It is still a Construction-2 item, though presumably should be a Construction-0 item like its 1-handed brother. This is because they're both called "Bane Blade" and the game only mods the first, 1-handed version.
--------------
Both s can easily be corrected by appending your CBcomplete_1.3.dm file with the following code:
Code:
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryeffect 0
#end
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryeffectalways 305
#end
#selectitem 30
#constlevel 0
#end
|
October 12th, 2008, 11:26 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 339
Thanks: 125
Thanked 24 Times in 15 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Typo for the phoenix pretender description "... but lcks the physical strgth..."
|
October 30th, 2008, 04:07 PM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: houston TX
Posts: 493
Thanks: 32
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
heya, I've been messing around with MA Man in CBM, and have discovered two things which I didn't know.
Knights of avalon aren't sacred despite costing more than knights of the shroud (EA ERMOR) which have recup as well... is it just paying for speed?
This doesn't bother me so much, since I doubt I would use them at the price even if they were... cheap stealthy wardens are clearly better assuming you don't need strat move 3.
The second thing does surprise me and I'd like to ask why it was done.... man MA longbows only have range 35 now, which makes any old composite bow (even in EA) superior.
This is bizarre and arguably some sort of dominions sacrilege, and especially unexpected as the resource cost was bumped up.
It's true than man's longbows were best in game, but they haven't much else going for them, and there doesn't seem to be a way to maintain an advantage (i.e dispel storm or arrow fend), so its hardly unbalancing.
Anyway just wanted to get that off my chest... now I have to go back to designing an MA man pretender for Dodeicus, that won't be a total pushover.
Send me a PM if you have any ideas.
|
October 30th, 2008, 08:42 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabelais
heya, I've been messing around with MA Man in CBM, and have discovered two things which I didn't know.
Knights of avalon aren't sacred despite costing more than knights of the shroud (EA ERMOR) which have recup as well... is it just paying for speed?
This doesn't bother me so much, since I doubt I would use them at the price even if they were... cheap stealthy wardens are clearly better assuming you don't need strat move 3.
The second thing does surprise me and I'd like to ask why it was done.... man MA longbows only have range 35 now, which makes any old composite bow (even in EA) superior.
EDIT: Thanks fungalreason and cleveland, I'll look into those for next version.
This is bizarre and arguably some sort of dominions sacrilege, and especially unexpected as the resource cost was bumped up.
It's true than man's longbows were best in game, but they haven't much else going for them, and there doesn't seem to be a way to maintain an advantage (i.e dispel storm or arrow fend), so its hardly unbalancing.
Anyway just wanted to get that off my chest... now I have to go back to designing an MA man pretender for Dodeicus, that won't be a total pushover.
Send me a PM if you have any ideas.
|
Knights of Avalon were never sacred... I leave such thematic decisions to KO.
The longbow thing was a change I thought I rolled back, I guess it's still in there somewhere.
EDIT: Thanks fungalreason and cleveland, I'll look into those next version.
Last edited by quantum_mechani; October 30th, 2008 at 08:45 PM..
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|