Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush

[Psitticine]

I also think this is a rather good idea, but for slightly different reasons. I think it would encourage combined arms, just to make sure one isn't caught with one's codpiece down, as it were. That would mean units that might otherwise fall by the wayside would have more usefulness as recruiting them into existing armies would help make sure one always has at least some of the most potent counterforces available for whatever they run into.

I tend to agree with St. Patrik in that, during the early game, one goes up against the diverse independents, and that during the middle game, one couldn't over-specialize their troops with this kind of system without becoming more vulnerable. However, I do think that those are things that would go along with what I said above to help insure a useful place for all kinds of different troops.

[Pocus]

Originally posted by Maelstorm:
Long and pointless post, licker.
This idea about weapon damages is brilliant.
If you do not like it, that is your personal problem.
The fact is, that it would raise the quality of the game, if this system would be added.
Just my 2 cents.

Short and pointless most Maelstorm. I'm a proponent of differing weapon damages, still I try to read what others say, and see that the reasoning of Licker is well thought, and certainly not pointless.

So let some year passes before posting again, I'm sure you will get at Last some wisdom (if you are capable of learning behavior).

[DominionsFan]

WOW! This system sounds damn cool! I would be very happy to see it in game!

I have a question. The AI will handle the troops properly if we will have a system like this? I mean you will have to build different troop types than, because of the various weapon damages. So if I build troops with good slashing protection, the AI will know that he must build troops with piercing attacks?
If the AI could handle this situation, than I say do not even hesitate to add this system!

[Mortifer]

Yes, I love this system too. If the AI can be scripted properly to use it well, it should be added indeed.

[Vger]

Hi,

OK, I just waded through all this and I have ONE thing to say: TOGGLES!!!!!

Please, please, please, PLEASE make this an option that we can select at game start. (Or a global option. That would even be better.)

Normally I'm a more is better kinda guy and have played these systems many times in CRPGs, RPGs and wargames, but I find myself in the camp that its swatting the coolness of a gnat with a sledgehammer made for Cthulhu. (Who is six miles tall, as I recall.)

But if, in their wisdom, the wonderful people of IW decide to put this in, if they make it optional, then we all get whatever we want. Those who want it, can play with it. Those who don't, don't have to.

Personally, more options that ARE optional are better than all of us having to play a game in lockstep.

Thank you, I feel SO much better,
V'ger gone

[WraithLord]

I've played the warlords series, age of xxx and other TBS/RTS that implemented this system.
Some implemented it very badly some better.
For example, the age of XXX system is horrible. both shallow and extreme. really turned me off and is the main reason I stoped playing them.
OTOH the warlords implementation is more subtle and added depth, diversty and increased the fun factor in the game.

buttom line I agree with saber, this system can add a lot to the game if it's introduced subtly.
If the devs don't have the resources/inclination to do so carefully then I prefer they leave it be.

[Aristoteles]

Warlords or Ages series are pure strategy games. Dominions has lot more RPg elements than those games.
I agree, this system should be added, if the AI can learn, that how to 'use' it in a proper way.