Please don't take my toys away!

Yes I changed it. Was distracted. Sorry about that, it has been changed. It has Prot 14, 10 HP.

Yes they do have awsome cavalry; they just can't use it very well.

The Horse Archers make very good decoys, as they have the tag "Cavalry", "Archer" and if you place them in back "Rearmost" so you can abuse the Tactical AI by sporatically placing 1 horseman in a place you want certain enemies to attack and abuse it in that manner. That is the only real benefit outside of having the equivilant of armor, mobile archers.

[PhilD]

Originally posted by MStavros:
Dude....your constant whining makes me sick, but seriously. You don't like lot of things, because of your beloved MP screwed in your opinion.

What about waiting for the mod tools, and make your OWN MP mod.
If your friends will like your mod, they will play with you.

Once again Stavros, you miss the point (other than Keir agreeing with you on the overall balance) - "doing your own mod" won't take you anywhere if, like Keir I believe, your main interest is in MP.

Unless there's a very wide agreement on the superiority of Mod X over the "vanilla" game, 99.9% of MP games will use the standard, Illwinter-designed, Shrapnel-released game, with all (not totally buggy) patches. What Keir argues here is for the devs not to listen too much to the hordes of people who complain about the lack of viable (competitive) options concerning the order/turmoil and luck/misfortune scales. I won't give my opinion, as I clearly lack the experience, but I don't see how you can understand this as whining about the balance.

{Edit: changed the display}

[ November 24, 2003, 20:45: Message edited by: PhilD ]

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:

I'm just feeling a bit sad that what I'm interested in - all the new race possibilities and how to play - seems secondary to largely pointless (IMO) debates on the grand balence. But hey thats just the way the cookie crumbles and so I haven't written up any races for awhile.

I think your timing is just bad. I'm interested in race possibilities too, but am still exploring what's different about Dom 2 more generally. It's easier for me to decide on race design once I get a feel for what things are effective.

[ November 24, 2003, 22:46: Message edited by: Jasper ]

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Zen:
There is no way I have found for them to be put on a flank and advance while Firing into an area. If you put them where they are not targeted for melee by an opponent; they will not engage unless something gets close enough.

Hmmmm. Perhaps Units with missile weapons that are given orders to attack, should also fire their weapons on the way? This would make bow armed cavalry more usefull, and then you could more intuitively give javelin armed troops attack rather than fire orders. Similarily for troops with guard orders, as has been brought up often before.

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
But if the elites have only 15 protection rather than 19 like 45gp indy knights, I'd prefer the indy knights.

I think the 25 gold Tien Chi cavalry is really the only one worth building. The much more expensive 45 gold cavalry is only marginally better at melee, and without bows.

I was doing the basis of the "View" screen when you highlight a unit and back click on it. So that's why I formated it as such. I was just in a hurry to do so Precision is the lower based on the list opposite of Morale, and Protection is the top left. I'll edit it.

But yes, I was less than happy with the Red Guard, and the Imperial Horsemen as they have substandard statistics to other human Indy units. Though I can see with the selection that you're given it might be justified; except for the Red Guard are capital only. There isn't enough of a combat difference outside of Morale which is the easiest to deal with outside of just that particular unit. (Larger Squad size, high morale mixed with low moral squads, priest and Divine Magic)

Edit: Where is the love for taking the time to write it out!?

[ November 25, 2003, 03:37: Message edited by: Zen ]

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by Zen:
Edit: Where is the love for taking the time to write it out!?

Thanks Zen. I'm in full on child care part of the week so getting back to Posts becomes slower. I do appreciate your effort.

re extra design points.

The point was relative to Dom1.

In Dom1 most races I designed had Order3/Luck1. I tried luck0 but never had the courage to play it in mutli-player due to concern over the horrific events you can get early in tests.

As an aside I think Johan underestimates the impact of losing population/gold early as the extra early gold is often the difference between expanding fast enough or going under. My experiance of MP suggests that early events (good or bad) have hugely disproportionate impact.

In Dom2 most races I design have order3/misfortune3. Thats 160 extra design ponts over Dom1 and that, in my estimation, is what makes the possibility of a wide range of bless effect races worth trying. Without the points only the most extreme temp races have enough points for the high level starting magic. Its not a question of quantative differrence in race power, as you suggest Jasper, but qualitiative - thats how the bless effects work. Its the level 9 ones the tend to matke the race desing viable or not. Got enough for the effects you need to make the troop type work - yay. Not enough and the race is simply lame. To me the difference in power between a tight race and a bitsa is not 10-20-30% but more like 50-150+% because of the way low casualty expansion feeds upon itself.

I'm sorry for not providing lots of concrete examples on this Jasper but it would take alot of work to do. All I can say is that the races I am trying to make work are very hard to get enough points for to make viable. To me this seems obvious but its clear its not for people who have approached things differently. I don't know what more I can say.

I realise that my initial post was just too flippent and not obvious enough in its humour. The whole post was supposed to be funny but obviously some people didn't get it - maybe you have to be spending alot of time around young kids to appreciate the joke. In future I will be more restrained.

I really do believe that a formalistic approach to balence which says that every feature should be individualy balenced with every other feature is just plain wrong. Its the overall balence and the possibilities this produces I'm concerned about and not wether certain options are necessary to get a good race. Does it really matter that much if most players take order 3 misfortune 3? I think the extra points from this creates ideas I don't think this strangles ideas. I do think, and have posted elsewhere, that cutting back the worst events is a good idea so I'm not adverse to any change and I am in favour of making turmoil/luck races viable. Its just that some of the changes recommmended would have disastrous implication on the overall balence.

Now I must withdraw from this discussion as, as you may have noticed, I'm not in the frame of mind to enjoy it, and why else would I want to post for? Doing some more work on my Mictlan design is a much better prospect.

Cheers

Keir