.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

The Falklands War: 1982- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:37 PM

Sir_Dr_D Sir_Dr_D is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 566
Thanks: 8
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Sir_Dr_D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

It sounds to me like the infantry need to get fixed up. Giving them +4 defence might do it. You want them powerfull enough so that they don't get killed so easy, but still weaker then other infantry. The slight weakness would be made up for by flying.

I have never played caelum in multiplayer, but if I did I would want to use the flying infantry.That is what is supposed to make Caelum unique. If Instead of using flying units you are forced to use mammoths, then a lot of the appeal of that nation is gone.

Personally from a themantic percpective I think that the high seraph should be capital only, flying infantry made stronger, and mammoths made slower.Mammoths should not be feared as much as elephants. They should be a strategic option that is handy at times, such as Pythiums Hydra, and not the only viable strategy.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:42 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

+4 defense doesn't make a lot of sense by itself, you have to ask where it is coming from. If it's to represent the fact they fly, it would have to be added to every flying unit, most of which are already among the best in the game.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:56 PM

Sir_Dr_D Sir_Dr_D is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 566
Thanks: 8
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Sir_Dr_D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

The +4 defense can be attributed to combination of being able to fly, of have extra brid like agility, and having gone through extensive training on how to make use of their agility and do hit and run tactics. Other flyers simpl;y woudn't have that same agility and training.

I see caelum ifantry as being very good at staying out of harms way until they see a momment to strike. I don't see units like draconians, angels or devils doing that.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:16 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Quote:
Sir_Dr_D said:
The +4 defense can be attributed to combination of being able to fly, of have extra brid like agility, and having gone through extensive training on how to make use of their agility and do hit and run tactics. Other flyers simpl;y woudn't have that same agility and training.

I see caelum ifantry as being very good at staying out of harms way until they see a momment to strike. I don't see units like draconians, angels or devils doing that.
Well, that's well and good, but I know from working with IW that they don't generally like just tweaking troop stats like that. It would pretty much have to fall into the catagory of a cross the board racial ability, extra training (which would mean higher gold cost) and a good reason why even the lowliest soldiers have it, or a some kind of equipment bonus.

And to be honest, I'm not sure 4 more defense would be enough to tempt me on most of the infantry anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:31 PM

Saint_Dude Saint_Dude is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 236
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Saint_Dude is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

The stats for the Caelum infantry are not great to begin with, but flight just makes them suck.

They rush into battle where they are exposed to concentrated fire. They fatigue out very rapidly, making their sup-par stats simply abysmal. And when they inevitably take the heavy losses that they have coming to them, they fly away. Which means if you are playing Caelum and win a battle with an army that included infantry in its ranks, you are likely to be without any infantry for a follow up assault. You are constantly having to go back and round the cowardly infantry from all surrounding friendly provs.

The elite Caelum infantry make descent bodyguards, but that is about it.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old August 18th, 2007, 08:03 PM

Sir_Dr_D Sir_Dr_D is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 566
Thanks: 8
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Sir_Dr_D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

You can get around some of that Saint_Dude by setting the flying infantry to be body guards of flying commanders. You then give the commander the commands to hold for 5 turns, and then attack rear.

The real problem is the flying mechanism in the game is not all that great. Just like for light calvarary there needs to be some sort of skimish command to make them usefull.

If you ignore the limitations of the dominions battle engine, the Caleum race would use their mobility in battle a lot better. Archers would fire at the infantry until the infantry got close. Then they would take off to a furtor distance and continue to fire. It means that countering the archers with any sort of infantry or calvary wuold be pointless. You would have to use archers of your own, or magic. The caleum infantry in the mean time would mostly fly around out of harms way, until they see an a weakness somewhere in the army. Then they would quickly strike. As soon as resitance builds up though they would fly away and look for another opening. Still the infantry would probably not be all that usefull inside of a battle.They would be more effective outside of the battle. They would contantly be able to ambush small patrols, and break down supply lines. Even if the the flying ifantry is not all that good, there hit and run attacks would be deadly.

I do not expect illwinter to ever improve on the combat options. It does not seem to be a high priority of theres. Therfore the only way to mimic any of that is with stats. They should be good at taking out PD, and small patrols, but less uselfull in big battles. The best way that I see to mimic this is to rasie their defense so they are harder to hit, and maybe give them sort of first strike abilty, where there first attack is extra deadly. (to simulate an ambush). The extra defense can be seen as inherent to the Caelum race. Just like C'tis has natural extra protection, Calelum can have extra defense.

It seems unthemtic for me that Caleum's main strategy in the game is mammoths. For this reason, and to make Caelum more unique and fun to play, I would like to see their flying infantry improved.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old August 18th, 2007, 09:06 PM

Xietor Xietor is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,741
Thanks: 21
Thanked 28 Times in 17 Posts
Xietor is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Caelum does not need ANY bonuses. Period. They are one of the stronger MA races right now. The only thing that keeps them balanced is their horrible pd, and the liability of their fliers.

Better infantry? They have tough infantry already. They have mammoths, the best elephant tramplers in the game. Great research. Great battle magic. on to ma Atlantis....

With all due respect to QM, who has devoted his life to balance, I maintain MA Atlantis is one of the worst ma races.

So what if they can cast falling frost? How does that help when your ground troops are slow and are being slaughtered by longbows or composite bows, which are out of range of falling frost? Many maps have very few water provinces so moving on to land is essential EARLY in the game.

Every race has some possible solutions. MA Atlantis can cast water elementals in battle etc. But you have to be highly skilled imho to beat another player of decent skill when you are playing ma atlantis.

And early in the game, MA Oceania cavalry and infantry are quite good against most land races' units.
__________________
"War is an art and as such is not susceptible of explanation by fixed formula."
- General George Patton Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:40 PM

Kuritza Kuritza is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 651
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Kuritza is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

How about another land-based infantry unit for Caelum? Not as defenseless as Wingless, not as resource-heavy as sacreds. Paul Anderson described such unit in the War or the Wing Men, when that trader convinced the Wing Men that controlling the ground is just as important as controlling the skies.
Some bulky non-ice armor that prevents flying (and can be mass-produced), like standard chainmail or scale mail, and a tower shield. Such warriors can make big 'jumps' thus moving faster than average, but they wont fly. Read what Quantum says - 'ignore the flying infantry'; exactly, it can be ignored. A nation needs some infantry that can fullfil its purpose.
And in my opinion, cheaper Caelum mages (1W, 2A 1W) are baaaaaaaaaaad. As it is now, Caelum depends on mages heavily, so I think making their only real battlemage capitol-only will cripple an already average nation.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.