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

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $5.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening > Scenarios, Maps and Mods

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 24th, 2009, 05:59 AM
Burnsaber's Avatar

Burnsaber Burnsaber is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
Burnsaber is on a distinguished road
Cool Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, version 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Line 334 --> "Dwarf Lighting" should be "Dwarf Lightning". I think. LOL.
Er, yeah. I always spell "Lightning" wrong. Don't know why, it's alot like my issue with "Strategy".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Why all the "Dwarf Weaponname/Armorname" bits? Are they *that* different? Weapon slots are limited too, you know :-) Couldn't you just bump the stats on the dwarfs?
Well, I admit that they're not *that* necessary gameplay wise, but it's a important thematic element. Basically every game always highlight the "Dwarf-made items are awesome" thematic aspect, but they don't get any in-game bonuses from it. Luckily dom3 has the mechanics to especially show this "dwarf items are awesome" fact and I intent to use it.

The custom armor actually has a gameplay intent behind it. To make dwarf units more vulnerable to Iron Bane, acid spells and desctruction effects. With the way how natural prot and armor prot combine, if I were to give dwarf units regular chain cuirass instead of dwarf-made one (which has +2 prot compared to normal), I'd have to give them +4 natural prot to keep the same prot value.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Also, since you're not using "Dwarves", should you be using "Dwarven" or "Dwarfish" or just "Dwarf"? (in your weapon/armor names)

Dwarven Axe
Dwarfish Axe
Dwarf Axe
Dwarvish Axe

...personally, I like the 'v', but since you seem to be moving away from it.
Yeah, I admit that the use of possessive pronoun is a bit of a mess currently. I prefer "Dwarven" myself, but sometimes I just used "Dwarf" because I wanted to avoid bumping into the character limit. I'll make it more consistent in the next version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Along that vein, your mod directory is still "Dwarves". Need to be consistent :-)
No, just absolutely no. Changing the name of the graphic folder will break all the "image links" in the .dm and replacing them will just open so many possible bugs (like the engineer battle crash bug in the v0.6). It's just a case of opening a really big can of worms for 0% gain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
...and after all that, I like your name list, although the potential for humor exists with names ending in 'i'. (I met this dwarf engineer who was afflicted with a broken leg. His name is 'Hurri'. Apparently his brother accidentally hit him with a hammer. His brother's 'Thorri'. ) I'd leave them in, though. The dwarfs won't be laughing.
I don't get the joke. Is there something wrong with me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
Some other things I saw: I like that Clan Kings get some research, but they're not drain immune so it ends up only being 1 research.
Yeah, I knew that. Unfortunately I can't make them drain-immune due to modding constraints. Basically they are copystatting a Gath commander for that "research although not mage"-tag and the only way to get the "Drain-immune" tag is to copystat a ulm smith. I can't copystat two units, so here we are. I decided that some research is better than no research and let it stay.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
Did Distill Flame/Thunder get a higher price because of the lower research level? Because with the efficiency of Dwarven construction, I'm not sure I can justify getting at least the Flamers--that's 3 Lightless Lanterns a bit later in the game, or a few fire brands.
I upped their price because it was really needed. Compare Flamethrowers to Fire Drakes and Thunderers to Storm Demons (which are often spammed in MP basically just for their lighting throwing ability).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Burnsaber's (mis)coinages are growing on me, though:

Stragedy - A strategy destined for tragedy. Suits dwarf history.
Disencouraged - Discouraged via the encouragement of other options.

...they always seem to make sense in a weird way
(Hope I'm not being too harsh Burnsaber; heaven knows what my posts would look like if I was trying to write in Finnish!)
Hooray for abusing the english language! I am the corruptor, the defiler, sneaking in new words spawned from the wicked aether of my chaotic mindscape! And wasn't shakespeare famous for basically making words up as he went along?

But seriously speaking, I really don't mind. The only way for my grammar to improve is to be pestered about it constantly. Lightning and Strategy, lightning and strategy. Thanks for that and please keep on rolling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
I don't see either Itza or Pythium being anywhere near too strong, but again that's more personal philosophy. I just see a nation that is upper-mid in power level getting used a lot more than one that's lower in power level. We need more Pythium, C'tis (who I think is really strong MA), etc and less Ulm, Malacha, etc.
Yeah, when talking about power-level, it's pretty much impossible to come to a clear conclusion. I dislike Pythium because it gets the best human infantry, hydras, best human mages (in its era), communicants, uber national summons, and completely random extra gem income (why?) with no clear drawbacks. Old age is more like a nuisance than a real drawback.

But this mod is still in development stage. I know from experience that it's best to *really* aim for weakness for the first releases. It's always easier to boost than nerf in order to fix something. This is basically what my other nation mod, Alugra, is going through. It started out too strong, but I (and other people) got used to it's power level, which made it difficult for me to try to get things appropiately costed. I call this "I don't want to castrate my baby" -effect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
But I think the runesmith nerfs are a bit much. More gold (when gold's already tight), more encumbrance, and less paths don't nearly do enough to offset the small research boost. Also, with all castles being so expensive now, your research will lag quite a bit, and recruiting non-caster commanders puts you at an even greater disadvantage.
I assume that when talking about "less paths", you mean Runelords, not smiths? I really don't want to go overboard with the Runelords, forgebonus 30 is really powerful (compare to Ashdod's Talmai Elder, which costs 500 gold for less path power and forgebonus 15).

And if I calculated correctly, Runesmiths now have the second best upkeep/research ratio (second to only journeyman runemsmiths) in the nation (in a drain 3 enviroment, of course). But if people feel that they're not worth going for, I might lower their prices back to normal.

It's also good to remember that dwarfs are really supposed to suck at magic, in fact, they shouldn't have magic at all. They could thematically have okay research but they shouldn't ever be "magic" comparable to anything other than MA Ulm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
That castle-summoning spell is the most ludicrously difficult thing to cast I've ever seen. You have to lug a prophetized astral-random runelord over to a mountain province with a lab, and then he dies when he casts it? Or I suppose you could make an anvil of doom and then kill it.
Yeah, I might have gone a bit overboard with it, I'll probably remove the random mountain requirement. But the spell had to fill a lot of reguirements, like:

1) Reguire astral gems (if it costed earth, it'd compete with Anvil of Doom, and fire/air just don't make sense)
2) Be cheap & low research enough to be able to be casted in mid-game, where forts actually matter (to avoid "Wizard's Tower"- pitfall, it just comes too late to have effect on anything)
3) Not to be spammable, which is hard when taking into account reguirement #2 (because then we'd be right back to the "invicible forts" issue, hence the requirement of killing a prohetized mage, this gives at least 6-month long period between castings).


Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
By the way, at this point the whole nation almost works better by getting Magic-1, using cheap Engineers as your main researchers, Runelords for your forgers, and just not getting Runesmiths if you can help it. You don't get as many high-earth casters, but you really didn't need many of those anyways. And on the plus-side, you one-turn siege every castle you meet. And have actual battle-casters that don't fatigue out on turn 3. It's at least a fun strategy to consider--you do lose other things by doing so.
Yeah, it's sort of quasi-intentional. Of course the magic scale shouldn't be the best strategy you take all the time, but should be considerable, perhaps even plausible with certain game settings and maps. It's not even unthematic, considering how the Golden Empire dwarfs are basically embodiments of "magic 3" scale (where everyone and their dog had a runeaxe and people were using anvils of doom as lunch tables). Going drain-3 all the time in a "no-brainer" mode is a bit boring.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
Again, a lot of these things I'd have to be in an actual multiplayer game to test out.
Yeah, this is the biggest issue when doing MP-balanced mod nations, it's all talk until the first game. At the moment, I could see the v0.7 go for MP-testing. Basing on the comments, it's certainly not overpowered, but (IMHO) shouldn't be that weak. And there really isn't any revisions and major additions waiting impletion, the content is there. Unfortunately, I really don't have time to start admining (or participating) in a yet another MP game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
Oh, and no matter what, Dwarves can't be as low-tier as Machaka. Just think of what prospectors can do to Machaka province defense. (Actually it's Rangers that utterly destroy them--those throwing axes simply demolish militia)
If you want to compare to vanilla nations, Ulm is the way to go and dwarfs really trump them in all aspects (except for battlemagic). MA Ulm isn't even really considered *that* weak anymore.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old October 24th, 2009, 09:05 AM

kianduatha kianduatha is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 403
Thanks: 15
Thanked 28 Times in 21 Posts
kianduatha is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, version 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber View Post
I upped their price because it was really needed. Compare Flamethrowers to Fire Drakes and Thunderers to Storm Demons (which are often spammed in MP basically just for their lighting throwing ability).
Well, I am comparing them. Fire Drakes with Dragon Master are way cheaper, have longer range, more ammo, don't cost upkeep, and are significantly tougher. They're capable of forming a frontline, while Flamethrowers are...not. Well, they can in a pinch, but you have better options once you get into melee.

Storm Demons are an entire league above Thunderers, between the flying(in storms, too!), storm power, no upkeep, and a nicer ranged attack(theirs scales with strength). Oh, and they're ethereal and take blood slaves, which are renewable.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old October 25th, 2009, 06:33 AM

alansmithee alansmithee is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 41
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 4 Posts
alansmithee is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, version 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber View Post
Yeah, when talking about power-level, it's pretty much impossible to come to a clear conclusion. I dislike Pythium because it gets the best human infantry, hydras, best human mages (in its era), communicants, uber national summons, and completely random extra gem income (why?) with no clear drawbacks. Old age is more like a nuisance than a real drawback.

But this mod is still in development stage. I know from experience that it's best to *really* aim for weakness for the first releases. It's always easier to boost than nerf in order to fix something. This is basically what my other nation mod, Alugra, is going through. It started out too strong, but I (and other people) got used to it's power level, which made it difficult for me to try to get things appropiately costed. I call this "I don't want to castrate my baby" -effect.
I think you're really underrating the effect of old age. And I'd say Ermor is close for infantry, not to mention Agartha or even much-maligned Ulm. Mages are the best humans, but I'd put near-human Marshmasters and Bakemono sorcerers as being very similar in power level. And hydras are a nice bonus, but not overpowering. Really, I see Pythium as about where most nations should be, and the other "men" nations to be somewhat lacking (although Ermor is pretty close in MA). But again, this is all personal philosophy, and I would just hate to see a great mod not get used because it's no fun to play due to it's weakness.


Quote:
I assume that when talking about "less paths", you mean Runelords, not smiths? I really don't want to go overboard with the Runelords, forgebonus 30 is really powerful (compare to Ashdod's Talmai Elder, which costs 500 gold for less path power and forgebonus 15).
Yeah, I meant the lords. And this isn't a fair comparison (which I think you know), as the 500 gold also comes attached to a thug/borderline SC chassis. Now, if you want to add in a body slot so you can get rid of the armor that makes them virtually useless in combat...

Quote:
And if I calculated correctly, Runesmiths now have the second best upkeep/research ratio (second to only journeyman runemsmiths) in the nation (in a drain 3 enviroment, of course). But if people feel that they're not worth going for, I might lower their prices back to normal.
They're still probably worth going for IMO (since you don't really want to give up the 120 pts for drain3), but you're still gonna lag far behind. Again, it's not just the boosted cost of the smiths, it's also the boosted cost of the castles you have to get to recruit more smiths. And even considering that, they're still only second-best to the journeymen. That, coupled with their uselessness as thugs now makes them seem quite useless.

Quote:
It's also good to remember that dwarfs are really supposed to suck at magic, in fact, they shouldn't have magic at all. They could thematically have okay research but they shouldn't ever be "magic" comparable to anything other than MA Ulm.
Well, to paraphrase something I heard about this game before I was playing it, Ulm (and this was pre-buff when they were considered the worst nation) is a nation full of people who are strong in will, and rely on the strength of iron to overcome magic. Unfortunately there's a spell that can block out the sun. Point being, any nation that thematically sucks at magic, is gonna be at a natural disadvantage since magic is so strong.

And it might not be what you want to go for, but when I think of the tabletop game I always imagine rows of sturdy infantry (which is quite present) backed up by ridiculous amounts of war machines (which don't seem present at all). Now if you don't want to add war machines (I was actually thinking if possible you could have cannons with gift of the heavens or some similar effect if it's moddable since nobody seems to want to just code "gunpowder" effects) I think it's reasonable to see runecasters as being essentially war machine replacements (through judicious use of earth spells, etc) if you did get rid of the crazy armor.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old October 26th, 2009, 09:17 AM
Stavis_L's Avatar

Stavis_L Stavis_L is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 466
Thanks: 35
Thanked 95 Times in 60 Posts
Stavis_L is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, version 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
Along that vein, your mod directory is still "Dwarves". Need to be consistent :-)
No, just absolutely no. Changing the name of the graphic folder will break all the "image links" in the .dm and replacing them will just open so many possible bugs (like the engineer battle crash bug in the v0.6). It's just a case of opening a really big can of worms for 0% gain.
...er...you do use a text editor that does find/replace, right? If you include the slashes as part of the string to replace, it should only match on the file paths ("/DWARVES/" --> "/DWARFS/"). Just saying. Though, as you say, it has no impact when actually playing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
...and after all that, I like your name list, although the potential for humor exists with names ending in 'i'. (I met this dwarf engineer who was afflicted with a broken leg. His name is 'Hurri'. Apparently his brother accidentally hit him with a hammer. His brother's 'Thorri'. ) I'd leave them in, though. The dwarfs won't be laughing.
I don't get the joke. Is there something wrong with me?
Hah! English has a long and glorious tradition of bad puns made in poor taste; try substituting 'y' for 'i', and 's' for 'th':
Hurri --> Hurry
Thorri --> Sorry

...and since it apparently requires explanation even to notice, I definitely wouldn't change any of them.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old October 26th, 2009, 05:18 PM
Burnsaber's Avatar

Burnsaber Burnsaber is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
Burnsaber is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, version 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
I don't think they're Man/Malacha weak, but I see them closer to there than the (non-Ashdod) top.
And that's about the level I'm aiming for. v0.8 will bring some more slight buffs (see the fix list for details), so they should be powerful enough after that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
I don't see the slayers as being that good at all. They just seem to die to easily. And everyone knows as the game progresses, troops have less and less use.
Well, slayers are not thugs in the same way as Bane Lords, for example. They, are perfect anti thug/sc units, thought (high attack value + immunity to awe + slayer axes). I admit that doesn't really translate well to a SP experience. Althought stone boots and some random good shield should be "enough" survival for what the AI throws at you.

And troops really have less use, but you have some nice specialist units to throw a unpreprepared opponent off. Arbalests hit for 16ap damage, meaning that they can consistently do damage to prot 30 units! Hammers/Slayers are basically immune to awe & fear and hammers hit with magic damage and high attack value, which allows them occasionally to overwhelm thugs. Ironbreakers can be easily buffed to be elemental-immune with "ward spells" and beefed to mr 19 and prot 26 (even more with army of lead/gold). Where is your god now?

Sure, those things have counters, but my point is that your troops are really nice templates to get a lot of mileage out of battlefield buffs and thus have solid late game uses.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
I respect the thematic consideration. But I would never choose to recruit a king. You need the research too badly.
It's a shame that I couldn't make the Kings drain-immune. I'll have to try to think about a solution. I might make Kings non-cap (perhaps with a higher gold cost, do disencourage unthematic spamming).

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
I found runesmiths to be decently thuggable in 0.6. That was one of the reasons I thought the slayers were so sub-par: they were totally bettered by runesmiths as thugs.
Heh, good thing that I nerfed the smith armor some more then :P.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
And as it stands, i'd still never recruit a king or slayer. I see thugging being handled by golems for the most part now, or possibly, journeymen. The stealth still gives journeyman a place, even if they weren't more gold-efficient.
Well, like I said, Giant Slayers are more like anti-thugs than thugs themselves. So it's pretty likely that you wont recruit some for SP. As for the kings, see comment above this quote. And like I said, journeymen are cost-effective but because of the tight castle commanders slots, I often go for Runesmiths after my first forts have been built (because they basically do 50% more research than journeymen and massing them also has the side-effect of getting that nice 10% elemental random).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber
(although Winged Shoes do not give mapmove 3, they just give mapmove +1)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
Pretty sure they give 3, as everything with flying has mapmove 3 (I could be wrong on that though)
Well, we both were right (sort of). I did a quick test, and equipping winged shoes only gives +1 to the mapmove statistic on the unit screen but still allows you to fly over two provinces (basically mapmove 3). But if you give it to mapmove 2 guy, he can fly over 3! provinces.

The more you know...

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee View Post
And again, I'd like to stress how much I enjoy the mod, it's great fun and looks wonderful.
Thanks, I appreciate it. Your comments have been helpful and given me a lot to think about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post
...er...you do use a text editor that does find/replace, right? If you include the slashes as part of the string to replace, it should only match on the file paths ("/DWARVES/" --> "/DWARFS/").
TECHNO BABBLE hits Burnsaber (roll: d20=18 + 4 = 22 over 12 AC)
The attack is super-effective! (roll: 100d6=126)
BURNSABER takes 126 damage!
BURNSABER is stunned!

(sorry, I'm pretty computer illeterate)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavis_L View Post

Hah! English has a long and glorious tradition of bad puns made in poor taste; try substituting 'y' for 'i', and 's' for 'th':
Hurri --> Hurry
Thorri --> Sorry

...and since it apparently requires explanation even to notice, I definitely wouldn't change any of them.
Oh, it was a pun! Heh, should have noticed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BandarLover View Post
I still get the dwarf engineer sprite 2 error.
Note that the new mod .dm file does not overwrite the old one! I changed the name so that the mod would appear with other WH mods in the "mod enabling" screen. So, you'll have to start a new game (and preferably delete the old .dm file, dubbed "Dwarves").

(Apparently I forgot to mention that on the first page. Fixed now, thought)
__________________
I have now officially moved to the Dom3mods forums and do not actively use this account any more. You can stll contact me by PM's, since my account gives e-mail notifications on such occasions.

If you need to ask something about modding, you can contact me here.

See this thread for the latest info concerning my mods.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
dwarf, warhammer

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 12:22 AM.


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