But do you really like SC in dominions2 ?

[Agrajag]

Yvelina said:
But in an age where the gods come down from Heaven to fight, how much would a dude with a short sword accomplish?

That dude with a short sword won't accomplish anything.
But along with his thousands of friends he will strike terror in the hearts of other men.

Just read your generic fantasy novel, like dragonlance, the bad guys ALWAYS have to build a massive army, the force of evil, the cloak that will cover the world, the... etc.
So yeah, that one guy with a short sword won't do much, but along with his army they will be the ones that conquered the world (and/or finally vanquished that annoying hero).

[st.patrik]

I think that the game balance is shifted too much towards SCs right now.

The way I see it there's a continuum between few, powerful troops and many weak troops, and right now Dom II is definitely more toward the 'few but powerful' end - this is simply the biggest bang for your buck. I think we'd see more strategic depth if SCs were made a little less potent.

I know that there are counters to SCs, but some nations don't have easy counters, especially for high MR SCs (most all the items mentioned (eye shield, etc.) have an MR check, so they become pretty much ineffective with a SC with a MR of 20+). These nations are hard to play competitively. NE Pan is a great example - also Ulm - of a nation that would do much better if SCs weren't so powerful.

I also agree with the comment about life-draining weapons - this is the single factor that often pushes a SC from 'challenging' to 'impossible' for a regular army to deal with.

[Yvelina]

BigDaddy said:
I was wondering about Life Drain SC's versus SC's, even maringal ones with big swords like, Frost/Fire Brand(or armor piercing/negating), which are cheap, 1 handed, and do huge damage.

These work, but I presonally prefer using swords that provide damage to which the enemy is particularly vulnerable. For example, herald lances against undead and demons, elf banes against elemental royalty, cleavers against constructs, etc...

The problem with using marginal commanders is that against a full blown SC they have trouble hitting, and that even when they hit, they are not garanteed a one-shot kill. Yes, you can increase their strength and attack with items, but then they become quite expensive - you are better off summonning a moderately tough commander to give them to.

That said, a Niefel Jarl will have no problem one-shoting a SC with the appropriate weapon, and Vanir and Thuatra may actually survive long enough to wear down the SC.

Yesterday or so, I had a fight in which a newly-recruited, but well-equiped Vanadrott supported by two Vanherses accidentally ran into a fully-equiped, highly-experienced earth king with boosted regeneration. The Vanadrott fought for nearly 40 turns before catching two blows in quick succession, and dying, but his escorts ultimately won, and gathered his equipment. Note that these were raiders scripted for fighting national armies and province defense, not SCs.

The earth king would not have stood a chance against a squad sent especially for him. A SC without the crazy regeneration (30+) would have died even against the Vandrott.

[PvK]

I think it's neat that it is possible for SC to exist. I think they are a bit too easy to create, though. I'd like to see at least options (and mods - I've been working on one) to make them more expensive so they are still possible, but much more difficult.

I think the Life Drain weapons are a bit part of it, but not all.

PvK

[Yvelina]

Agrajag said:

That dude with a short sword won't accomplish anything.
But along with his thousands of friends he will strike terror in the hearts of other men.

Absolutely. Even on turn 100, I still use recruitable commanders for mopping up revolts, keeping down unrest, catching spies, and even raiding the enemy's heartlands. Police work, as it is.

Just read your generic fantasy novel, like dragonlance, the bad guys ALWAYS have to build a massive army, the force of evil, the cloak that will cover the world, the... etc.

Well, you do not have to go that far to look for an example. Modern wars are won with bombardment, air supremacy, and armour incursions, but the occupied territories are held with infantry. But would you send Hummers with mounted machine guns and companies of riflemen against an armour company?

So yeah, that one guy with a short sword won't do much, but along with his army they will be the ones that conquered the world

Yes.

(and/or finally vanquished that annoying hero).

Possible, but unlikely. Tanks break down, and do get covered in branches and set on fire, smoking or cooking the crew in the process. But how often does it happens? Even in crappy fantasy novels, the main hero seldom dies to a faceless mob.

[Ironhawk]

This statement completely overlooks the tactical scripting of a well designed army. The last... three or so games I have played haven't had any SC's at all (due to house rules) and its most certainly not just "who has the most troops wins". Placing your army correctly, knowing your troops and the enemy troops, and scripting intelligently has allowed me to defeat "superior" forces on a number of occassions.

One could make an argument that placing/scripting these armies and understanding the tactics of your opponent is no different than designing and scripting SCs and anti-SCs to fight your enemy. And that seems valid to me... but honestly I like watching big armies of men duke it out on the battlefield. So much more epic! Tho I would like to see the hero-style SCs that people were suggesting, rather than mega-army-killers.

Graeme Dice said:
I have absolutely no problems with SCs as they currently stand, as they are vital to prevent the game from devolving into a zerg rush of "whoever has the most troops wins".

[Oversway]

How many militia (or some other troop type, if you like) are people thinking a 'hero-style' SC should be able to kill on average? Ten? Twenty?

[PvK]

Graeme Dice said:
I have absolutely no problems with SCs as they currently stand, as they are vital to prevent the game from devolving into a zerg rush of "whoever has the most troops wins".

"Vital" in the sense that they are one thing that makes the game not "whoever has the most troops wins".

However I think there are plenty of other things that also accomplish that. I almost never use SC's, and I love the game, especially when I'm just using troops and "thugs" and other stuff.

PvK

[BigDaddy]

I've never tried this on well developed SC's before, but don't magical SC's (like air queens) suck against ether warriors, and demon SC's suck against a couple groups of angels of the host?

[Taqwus]

If they can do more damage than is restored per turn, perhaps. A well-equipped air queen with mirror image might be hard to hit.

There's always Pan CW for being hell on enemy SCs; defense goes down with many attacks on the same turn, and sleep vines get 3 per with each hit delivering armor-negating unresistable fatigue damage... and there's no attack vs. defense roll on those already unconscious. Anybody unconscious and facing more sleep vines is therefore likely to never wake up.

In the more general case, the aforementioned elf banes, solar lances, moon blades, even bane blades and banefire archers (decay, and potentially many MR checks per salvo) and banefire (massive unresistable damage with a chance of decay) should help. Curse should help versus those relying on life draining instead of regeneration or recuperation, as a blind SC won't fight very well.

In extremis, I wonder how many Crystal Mages it would take to reliably slap one with Gifts from Heaven. 150 points of pure physical damage is not to be laughed at.