Conceptual Content Mod

[Dedas]

This is fun reading. Thank you.

[Endoperez]

I'd give the Huntsman hatchet, dagger and shortbow. Whether or not the staff would fit a British low-born warrior, the unit is modeled after Forester, and thus should should be ambidextrous dual-wielder.

[Sombre]

Yeah an axe/dagger/shortbow does make sense. Makes it quite an unusual troop too, while similar to the LA Ulmish rangers.

[Sombre]

Sorry, I did mean hatchet. I don't pay much attention to the order weapons actually resolve in though and I'm not sure I want to start now

[Endoperez]

Here's what I wrote, in an other thread.

Also, I meant hatchet (253), not an axe. Hatchet is dam 5, att/def 0, len 1, while axe is dam 7, att/def -1, len 1. Hatchet is clearly much better than a normal axe.

Also, dagger/hatchet is better than hatchet/dagger, because this way the dagger's weaker strike lowers defence and makes it more likely the more powerful weapon hits.


Yeah, I was pretty sure you knew what I meant, I just wanted to be sure. I'm not even sure if there are any units armed with a hatchet in base game. It's pretty rare.

[Wrana]

To Sombre:
Well, either you are going to discuss the question or not. If you are going to discuss it than do this. If not, than I personally am not going to take your prejudices as arguments on any other questions.
Do you have any meaningful objections against using a weapon already existing in the game in the mod? Or are you going to use the immortal I-see-it-so argument ad nauseum? I'm certainly not going to take such "arguments" or stop making my point of view on silliness of such clear.
Remain yours truly,
Wrana

[Wrana]

To Endoperez:
Well, ambidexterity is a learned skill. You can consider that their apprentices hadn't learned it currently...

There are units armed with hatchet. IIRC, Bear Tribe Warriors & some other tribesmen.
And while from the mechanical point of view dagger/hatchet IS better, this is what I would call silly - primary weapon used in off-hand!

[Sombre]

Wrana said:
Well, either you are going to discuss the question or not. If you are going to discuss it than do this. If not, than I personally am not going to take your prejudices as arguments on any other questions.

As I said before, this thread isn't the place for a discussion of the quarterstaff as a weapon. So no, I'm not going to discuss it.

As for you not 'taking my prejudices as arguments'; I don't care. I'm not here to influence your opinion on anything.

Do you have any meaningful objections against using a weapon already existing in the game in the mod? Or are you going to use the immortal I-see-it-so argument ad nauseum? I'm certainly not going to take such "arguments" or stop making my point of view on silliness of such clear.

Immortal I-see-it-so argument? I'm not familiar with that one. Astral hook, devour soul and tiny bite are already in the game. I can categorically state I'm not using any of those in this mod either. For different reasons, but again I don't feel the need to justify them to you.

I asked people for input and I've gotten some great feedback, but if you want more than that, to exert creative control or demand justifiation, you'll have to either pay me or make your own mod -shrug-

[Zeldor]

Sombre:

Ok, I understand most of my things are rather suggestion for CBM. Making wardens non-sacred and build-everywhere is no option for CCM either?

And there are many people throwing ideas around, do you have a task-list of some specific things that should be done?

[Aezeal]

I think this thread is just for completely new units for nations... all other stuff including adjusting existing units is for CBM