vengeance of the dead, how it works with 1000+ ?

[vfb]

We just need a new battleground for assassinations ... the dead end street the assassin cornered the victim in!

I suggest:

battlemaps/drkalley.d3m
battlemaps/clifedge.d3m
battlemaps/latrine.d3m

[triqui]

If you did not become auto killed when you fled from assasination it would be very hard to use assasins except on commanders moving with armies. Every player would put all important commanders not currently headed for combat on retreat.

That's true. And the turn limit is necesary to avoid game-staling(for example a assasin witn spam-skellie trying to kill a mage with spam-skellie, both with reinvigoration)

But still, the ATTACKER should flee if turn 50 is achieved. That do not happen with VotD, and it is wrong.

[NTJedi]

johan osterman said:
If you did not become auto killed when you fled from assasination it would be very hard to use assasins except on commanders moving with armies. Every player would put all important commanders not currently headed for combat on retreat.

I actually addressed a solution for this within another thread. What should be done is the assassin should be placed on the defenders side of the battlefield and the defender on the attackers side of the battlefield. This means the commander/mage would have to run past the assassin while retreating.
If the commander does successfully retreat it still ends up in a different province if one is available plus any units under its command would have been left behind. This provides an effective assassination while still being logically and historically accurate.

[johan osterman]

NTJedi said:
I actually addressed a solution for this within another thread. What should be done is the assassin should be placed on the defenders side of the battlefield and the defender on the attackers side of the battlefield. This means the commander/mage would have to run past the assassin while retreating.
If the commander does successfully retreat it still ends up in a different province if one is available plus any units under its command would have been left behind. This provides an effective assassination while still being logically and historically accurate.

I'm not sure why the current assasination is so 'historically and logically' inaccurate though. As vfb suggested an assasination could be taken to represent a scenario where the assasin has attacked a victim where the victim is cornered, with no possibility of escape.

A problem is that assasinations take place in a province that has no neighbours, and neighbours is a function of the map file. Which is why they die when they flee. It is not trivial to add neighbours ingame, and I very much doubt that JK would want to fiddle with it. It is the sort of change that is likely to introduce new bugs and problems. I guess that goes for switching positions on the battlefield as well.

Also I am not alltogether clear on why, as someone suggested, a retreat in VotD would represent awakening from the dream, it might as well be called death from fear, or the soul losing itself in the land of dreams, or any other pat explanation you happen to like.

[NTJedi]

johan osterman said: I'm not sure why the current assasination is so 'historically and logically' inaccurate though. As vfb suggested an assasination could be taken to represent a scenario where the assasin has attacked a victim where the victim is cornered, with no possibility of escape.

It's historically inaccurate because there have been assassination attempts in history where the target has fled successfully! Within dominions it's impossible and thus historically inaccurate.

johan osterman said:
A problem is that assasinations take place in a province that has no neighbours, and neighbours is a function of the map file. Which is why they die when they flee. It is not trivial to add neighbours ingame, and I very much doubt that JK would want to fiddle with it. It is the sort of change that is likely to introduce new bugs and problems. I guess that goes for switching positions on the battlefield as well.

I understand it's very very unlikely we'll see a change within the current game. The issue is important to mention in hopes of providing a more logical and historically accurate game events for future versions(Dom_4) and any other project(s) Illwinter may be working.

johan osterman said:
Also I am not alltogether clear on why, as someone suggested, a retreat in VotD would represent awakening from the dream, it might as well be called death from fear, or the soul losing itself in the land of dreams, or any other pat explanation you happen to like.

Since the retreat is the result of a turn limitation it's not death from fear or death from being lost in the dreams. A target which is killed because of a turn limitation is wrong and illogical.

[triqui]

johan osterman said:
Also I am not alltogether clear on why, as someone suggested, a retreat in VotD would represent awakening from the dream, it might as well be called death from fear, or the soul losing itself in the land of dreams, or any other pat explanation you happen to like.

Is this an official point of view from developers? I mean, the spell is working as it is supposed to work (attackers do not rout at turn 50, and defender die in turn 75)?

I'm asking becouse that might be an easy and clean solution for me. If that is *how* the spell is supposed to work, i have exactly ZERO problems with it. I might find it a spell too good for it research cost, but i also find thunderstrike too god for it research cost, and wont ban it from my game. My grief is that, as i understand it, the attacker not disolving in turn 50 was unintended.

So if VotD is offically working as intended, my problem with it vanishes.

[johan osterman]

triqui said:

That's true. And the turn limit is necesary to avoid game-staling(for example a assasin witn spam-skellie trying to kill a mage with spam-skellie, both with reinvigoration)

But still, the ATTACKER should flee if turn 50 is achieved. That do not happen with VotD, and it is wrong.

I guess this work this way because the VotD is placed in a province. Then the victim is teleported there. As the dead are allready in place theyr are considered the defenders. In order to change the defender attacker situation it might be that you would have to have created 2 provinces. 1 where a commander is teleported. 1 where the dead starts. Then move the dead would have to move from their province to the province of the victim. I think it is possible that this would not be accomplishable without major changes to the turn sequence and turn resoluation. Which I know from experience that JK is extremely reluctant to do. Once again because it is the sort of situation that is very liable to break old things and introduce new bugs.

[triqui]

As the dead are allready in place theyr are considered the defenders.

I dont think so. In my battle report, the dead are in the left side of the screen. My SC does the first movement. And on turn 50, i get a "the army of Ryleh is routed" message. Just that the undead do not rout at all (or vanish like golems do)

[johan osterman]

triqui said:

Is this an official point of view from developers? I mean, the spell is working as it is supposed to work (attackers do not rout at turn 50, and defender die in turn 75)?

I'm asking becouse that might be an easy and clean solution for me. If that is *how* the spell is supposed to work, i have exactly ZERO problems with it. I might find it a spell too good for it research cost, but i also find thunderstrike too god for it research cost, and wont ban it from my game. My grief is that, as i understand it, the attacker not disolving in turn 50 was unintended.

So if VotD is offically working as intended, my problem with it vanishes.

Well it is working as intended, it is not bugged.. Perhaps it would be desirable that the dead where the attackers. Or that the dead not count as kills or what have you. But those things are not trivial to accomplish. There has been debate abnout this spell since dom 1 days. And JK has resisted all attempts to convince him to change it in either of those ways.

[NTJedi]

Death because of a turn limitation game mechanic is wrong for any game.

period