So far what nations look strong... and weak?

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by apoger:
>That sentence summerises Marignon race discussions in Dom1.


Heh, check out Tein Chi. They are the new poster child for magic duel smack down. Makes Marignon look strong (from an astral standpoint).

Do I like races with crippling disadvantages or do the sort of races I like tend to have crippling disadvantages?

I love Tien Ch'i but so far I'm under impressed. Inability to find orders that allow the double armed cavalry to do their things is a big part of the problem. It sad when your defining troop type is messed up.



Keir

[Jasper]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:
I love Tien Ch'i but so far I'm under impressed. Inability to find orders that allow the double armed cavalry to do their things is a big part of the problem. It sad when your defining troop type is messed up.

I find their 25 gold cavalry, composite Bow, Lance, prot 14, and strategic move 3 to be good. True, the kinds of orders that would really take advantage of the combined lance/bow are too conditional for pre plotted movement. Still I find either setting them with no orders or with orders to attack rear depending on what I expect them to face to be effective.

What sort of order to you envision that would really help them?

[HJ]

The question was not directed at me, but I was thinking about the "fire and attack" order. We now have "fire and flee", "hold and attack", so "fire and attack" where a unit would fire its missile weapon for two or three turns (or two or three times I guess for crossbows) and then switch to attacking seems logical. And useful, not only for Tien Chi, but for friendly fire mishaps as well, for example, when you're facing a weak army and don't need a constant barrage of arrows/bolts.
I'm also thinking about legionnaires, as this was their standard tactic historically. If the enemy is not in range, then the squad would approach that turn, as missiles do in general. But it would suit Tien Chi cavalry even better, as they would cause disorder with their bows first, and then charge the shaken formations with lances. Very effective in theory.

[ November 24, 2003, 07:54: Message edited by: HJ ]

[Humer]

Originally posted by apoger:
Any other opinions? Does anyone out there ENJOY what magic duel brings to the game? This is perhaps the question that needs to be asked.

I like mind duel. Astral is said to be the most powerful Arcana (in manual, if I'm not mistaken). There's nothing like having your mages picked up one by one by a superior astral mage. It really makes you think strategy. Really. It pisses me off, but I tend to take it as a learning experience.

Counter-balance-wise other paths have better summons and mass-destruction spells. What astral can do to that end?

Dabble in astral and be ready to pay the price. Master the astral and be one to collect the price.

- Humer

[Wendigo]

Astral is brutal in the end game, easily the most powerful field excluding Blood summons, and it also has some good tricks for early expansion vs inddies. The good thing about astral is its versatility, and the fact that the related ward can only protect to a certain degree.
I would be willing to prove the point vs anyone that thinks otherwise.

Concur with most of Jasper's points. I like having Magic duel in the game (and this from a player that has spent quite some time playing a 2nd tier astral nation), tho the effects from a lost duel are open to debate & suggestions.

I cannot see how some players claim that 'banning Magic Duel increases options', IMO it does the opposite: every single SC pretender will be designed with some astral proficiency because it gives both mobility & the *best* combat booster spells. It's the best magic to have on a SC with the risk removed, and gives Mind Hunt immunity as a bonus.

[ November 24, 2003, 09:34: Message edited by: Wendigo ]

[PDF]

Originally posted by Teleolurian:
I'd like to propose a different solution to mind hunt (or whatever it's called). Too many interesting Dom1 Posts had a long segue of 'I'd do it, but the vulnerability to mind hunt sucks'.

How about a Construction 6, Astral 3 Helmet with:

Protection: 2
Defense: -1
Immunity to mind hunt/(magic duel?) and feeblemind.

Restricting use of astral doesn't sound very good to me, since the reason I have these mages on the field is in order to use things like Star Fires. The immunity to feeblemind (and therefore the dreaded Black Bow) increases the usefulness. Of course, something like this should have a moderately high gem cost to counteract this gross specific protection... it should at least be more expensive than the bow is.

Won't it be even simpler to add a "Mind Blank" spell (Enchantment 4 (?)- Astral 1 or 2) that will have the same effect ?
So we would have a magic counter to a magic threat, like Fireballs has Fire Resist, etc...

[Humer]

Originally posted by PDF:
Won't it be even simpler to add a "Mind Blank" spell (Enchantment 4 (?)- Astral 1 or 2) that will have the same effect ?
So we would have a magic counter to a magic threat, like Fireballs has Fire Resist, etc...

Better yet, make the "Mind Blank"-spell cause feeblemindness of battle duration: "No magic duel... durrrr...*drools* "

- Humer