Conceptual Balance Mod v1.92 - Page 25

Legendary League · #1 March 6th, 2012, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shardphoenix

Looks like I`ve found a bug in Worthy Heroes.
Member of the Third Tier, LA Ulm`s multihero has only one chance at showing up in his WH form (2F 3S 3B not old), and sometimes even this doesn`t happen, so even the first one comes as non-WH (2F 2S 2B old), and any subsequent Members of the Third Tier will be non-WH too.

I've had this happen to me in a game. Is this intended?

Valerius · #2 March 15th, 2012, 02:54 AM

Not sure if I've mentioned this before but I'd like to lobby for EA C'tis to get a scout. Indie scouts can be difficult to come by in EA and it's kind of tough having to rely on black servants for scouting or ferrying gems...

earcaraxe · #3 March 15th, 2012, 03:44 AM

i find the call selkie spell for ma oceania a fantastic idea, a balanced and thematic buff, but i wonder if its intentional that she can only be summoned above water. I would change that.

Shangrila00 · #4 March 17th, 2012, 12:18 AM

Okay, this is not really a CBM issue, but I figure CBM might as well fix it. Why does Mictlan's starting army have map move 1 but otherwise identical versions of its armored warriors that it can't even recruit? Is it supposed to be that way for some obscure reason of balance? I didn't see it on the bug list, but surely someone must have noticed before.

Shangrila00 · #5 March 17th, 2012, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kianduatha

Okay, there are two problems; One is that growth is too powerful at the moment. Granted. There are two ways to make that disappear: revert the changes and make it 3% income/0.2% growth, or make it 1% income/0.3% growth. The second is that scales in general are too powerful it seems, particularly Turmoil/Prod/Growth/Luck. How much of that is due to Growth being too awesome? If Growth is taken down a notch, will that still be overpowering Order/Misfortune?

Okay, this is coming a little late since I didn't watch this thread, but...

I disagree strongly. The shift of growth from direct income boost to later income boost is only a positive thing in the absense of popkilling effects, which is only reasonably certain in single player. As it is, CBM growth only breaks even with vanilla growth on turn 20. Income early is better than income later, not only for reasons of expansion and the increasing obsolescence of recruitable troops, but because the later the income comes, the more likely it ends up never coming due to war, poploss events, or various means of attacking population. CBM has made Volcanic Eruption only cost 5 gems, btw. Certainly, your suggested turmoil/production/growth build is not conducive to actually benefiting from the new growth thanks to all the popkill events opened up by turmoil, which will hit even with luck 3.

Taking growth is a gamble, that you'll be able to keep your population long enough to benefit, as it should be. But it shouldn't be a terrible gamble. With your suggested nerf of growth to only 1% income per tick, it won't break even with vanilla growth until turn 38. I suggest that makes growth a terrible gamble. And it nerfs those nations with no choice but to take growth thanks to old mages.

Nightfall · #6 March 24th, 2012, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shangrila00

As it is, CBM growth only breaks even with vanilla growth on turn 20.

Not sure what your talking about, since vanilla growth is 2%/.2%, CBM growth is flat out superior at the moment.

Adjusting growth from it's current point gives you a range of options, depending on what you want to achieve, for example.

Drop to 1%/.3%, income inferior to current CBM breaks even with vanilla growth around turn 23.
Change to 0%/.35%, income breaks even with vanilla around turn 29 and current CBM about turn 73.
Change to 0%/.4%, income breaks even with vanilla around turn 23 and current CBM about turn 40.

I also think the current production/sloth needs to be toned down to +-3% income, sloth is almost unpickable at the moment.

Shangrila00 · #7 March 24th, 2012, 11:19 PM

My mistake. Too used to the older and less controversial CBMs. Certainly, if the latest CBM supposedly makes scales too good, while earlier ones didn't, it needs to be compared with earlier CBMs.

And no, I still disagree. Production should not be a dump stat, and neither should growth, which is the whole point of the CBM changes in the first place. Having resource cheap, yet effective units is an advantage, but it should not be worth hundreds of points, and neither should having good, non-old mages. Some nations, Mictlan, Ry'leh, etc still pick sloth 3 and are not even close to being underpowered. For other nations to have to think before choosing sloth is a good thing. I mean, really? Sloth is unpickable? I guess nobody ever picked a temperature preference other than their prefered, since that's so much worse?

Valerius · #8 March 22nd, 2012, 06:49 PM

This comment is based on bbz's post in the main forum.

Sidhe Lords in EA and MA are different units and in MA they have the same golden lance that Ri/Tuatha use and to which false fetters was added. I'm not sure if recruit everywhere units having this weapon was intended?

In any case, I think it would be good to remove the AOE 1 and make the effect be on hit as was done with the vine whip. I'm just not a big fan of things that autohit - the opponent should have a chance to avoid it.

In the above thread bbz also wondered about the price of sidhe warriors. I use them for thematic reasons but they aren't really worth 35 gold. You could safely price them at 30 but really I'd just go with 25 since they're cap only.

In the same thread Shangrila00 also mentioned making the hoof attack on the mounted commanders the warhorse hoof attack, which I think is also a nice idea.

Valerius · #9 March 25th, 2012, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdonj

Yeah, temperature hurts, but it's still the first thing I dump... sloth is hardly unpickable now, it's still easier to take than losing order is in many cases. You just are going to think hard before going sloth 3 now. Having to think is the entire point.

As per kianduatha's point earlier I think it may be more of an issue in the opposite direction - turmoil/production/luck to get the benefits of luck but also have prod offset most of the income hit form turmoil (and the bonus to resources is nice because you can ramp up your forces quickly when needed). Kianduatha also mentioned growth in that comment, but I think even without growth this should work out favorably.

It's not really a big deal to me and the changes have certainly altered my approach to designing pretenders but it would be worth assessing the effects. My gut instinct is that it might be best to have a three point difference between prod and order (whether it's 4 and 7 or 3 and 6).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shangrila00

And no, I still disagree. Production should not be a dump stat, and neither should growth, which is the whole point of the CBM changes in the first place. Having resource cheap, yet effective units is an advantage, but it should not be worth hundreds of points, and neither should having good, non-old mages. Some nations, Mictlan, Ry'leh, etc still pick sloth 3 and are not even close to being underpowered.

Well neither is Niefel and they get 120 free points from cold 3.

Nightfall · #10 March 25th, 2012, 04:44 AM

I know this one's going to cause a rukus.

It's becoming more and more obvious to me that the biggest problem with making dwarven hammers unique is that the first person to research construction 8 gets both unique hammers and a much bigger advantage than in vanilla; where it was already a huge advantage.

Is it possible to move the Hammer of the Forge Lord to construction 10?

That way, as I understand it, it could be wished for but not forged.