|
|
|
|
|
January 1st, 2011, 08:48 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 332
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
What about putting a limit on the # of tartians summonable?
|
January 1st, 2011, 09:26 PM
|
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,435
Thanks: 57
Thanked 662 Times in 142 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corinthian
Actually, the lack of hammers in CBM 1.7 might just increase this problem. I have been playing in kings of drama using CBM 1.7 for 33 turns now, and I have yet to see a single thug in the game so far. I'm sort of starting to doubt I will see one until the tartarians start showing up. Because they are the only chassis that are powerful enough that you can afford to put expensive equipment on them without hammers.
Of course, all those gems are probably going somewhere else instead. But were? I don't know?
|
Oh I doubt that. There are plenty of chasises that are effective enough with a frost brand and vine shield or something similarly priced, and a smaller number that can get away with just a good shield if you're clever about it. 15 gems (plus the cost of the chasis) is a very reasonable price for something that can reliably clear PD out as a raider, and not *that* far from the 10 it'd cost you with hammers. Heck, you'd have to outfit three thugs thusly to break even for the cost of your first hammer, and assuming you were making multiple hammers before its not much of a stretch at all to say you could easily outfit 10+ light thugs with the same number of gems you were doing your first 10 thugs using hammers. Thing is, most people tend to go overboard and use 50 gems worth of equipment when 15 would work. Know what you want to accomplish, and use just enough resources to reliably do that.
__________________
My guides to Mictlan, MA Atlantis, Eriu, Sauromatia, Marverni, HINNOM, LA Atlantis, Bandar, MA Ulm, Machaka, Helheim, Niefleheim, EA Caelum, MA Oceana, EA Ulm, EA Arco, MA Argatha, LA Pangaea, MA T'ien Ch'i, MA Abysia, EA Atlantis, EA Pangaea, Shinuyama, Communions, Vampires, and Thugs
Baalz good player pledge
|
January 1st, 2011, 11:22 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 84
Thanks: 5
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
What about putting a limit on the # of tartians summonable?
|
Not possible.
|
January 1st, 2011, 11:55 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Unless you made them all unique.
BTW someone in the irc channel pointed out that the note on limiting GoR does say its a modding note. So unless thats an error this might be an added way for us to limit it, not the game itself
|
January 2nd, 2011, 02:57 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: az
Posts: 3,069
Thanks: 41
Thanked 39 Times in 28 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
What about putting a limit on the # of tartians summonable?
|
Actually I disagree with removing hammers and feel the solution for Tartarians should be creating new summoning spells and offensive spells which are specific for Tartarians and SuperCombatants.
A) A spell which summons 10 weak units which have the #horrormark trait... thus when struck leave a horrormark. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against supercombatants.
B) A spell which summons 5 average units and are size 4 which have two melee attacks... one which does increased damage to larger units and another which does increased damage to undead. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against the large undead supercombatants.
C) A spell which summons 2 strong flying units which are size 5 with lots of life with armor negating missile weapons which do extra damage against larger units, yet only last for the duration of the battle. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against the Tartarians.
I could easily provide a list of offensive spells as well, yet I don't have the time for the modding.
__________________
There can be only one.
|
January 2nd, 2011, 04:22 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: az
Posts: 3,069
Thanks: 41
Thanked 39 Times in 28 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
QUESTION: What's the most recent update??
"2nd January 2010
* --nonationinfo is now implemented. "
__________________
There can be only one.
|
January 2nd, 2011, 04:26 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Good catch.
I looked right at that and didnt see it. I'll let Johan know
|
January 2nd, 2011, 05:19 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 332
Thanks: 4
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Quote:
Originally Posted by NTJedi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warhammer
What about putting a limit on the # of tartians summonable?
|
Actually I disagree with removing hammers and feel the solution for Tartarians should be creating new summoning spells and offensive spells which are specific for Tartarians and SuperCombatants.
A) A spell which summons 10 weak units which have the #horrormark trait... thus when struck leave a horrormark. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against supercombatants.
B) A spell which summons 5 average units and are size 4 which have two melee attacks... one which does increased damage to larger units and another which does increased damage to undead. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against the large undead supercombatants.
C) A spell which summons 2 strong flying units which are size 5 with lots of life with armor negating missile weapons which do extra damage against larger units, yet only last for the duration of the battle. Gem price makes them not useful against mages or regular troops, but valuable against the Tartarians.
I could easily provide a list of offensive spells as well, yet I don't have the time for the modding.
|
I think this is a much more palatable solution than limiting hammers.
|
January 2nd, 2011, 05:21 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 84
Thanks: 5
Thanked 10 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
Post your ideas in the CBM thread, qm might see them then.
|
January 2nd, 2011, 07:53 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: update on progress page
There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding on the rationale for making hammers unique. It was not intended to significantly address the tartarian problem (hopefully the new patch will allow that through GoR), the issue was the ubiquitousness of hammers. The game could not be competitively played without them, this greatly skewed pretender creation (the e3 factor alone was making many pretender chassis simply unusable in games without trading), was well as gem usage and research. Not to mention creating micromanagement for basically no reason.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|