Mod Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation - Page 2

Epaminondas · #1 September 14th, 2008, 07:16 AM

I have a strange anomaly, and I am wondering if it's being reproduced in others. Namely, the Great Enchantress changes are not applied in the game. I also tried to change the Great Enchantress in a different way than those registered in this mod, and that didn't work either. So I am wondering if the unit ID # given in the game itself when you "shift + i" is inaccurate.

Epaminondas · #2 September 14th, 2008, 07:57 AM

By the way, I ought to add that the mod is a stupendous work. So please don't take my disagreement about the changes to items and spells as indicative of my assessment of the mod overall.

quantum_mechani · #3 September 15th, 2008, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epaminondas

I have a strange anomaly, and I am wondering if it's being reproduced in others. Namely, the Great Enchantress changes are not applied in the game. I also tried to change the Great Enchantress in a different way than those registered in this mod, and that didn't work either. So I am wondering if the unit ID # given in the game itself when you "shift + i" is inaccurate.

Well that is pretty baffling, every thing looks fine as far as I can see.

As for bogarus cavalry, I thought I fixed that this version but guess it slipped through.

About making spells and items easier/more powerful, as I've said before my assessment method is pretty simple, if I never see something being made use of, I improve it. This is naturally not full proof, but I think it would be hard to argue that on the whole it doesn't work out to a closer balance than base game. And of course the key thing to refining the balance is feedback. I have actually come around somewhat on the vampires, next version they will probably be 66.

vfb · #4 December 30th, 2008, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kuritza

Still, how about fixing Bogarus cavalry? Its their only damage dealing troop after all. Malaya Druzhina still have no lances, Grid Druzhina has lances instead of bows (wich makes sense), but no shields (which makes no sense since they lost bows).

My CB1.3 still looks like it has these problems, so ... bump? Or do I need to get a new one somewhere?

iceboy · #5 December 30th, 2008, 09:20 PM

Maybe there is someone else that is updating CBM? Anyone else out there doing fixes or updates? I would do it myself if I knew what program to use? I tried wordpad but just got jibberish...

Tifone · #6 September 15th, 2008, 04:21 AM

Great work with that. I have always been reluctant using mods, I like to play games the way devs thought it... but this mod adds a lot of things I like... and for the (few) ones I don't... oh well c'est la vie ^^

May I bring one small suggestion? On a discussion about fortune telling, I brought the idea of the Oracle pretender having it, for thematic reasons. Even KO agreed it was not a bad idea. Maybe it could be nice if the CBM puts some of this ability (3 points? 5?) on the Oracle (let's say for half the points of a Luck scale, as it would prevent bad events in the capital to happen in the moment you need it more for Misfortune choosers - at the beginning). I think it would be a nice and thematic addition, as it is an immobile chassis which ppl will take awaken for the gems it gives in the mod, it could open a new nice strategic opportunity ^^

Sombre · #7 September 15th, 2008, 05:50 AM

I agree, fortune telling on the oracle would be good.

I just want to say, once again, how much I love this mod. If I could I'd play cbm exclusively. I hope you continue to work on it qm, using the new features like water and forest shape etc in interesting ways.

Tifone · #8 September 15th, 2008, 12:44 PM

One nice thing to use for this mod would be if the devs add the command asked today... the one for new "second shapes" that some commanders already get when they're prophetized ^^ I think i.e. Oni Generals of Yomi would really deserve something this nice ^^

HoneyBadger · #9 October 1st, 2008, 01:39 AM

Quantum Mechani, could you look at the possibility of making EA Abyssia's Demonbred commanders non-Capital? Have you already considered this? They're one of the easiest and best ways for EA Abyssia to break into other forms of damage than Fire, and since they're Commanders, they still can only be recruited 1 at a time. Doing so would give EA Abyssia a competitive boost that I would assume is much needed, now that EA Gath and Lanka are running around.

I can't imagine that, as Capital-Only, they're used very often, and making them non-Cap opens up some interesting directions that a player using Abyssia might choose to take.

Thanks!

Sombre · #10 October 3rd, 2008, 06:14 AM

A thought for CBM that I believe I've mentioned before: Skirmisher shields.

Currently a fairly useful unit against massed xbows is a cheap fairly low rcost unit with a shield. This is because if the bolt is parried by the shield, prot no longer matters. Cheap units /without/ shields are generally too quickly killed no matter what their cost and numbers, to be a useful counter.

But I personally feel the counter is not well realised enough. Although it's certainly better for a cheap prot 5 guy with a shield and a spear to be used as crossbow fodder than a medium infantry with prot 13 and a shield, or any unit without a shield, it isn't the kind of significant difference that makes you want to actually use light/skirmmish infantry.

So what I propose is that suitable 'skirmisher' units, such as the Arco peltast, get special 'skirmish' versions of their current shields. So the Velite would get a 'Skirmish Tower Shield' instead of a shield, the Peltast a 'Skirmish Shield' and the Machaka jav armed warrior a 'Skirmish Hide Shield'. How would these shields differ? Well they'd have an extra point of parry and a slightly lower prot value. This represents the fact that though the shield is no larger, the skirmisher is used to using it as his first and last line of defence - he understands better than others how to shelter from missile fire and he doesn't have such heavy equipment, armor and weapons wise, allowing him more freedom to manuever his shield. With the parry 1 level higher, he's significantly better against missile fire, while still being killable and expendable - he's also more likely to parry in melee, particularly with his already high def score (due to lack of malus from heavy armor), however with the reduced prot (you can imagine the skirmisher uses a slightly lighter version of the shield, or that he's less able to ignore glancing blows due to lack of armour) if he does parry and it's against heavy infantry, cavalry or the like, he's still toast, just like before.

Thoughts?