|
|
|
|
|
October 30th, 2008, 08:42 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by rabelais
heya, I've been messing around with MA Man in CBM, and have discovered two things which I didn't know.
Knights of avalon aren't sacred despite costing more than knights of the shroud (EA ERMOR) which have recup as well... is it just paying for speed?
This doesn't bother me so much, since I doubt I would use them at the price even if they were... cheap stealthy wardens are clearly better assuming you don't need strat move 3.
The second thing does surprise me and I'd like to ask why it was done.... man MA longbows only have range 35 now, which makes any old composite bow (even in EA) superior.
EDIT: Thanks fungalreason and cleveland, I'll look into those for next version.
This is bizarre and arguably some sort of dominions sacrilege, and especially unexpected as the resource cost was bumped up.
It's true than man's longbows were best in game, but they haven't much else going for them, and there doesn't seem to be a way to maintain an advantage (i.e dispel storm or arrow fend), so its hardly unbalancing.
Anyway just wanted to get that off my chest... now I have to go back to designing an MA man pretender for Dodeicus, that won't be a total pushover.
Send me a PM if you have any ideas.
|
Knights of Avalon were never sacred... I leave such thematic decisions to KO.
The longbow thing was a change I thought I rolled back, I guess it's still in there somewhere.
EDIT: Thanks fungalreason and cleveland, I'll look into those next version.
Last edited by quantum_mechani; October 30th, 2008 at 08:45 PM..
|
October 31st, 2008, 04:01 PM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: houston TX
Posts: 493
Thanks: 32
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Hey qm, I just want to emphasize, since tone is hard to intergrate into font, that this mod is teh awesome. Making pretender choice interesting even by itself would merit you a shrine, the masses of great other stuff is just gravy. Wasn't implying I was unhappy witht he mod, just kvetching as a Man player under the gun....
I'm treating this as a discussion thread, but if I'm posting in the wrong place let me know.
One thing I think you might consider for a future version is giving each nation a bless pretender for their natural magic paths. Sort of like the bahomet for mari, but with some variation depending on thematic preferences. If someone is willing to take an immobile pretender that doesn't expand their magic diversity at all, I think they deserve a discount.
For example when I was trying to find an earth nature bless for Maverni, I had either to pay through the nose with an 80 pont new path (greek) cyclope, the 60 point new path nature serpent (who I love btw) or I was briefly envious that some nations get the gorgon, but realized that wasn't thematically much better. I could of couse take the goddess of willendorf... except she's well... as expensive as usual, and my tramplers ALWAYS die. etc. I eventually went with an (imprisioned)lord of the forest, but I didn't want an SC just a bless.... something like the Spirit of Maverni 2e/2n dom 4 would have been lovely even if it costs 75 points or whatever would pass as exorbitant.
Just a thought, and thanks for all your work,
Rabe
|
November 26th, 2008, 01:48 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,691
Thanks: 269
Thanked 397 Times in 200 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleveland
While updating the CBM Forging References, I found two small s.
The first is with the Evening Star. It is not working as intended due to 2 misspellings of the word "effect". Currently, the erroneous code is:
Code:
#selectitem "Evening Star"
#constlevel 2
#end
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryefect 0
#end
#selectweapon 304
#secondaryefectalways 305
#end
|
What's the effect of the bug? I've been running around in a couple games with Evening Stars because with AOE5 they are pretty spectacular. Does secondaryeffectalways versus secondaryeffect introduce friendly fire?
__________________
Whether he submitted the post, or whether he did not, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever.
http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?
|
November 29th, 2008, 05:37 AM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 790
Thanks: 7
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
secondaryeffect means the target needs to be hitted (sucessfull attack vs defence strike) to get the effect.
secondaryeffectalways just needs an attack, sucessfully or not the effect will be processed. Thats why the brand weapons are so usefull.
With the misspell secondaryeffect is used (like the item in base game uses).
With a triggered AOE>1 on a weapon/effect you always risk to hit yourself.
Last edited by calmon; November 29th, 2008 at 05:49 AM..
|
The Following User Says Thank You to calmon For This Useful Post:
|
|
November 29th, 2008, 08:01 AM
|
|
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Eastern Finland
Posts: 7,110
Thanks: 145
Thanked 153 Times in 101 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by calmon
With a triggered AOE>1 on a weapon/effect you always risk to hit yourself.
|
Especially annoying with that MA Ulm hero that gets Star of Heroes in CB, and runs around destorying both his own and his bodyguard-Black Knights' armors. And then it takes several turns in a mountain province before their armor comes back.
|
November 30th, 2008, 12:37 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Japan
Posts: 3,691
Thanks: 269
Thanked 397 Times in 200 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Quote:
Originally Posted by calmon
secondaryeffect means the target needs to be hitted (sucessfull attack vs defence strike) to get the effect.
secondaryeffectalways just needs an attack, sucessfully or not the effect will be processed. Thats why the brand weapons are so usefull.
With the misspell secondaryeffect is used (like the item in base game uses).
With a triggered AOE>1 on a weapon/effect you always risk to hit yourself.
|
Thanks! I'm using thugs with a high attack, so I never noticed a difference. They're FR and have regen so I've avoided self-inflicted damage. I suppose if I'd have tried it on a low attack unit like a Golem I might have been disappointed, but the Evening Star's got +6 attack, so it should hit more often than not.
__________________
Whether he submitted the post, or whether he did not, made no difference. The Thought Police would get him just the same. He had committed— would still have committed, even if he had never set pen to paper— the essential crime that contained all others in itself. Thoughtcrime, they called it. Thoughtcrime was not a thing that could be concealed forever.
http://z7.invisionfree.com/Dom3mods/index.php?
|
October 31st, 2008, 06:32 PM
|
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,066
Thanks: 109
Thanked 162 Times in 118 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
The serpent and monolith are pretty much as thematic as you get for Marverni pretenders, and you'd have had better results for your points (on an E9/N8 or 9 bless) with the Serpent than the Lord of the Forest.
|
October 31st, 2008, 07:42 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Just a note:
I notice alot of misspellings in the dm file itself.
Maybe we could get Edi to look at it?
|
October 31st, 2008, 08:10 PM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: R'lyeh
Posts: 3,861
Thanks: 144
Thanked 403 Times in 176 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
I noticed a number of spelling errors, too, playing in a MP game with CB included. It seems that the descriptions, whereever they come from, aren't that homogenous, too. But I might think that Edi would gladly reject doing any more work. For most things, running it through a spellcheck should work, I think.
|
October 31st, 2008, 10:55 PM
|
|
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Vacaville, CA, USA
Posts: 13,736
Thanks: 341
Thanked 479 Times in 326 Posts
|
|
Re: Conceptual Balance 1.3, updated documentation
Taking so many different modules by different people and getting them to work together is a chore enough. When you are reading thru such adds you are catching modding errors and conflicts. Kudos to you for it. I can totally understand each authors minor spelling errors slipping thru. For someone like that, a proofreader tackling it with a fresh eye would be more effective. Edi has been doing that for the devs and doing a great job (hence little things like descripts and events getting fixed). Thats why I thought of him first.
|
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
|
|
|
|
|