Conceptual Balance Mod v1.92

[Calahan]

Attached is a modified version of CBM 1.92 that fixes the recruitable Wild Ettin bug, and replaces it with (what I believe to be) the correct unit (2855 Shambler Chief)

This mod is on the llamaserver under the name "CBM 1.92 - Ettin Fixed (with download link)", and this post is here to provide a download link for it.


Edit - Please note that you still need to download the full CBM mod to get all the new unit sprite files that you need to use and play CBM. The attached file is only the .dm file. (ie. only the mod file, not the support files)

[Peter Ebbesen]

A quick check:

For jokes and giggles in SP testing as EA Ermor, I just tried to wish for a Grigori under CBM 1.92 with latest Dompatch and no other mods... And got a non-commander clone of Azazel rather than the old man Grigori as I expected.

6 Nature Gems later and Attalus the Grigori was ready to kick arse and take names.

Oops.


Can anybody verify this aberrant behaviour? I believe it is still the intention that the Grigori remain unique, unwishable, and limited to Hinnom?

I hope it is due to a user error on my part, but I can't think of what it could be. I've checked installed mods, activated mods, and that it is the latest domversion.

[Corinthian]

I can confirm Peter Ebbesen's findings. You do indeed get Azazael, the strongest of the lords of civilization. And looking at the mod file I can not explain why.

I dont think I have a vanilla game were I am capable of casting wish, but if someone would like to try this in vanilla I would be grateful.

Though I dont think people use the spell wish all that often in CBM any more so maybe this will give people a reason to use it again.

You can not summon more than one Azazael though as he is unique.

[Calahan]

Just tested with CBM 1.92 and the mega powerful Grigori does indeed turn up as Peter Ebbesen and Corinthian say.

And attached are two save games (before and after) from a vanilla game I just did that shows that in vanilla the old weak Grigori turns up as normal. So it certainly looks like a CBM issue.

[Valerius]

When I was working on making some changes for an experimental game it occurred to me that iron bane is surprisingly cheap to cast. Compare to other battlefield-wide E spells:

Earthquake - 3 gems
Rain of Stones - 2 gems
Curse of Stones - 3 gems
Army of Gold - 3 gems
Army of Lead - 3 gems

Of course iron bane, unlike destruction, still requires a hit in order to destroy the armor but destruction has a much smaller AOE and requires proper scripting/placement.

In the experimental game I ended up increasing the gem cost and making it MRN easily, like curse of stones. I'm not proposing that but given that it is battlefield-wide and there's no resistance roll it seems reasonable that it should cost more than 1 E gem to cast. How about 2 gems? Though even at 3 gems it would still be perfectly usable by an E1 mage with earth boots and summon earthpower (since unlike the spells listed above, especially the offensive ones, there's no need for iron bane to be cast the first round to get the full benefit from it).

[Admiral_Aorta]

I think the question we should be asking before changing it is 'is iron bane causeing problems in games?'

[Valerius]

Well, if it were causing problems my suggestion would do little to fix that since it doesn't make it any more difficult to use effectively (in the way that increasing the cost of rain of stones from 1 to 2 gems did make that spell more difficult to use effectively).

If I had thrown out the idea of making it MR negates (and I'm not suggesting that as I don't know that it would be a good idea) then that would be completely different and I agree that would need serious debate as you get into questions about the balance between armored (usually recruitable) and unarmored (usually summons or freespawn) troops.

It's really just a price adjustment, as it seems to me that it should cost a bit more than one gem to weaken all the armor on the battlefield. It's not really a significant change - but of course if it isn't significant then you could argue why bother making it to begin with.

[decourcy]

I think CBM needs some adjustment. I agree that vanilla EA Agartha is weak. However, in CBM just build 35g, 1r stone throwers. Maybe add giant strength. Yea, you just won.

Lances are effective. I just encountered this in a MP while playing Tir. early second year, i have no lances. I tried the best tactic i could think of, i started a force of 45 sacred infantry a bit back from the front, blessed with my prophet, then used quickening song. We charged. We died. He had maybe 30 throwers, nothing else.

I started a small SP with me playing Agartha, i conquered a 116 province map in 3 years, slightly faster than i can do with Niefel. Far faster than anyone else i have tried.

[decourcy]

It was suggested by a twit on Invision that i try thugs with brands against stone throwers. Just tried, doesn't work in anything resembling a decent return on gold. The stones hit glamoured thugs just as easily as militia. And insta kill.

Hopefully this is something that can be fixed, there is much good in CBM, but this is way overpowered against anyone but giants.

[kianduatha]

Wait, the naked stone throwers?

Did you try using slingers? I'm afraid stone throwers are specialized at dealing with expensive troops like the sacreds you used, so you sort of played to his strengths. Also certain scripting tricks can easily make the boulder throwers run forwards instead of throwing boulders.