|
|
|
 |
|

October 3rd, 2008, 12:14 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agema
Your first two paragraphs are the worst act of reductio ad absurdam I've seen in a long time. Please at least try to view my argument with at least some reasonable spirit.
I'm not going to second-guess KO or assume I know his motives. But to me the elephant graphic looks damn large enough to be size 5 or 6. I don't honestly see what the problem with its representation is, or with Titans, krakens, and the rest of it. You know there are 6 sizes. If they look big, you check the size stat to make sure, just like you see a knight and check to see quite how nasty it is. The "feeling" is fine to me, and I suspect most other Dom3 users.
|
You don't have any argument. Or rather you've changed it to the extent that I have no idea what your position actually is. You first stated graphics were irrelevant to size and are now say elephants look size 5 or 6 so there isn't a problem. No-one has said elephants should be below size 5. The talk has been of setting them at size 5 to nerf them a bit and whether or not that is sensibly justifiable in terms of graphics, realism (to the extent that it's useful) and flavour.
The rest of your post suggests to me you haven't actually looked at the kraken graphic. Not the ancient kraken. The regular summon. I believe the shark is also size 6. It doesn't seem intuitive to me, but being underwater it doesn't come into play that much. It's not something I'd go on and on about.
Regardless, I don't really disagree with your second post. Elephants look size 5 or 6 graphically speaking. Or put another way, considering they're size 6, their graphic looks of an appropriate size. It would also be appropriate for a size 5.
|

October 3rd, 2008, 01:57 PM
|
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 2,741
Thanks: 21
Thanked 28 Times in 17 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Btw, I still think MA Arcos is one of the better MA Races. But it is based on their strong astral magic, mind hunts, communions, and reverse communions. But they need elephants to survive early. If Elephants were nerfed, they would no longer be one of the better MA Races. They are in fact better than LA Arcos because astrologers get more s magic then sybils.
Both arcos races are hard to play, as they need much pregame planning. They need thugs to survive in the midgame due to elephants becoming obsolete, and no decent national summons or sacred troops. I am quite happy with the Lich as a pretender for LA Arcos.
__________________
"War is an art and as such is not susceptible of explanation by fixed formula."
- General George Patton Jr.
|

October 3rd, 2008, 03:41 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,445
Thanks: 85
Thanked 79 Times in 51 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
By the way, it's been a very long time since I've read the elephant description, but I'm not 100% certain that Kristoffer intended that they just be average sized Indian elephants--which I still believe should be size six. They could very well be African elephants, which are significantly larger, or even imperial mammoths, which reached heights of 16 feet or more at the shoulder. I *do* remember something being said about them being the largest of all beasts, which to me says size 6 all the way.
__________________
You've sailed off the edge of the map--here there be badgers!
|

October 3rd, 2008, 03:59 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,414
Thanks: 26
Thanked 73 Times in 49 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Endoperez:
Nothing is more ugly than mind burning illithids. You can get at least an headache from it. Or worse.
|

October 3rd, 2008, 05:04 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florence, Italy
Posts: 1,424
Thanks: 740
Thanked 112 Times in 63 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
BTW as we are on topic:
How would a couple of good, untrampeable thugs with ivy crowns (some animal awe), work against, let's say, a dozen elephants?
And does normal Awe work against elephants as well?
|

October 3rd, 2008, 07:15 PM
|
First Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 792
Thanks: 28
Thanked 45 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombre
You don't have any argument. Or rather you've changed it to the extent that I have no idea what your position actually is. You first stated graphics were irrelevant to size and are now say elephants look size 5 or 6 so there isn't a problem. No-one has said elephants should be below size 5. The talk has been of setting them at size 5 to nerf them a bit and whether or not that is sensibly justifiable in terms of graphics, realism (to the extent that it's useful) and flavour.
The rest of your post suggests to me you haven't actually looked at the kraken graphic. Not the ancient kraken. The regular summon. I believe the shark is also size 6. It doesn't seem intuitive to me, but being underwater it doesn't come into play that much. It's not something I'd go on and on about.
|
You seem a bit unnecessarily aggressive. You've chucked around terms like "silly" and "ludicrous", misrepresented my opinions, and stuff like "suggests to me you haven't actually looked at the kraken graphic" comes across as a bit insultingly dismissive (never mind wrong).
I didn't say graphics had nothing to do with the creature: you extrapolated that unfairly. Similarly I don't know why you are implying I thought elephants should be size 4 or under. I feel like you are putting words in my mouth and arguing against them instead of what I've actually said.
If I can clarify, I read the file and saw people arguing size stats for some units are "wrong" or need reconstructing to 12 sizes. I don't find some of the arguments about 'realism', graphical niceties, and so on convincing. I think the important arguments are about game balance. That's where I'm coming from, even if I didn't just stamp that statement down straight away.
|

October 3rd, 2008, 07:22 PM
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,327
Thanks: 4
Thanked 133 Times in 117 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Awe works against elephants. Pretty well too, though their morale isn't really that low. Normal humans with Ivy crowns would probably get squished pretty quickly. Giants (or the equivalent) would last long enough to matter. I wonder if that's the niche use for the Rat Tail? Fear on hit & Animal Awe
Anything untrampleable works wonders against elephants, but the only things elephants can't trample are other size 6 creatures, which at the start where elephants a threat is your pretender (or your own elephants)
|

October 3rd, 2008, 07:53 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,463
Thanks: 165
Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Yeah rat tail does ok against elephants. However with enough of them or a morale boost, your dude will get trampled fairly quickly. Only has to lose one awe check and he's toast.
|

October 3rd, 2008, 08:46 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Utopia, Oregon
Posts: 2,676
Thanks: 83
Thanked 143 Times in 108 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sombre
Yeah rat tail does ok against elephants. However with enough of them or a morale boost, your dude will get trampled fairly quickly. Only has to lose one awe check and he's toast.
|
Cast Flight > Cast Personal Quickness > Attack Large Monsters
? 
|

October 3rd, 2008, 10:23 PM
|
 |
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Holbrook,AZ
Posts: 456
Thanks: 3
Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
|
|
Re: Trample balance discussion
Ive given some of the EA Ctiss sacred chariot riders a rat tails and used them as linebackers to hold hordes of Mammoths while terror spam finally made them route.
|
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
|
|
|
|
|