EitB Paring Questions

[Tasunke]

Nightwatch @ Poisons and Archery ... and having Shadowriders as an elite HA at Stirrups, might brook favor. Shadows as a unit are actually quite wanted, and I would hate to see them weakened, but perhaps an additional unit in the like of an assassin replacer could be interesting.

[Bobchillingworth]

Out of curiosity, what role do non-Dwarven Shadows (and non-Angels of Death) even fulfill, anyway? Sure invisibility is cool and all, but Marksmen are already taking up the "high strength assassin" position.


Hmm, how about this-


* Remove Extort; it's either not being used or being called broken, and it's kind of awkward that it's the only brand new spell in EitB.

* Make Nightwatch only require Archery, and have them do collateral direct collateral damage.

* Shadowriders become either HA with +1 strength, Shadow II, and whatever cost Ratha have, or become HA at regular HA cost with one of those two bonuses. Or somewhat expensive National units with +1 or 2 strength, Shadow II and the ability to do collateral.

* Shadows become essentially Assassins with permanent invisibility; Dwarven ones still get to do collateral.



Hopefully changes Esus from "powerful one-offs with awesome national units you'll never build" to "provides elite versions of unit lines that need more player love anyway".

[Kragroth]

Shadows punish people who don't have Hawks, Metamagic units, or empyrean reveal. They're stronger than assassins and it makes a difference.

It's also because assassins have -50% city attack while Hunters and Shadows have -20%

[Bobchillingworth]

Shadows are also available at Guilds. If you can't spot invisible units by the time your opponent researches it you're probably screwed anyway.

[Kragroth]

Shadows are also available at Guilds. If you can't spot invisible units by the time your opponent researches it you're probably screwed anyway.

Indeed. Still a purpose though.

[Qgqqqqq]

I like the idea of mirroring Empyrean more. I'll have a look at the breakdown later, but remember that Blinding Light is super boss and Shadow 2 is definitely not.

And what Bob said re:Tasunkes suggestions.

[Bobchillingworth]

I like the idea of mirroring Empyrean more. I'll have a look at the breakdown later, but remember that Blinding Light is super boss and Shadow 2 is definitely not.

And what Bob said re:Tasunkes suggestions.

Yeah, hence possibly also giving them +1 strength; 7 base strength. 3-move units that ignore first strikes and city defenses will be pretty sweet; good enough that they'll need to cost more than regular HA, as Ratha compared with Chariots.

[Tasunke]

Honestly if its within theme I don't think adding a unit is really all that bad.

To effect, the 'spy' unit could certainly be considered a 'bad' addition because it introduces an entirely new game mechanic ... but then so does invisible assassins (to a lesser effect).

I say Esus invisible assassins is probably a good thing, and don't forget that they can 'spy' into cities as well, to sniff out opponent production choices, and relative yield outputs of the city. I still hold that there are 'Shadow Lords' to replace the original shadows, which are essentially the same National units that Shadows were, and if u think the unit truly useless, then remove the Esus requirement for the 'Shadow Lord' I guess.

I used shadows quite a lot, before they required Esus state religion. And while I don't *mind* having Shadow Lords being state religion required ... if the consensus is that they aren't very strong I would love the opportunity to prove otherwise.

--------------------------------------

As far as the Patriarch .... its exactly the same as adding a Building, or movable building, that has to dissapear when u are no longer in Esus state religion. Units are simply much more controllable than buildings. If you build it once its built forever (unless the city gets captured) .... even if you switch OUT of Esus. But if its attached to a unit (that creates the building inside a city while he is in it), then its still a building, in effect, but it is being controlled by a unit.

[Qgqqqqq]

Honestly if its within theme I don't think adding a unit is really all that bad.

And for your mod, that's your prerogative.

For EitB, it's not. Theme most certainly isn't enough - or we'd just use Magisters as a baseline. Tbh, balance isn't enough either - virtually nothing would be sufficient to add a whole new unit to the mod.

The units that have (technically) been added have never been about being a new unit, but rather extending a mechanic or overcoming a bug - hence the doubled copy of mistform, or the lesser summon. A new unit is beyond the prerogative of the mod if it is functionally a new unit. If anyone can ever describe something as "X, which is a new Y (unit/civic/whatever) that EitB added", then we've done something wrong. That's one of the reasons supporting rolling back Extort - EitB isn't about creating new things.

[Tasunke]

The proposed *changes* of units (and indeed, the changes to Stygian guards) are as similar to making a new unit as one can truly get without actually adding a unit. I can understand where you are coming from in that you do not wish to add clutter, but in the case of Shadow/Shadow lord, its really just a question of "should we completely and totally change an element of the game??"

I never used Nightwatch, I never used Shadow Riders .... I ALWAYS used Shadows. So in my opinion, the proposed change to Shadows is flawed because it would be stepping on Ghost territory mightily, and it would be ridding the game of an iconic end-game unit. You could always move Shadows from Guilds to Taxation ... or something. But imho he is a potential super unit just waiting for the right set of conditions ....