Bobchillingworth
Unregistered
Quote: IND/ORG/ING v. FIN/AGG/ING an interesting choice for Khazad?
Well, there really aren't many IND leaders left, and lots of financial ones now. So I can see some justification. But... without financial, I'd probably go back to picking Kandros for every Khazad game (right now I actually prefer Aurturus).
Although tbi, I'd probably also stop playing as him if you brought command posts back to only +2 exp.
What would need to change about the Noctis? You already nerfed it. Maybe Tasunke is not aware of this?
Posts: 5,294
Threads: 59
Joined: Dec 2004
Bobchillingworth Wrote:What would need to change about the Noctis? You already nerfed it. Maybe Tasunke is not aware of this?
Current Noctis behavior is def. place-holder in my mind until we can hack together something else for it. So his thinking around the original nox noctis is fine.
Blog | EitB | PF2 | PBEM 37 | PBEM 45G | RBDG1
Posts: 3,390
Threads: 31
Joined: Dec 2009
Two things.
Minor quibble:
When you discover Currency, you get the pop-up asking if you want to revolt to Consumption. The description you get is +10% gold iso 20%. You still get the 20% once you revolt though. (so the pop-up description just needs to be changed)
Conquest and Command Posts:
Would it be possible to reduce both to 2 exp, but increasing them back to 3 exp once you discover an advanced tech (for example, Iron Working)?
Hmm, three things... 
Could we have a look at the City States civic?
Posts: 5,294
Threads: 59
Joined: Dec 2004
Ilios Wrote:Two things.
Minor quibble:
When you discover Currency, you get the pop-up asking if you want to revolt to Consumption. The description you get is +10% gold iso 20%. You still get the 20% once you revolt though. (so the pop-up description just needs to be changed)
Conquest and Command Posts:
Would it be possible to reduce both to 2 exp, but increasing them back to 3 exp once you discover an advanced tech (for example, Iron Working)?
Hmm, three things...
Could we have a look at the City States civic?
- Added the popup text to the fix list.
- Doable, though would require new coding infrastructure to improve buildings based on techs. Could see upping Conquest @ Military Strategy and Command Posts @ Precision or some other high-end tech.
- What's up with City States?
Blog | EitB | PF2 | PBEM 37 | PBEM 45G | RBDG1
Posts: 2,257
Threads: 13
Joined: Jun 2010
I would prefer IND Acturus actually. Fin/Org/ING vs Fin/Agg/ING is just not too big of a choice, as you choose either Org or Agg. Might as well turn it back so that the choice is more different compared to now.
Posts: 4,421
Threads: 53
Joined: Sep 2011
I could see upgrading conquest at Military Strategy ... (if conquest is back to 2, should it be allowed at Education again?)
and upgrading Command Posts at either Code of Laws or Feudalism.
------------------
As far as Nox Noctis, building the shrine itself is fine the normal way (with priest) I *suppose* ... if the argument is purely gold + shadow mana.
But then an Improvement (buildable only with State relig and if Nox is in the city) should add the old powers of the Nox Noctis for that player.
As such, the improvement has a 100% destruction chance if captured, so unless the city is gifted (which would be cheese imho), you would have to run Esus state religion to rebuild it.
Posts: 4,421
Threads: 53
Joined: Sep 2011
How about for boar riders, instead of giving a bonus vs horses, gives a bonus towards animals/beasts instead?
Silly boars know not to be afraid of such things
and perhaps, if that is not enough, then allow them defensive bonuses as well.
-----------------
I know its silly, but I always imagined any (vs horse) bonuses for mounted units to be strictly Hippus territory. (or if another civ was added that had an equal focus on mounted units)
I'm not really arguing for this at the moment (but I have pondered allowing Horselords to add FormationI to units as well), but I see them as the obvious choice should such addition be added.
The idea would be that, if everyone is running around with horsearchers (midgame) the Hippus horsearchers would win a direct confrontation horsestack vs horsestack (and not just because of the withdrawal).
Khazad +20% natural city defense is already a pretty good defender against horse rushes ... but giving them a mounted unit specifically designed to take out horse rushes seems ... I dunno. Giving them defensive bonuses is fine, because the Khazad love their defense, but having Boar riders being the best out in the field (not in cities or hills), feels wrong imho.
Personally one of the best flavorful matchups is Hippus vs Khazad, imo, and I've played both sides of that coin (in multi). I just wouldn't want for Boar Riders to change the dynamic too much (into an agressive "horse slayer" opponent). I guess requiring access to pigs would help somewhat, but offensive "horse slayer" boars seems a bit odd.
If you do end up giving the Boars some sort of bonus vs mounted units ... then please make it only a +X% defense against Horsemen and War Elephants (by unitclass) ... nothing with HAs please. In other words, no offensive bonus.
Posts: 6,178
Threads: 37
Joined: Jul 2010
Bobchillingworth Wrote:Well, there really aren't many IND leaders left, and lots of financial ones now. So I can see some justification. But... without financial, I'd probably go back to picking Kandros for every Khazad game (right now I actually prefer Aurturus).
Although tbi, I'd probably also stop playing as him if you brought command posts back to only +2 exp.
Command Posts at 80 Hammers for +20% Military Production and +2 exp are a damned fine deal.
Ind got a very nice little buff in the mod: +25% to worker production. That get's your snowball rolling faster....and it's a boost to Dwarven worker production. So you get workers built faster, who work faster and pay only 1 movement to move onto hills.
And you still get to keep cheap Dwarven Smithies, cheap National Wonders (like say, the Brewery and BoM....plus the Epics....not to mention a cheap Palace move if the game warrants it) and cheap World wonders.
Plus Org for cheap civics, cheap(er) Command Posts, cheap Courthouses and possibly cheap Lighthouses.
Looks pretty solid to me.
Amelia Wrote:I would prefer IND Acturus actually. Fin/Org/ING vs Fin/Agg/ING is just not too big of a choice, as you choose either Org or Agg. Might as well turn it back so that the choice is more different compared to now.
 Aruturos and Kandros play differently (assuming Ind/Org Arturos) but both have their uses.
As far as the Pig Rider buff goes, I'm not sure it's needed. After all the Kahzad got a boost to their other UU (the Trebuchet) with the ability to take Mob 1 as a promotion.
The Kahzad armies are still slower than their foes, but that's the price you pay for being 3' tall.  *
* OTOH, being 3' tall and having a penchant for wearing helmets with horns on them does nasty things to your headbutts vs the tall ones.
fnord
Posts: 2,390
Threads: 20
Joined: Oct 2011
Selrahc Wrote:Remove the duration bonus to units summoned by Puppets. This means that the mages can choose to summon puppets which last two turns and cast all their spells in a slightly weaker fashion, or cast full strength summons which last for two turns.
This. And also don't pass twincast along to puppets (twincast can still summon two puppets). Hemah/Gibbon would still be awesome with Keelyn, but not game-breakingly so.
Posts: 4,421
Threads: 53
Joined: Sep 2011
I think the original purpose of puppets was to increase the abilities of domination.
Perhaps giving disciple units mind 1 and adding puppet function to disciple units as well? (at least for caster disciples)
-> For either Keelyn (Arcane+Mind), or for the Basleraphs as a whole.
Perhaps would make the Keelyn nerfs a bit more palatable for some?
|
