(April 16th, 2012, 22:41)Bobchillingworth Wrote: [SIZE="4"]Leader: Furia the Mad
Civilization:Balseraphs
Alignment:Neutral
Traits: RAI, CHA, BAR [/SIZE]
Purpose: Added per Mardoc's suggestion for a Balseraphs leader who can make genuine use out of their three special recon-line units. Perpentarch could theoretically use any of the Balseraphs UU very well, but the presence of Insane makes basing any sort of long-term strategy around his traits is an exercise in futility. Raiders pairs perfectly with Recon units, allowing Furia to move her Harlequins deep into enemy territory to Taunt out garrisons or other entrenched forces. Charismatic is there largely because it is a unique pairing with Raiders which also has some nice synergy. Charismatic also fits along with Barbarian on a thematic level, representing Furia's dual-personalities (which is also the reason I suggest her being Neutral). It might not matter for game-play purposes, but it is nice to have leader's traits make thematic sense, if for no other reason than to preserve flavor for SP games . Barbarian also supplies a few gameplay functions. First, it gives the game another Barbarian leader (which it could really use more of), second, it helps temper the otherwise excellent Raiders / Charismatic combination, and finally it allows the Balseraphs to use Loki as a neat pseudo-Ratine, converting barbarian cities.
BAR really sucks, if it weren't a necessary nerf for the Clan I'd suggest removing it. It's a good thing to put onto Averax and other rushers, but there's a reason Charadon has only been played in the dregs game. RAI doesn't work well for any of the Bals unique recon units (Taskmaster makes slaves? how are you going to escort them home deep in enemy territory?, and Harlequin is more like a mage then a ranger thanks to Taunt anyway). CHA is kinda ok but none of the other Bals mechanics really work around promoting units (Mutate isn't affected by CHA).
I'm not really sure what to do about her though. I mean Perpy can do pretty much anything Furia could do aside from SUM (which Keelyn is already doing, as we all know) and BAR. But BAR is terrible, as has been established. TBH I'd suggest removing her, she doesn't anything to the Bals they don't already have in a normal game, unless you want to keep her around for wacky variants with Last Days or a barb heavy game, but I think that's a but too focused for a leader (although Charadon is kinda in the same boat...).
I've been meaning to play a single player game as Furia for awhile, as the Balseraphs are one of my favorite civs and I think Furia has some strong features that run different from what Perpentach and Keelyn can do.
The key thing to note here is that while Perpentach CAN do the things that Furia can do, he can't be relied upon to do them, or to do them at a convenient time. The barbarian trait is not bad, it just pairs some benefits with some drawbacks and favors certain strategies over others. I think the Balseraph economic advantages should synergize well with the advantages of the BAR trait, and should also be enough to compensate for the science penalty.
Active in:
FFH-20: Jonas Endain of the Clan of Embers
EITB Pitboss 1: Clan/Elohim/Calabim with Mardoc and Thoth
0. Player Requests: The player's requests take precedence, even if they contradict the following guidelines.
1. Balance: The map must be balanced, both in regards to land quality and availability and in regards to special civilization features. A map may be wonderfully unique and surprising, but, if it is unbalanced, the game will suffer and the player's enjoyment will not be as high as it could be.
2. Identity and Enjoyment: The map should be interesting to play at all levels, from city placement and management to the border-created interactions between civilizations, and should include varied terrain. Flavor should enhance the inherent pleasure resulting from the underlying tile arrangements. The map should not be exceedingly lush, but it is better to err on the lush side than on the poor side when placing terrain.
3. Feel (Avoiding Gimmicks): The map should not be overwhelmed or dominated by the mapmaker's flavor. Embellishment of the map through the use of special improvements, barbarian units, and abnormal terrain can enhance the identity and enjoyment of the map, but should take a backseat to the more normal aspects of the map. The game should usually not revolve around the flavor, but merely be accented by it.
4. Realism: Where possible, the terrain of the map should be realistic. Jungles on desert tiles, or even next to desert tiles, should therefore have a very specific reason for existing. Rivers should run downhill or across level ground into bodies of water. Irrigated terrain should have a higher grassland to plains ratio than dry terrain. Mountain chains should cast rain shadows. Islands, mountains, and peninsulas should follow logical plate tectonics.
(June 15th, 2013, 12:43)Ellimist Wrote: What about changing Illusionists so that they don't replace mages? So a Svartalfar player could upgrade an adept to either a mage or an illusionist?
I think that would do a LOT to make them more playable. Illusion summons have a role, but it's tough not having access to the typical summons.
Something like that would let us leave the Svartalfar leaders as they are for now.
I don't think the problem is that the Svart leaders aren't balanced with each other, it's more that Volanna is too strong compared with other leaders (including the Svartalfar leaders). EitB has already really boosted the Svartalfar by lowering the cost of fawns; Faeryl doesn't need any more help, IMO.
I would love to see the flying camera removed completely (and not just because I suck at using the controls). The only cost is the ability to make some pretty pictures, and the gain is that you actually have to explore the map to gain information about it.
I think that perhaps alchemy labs should be re-removed from the elven building roster. Originally elves could not build Alchemy labs, and if you think about it, the other building civs could in the past use them to somewhat compensate for the late game elven research advantage.
So? The elves are intended as the late game ultimate builders.
You might as well remove coves from lanun, so that everyone can catch their tech :rollseye:
Erebus in the Balance - a FFH Modmod based around balancing and polishing FFH for streamlined competitive play.
Qgqqq I respectfully disagree on your viewpoint of the elven need for Alchemy Labs. The way I see it, elves have always been a strong race. When you add leaders like Volanna, their early game weaknesses are largely removed as well.
While Volanna is an entirely different subject altogether, under a recent discussion I noticed that Alchemy Labs used to be blocked from the Elves.
Now, what I am saying is that .... if Alchemy labs were added to the elves on the sole basis of enabling Mary Morbus .... then EVERYONE should have access to the Alchemy Labs. Instead, civs such as the Hippus, Clan, and Doviello still do not have such access.
Therefore I propose to either completely remove any obstacle to building Alchemy Labs (to where EACH and EVERY civ can build them) if Mary is that important .... OR to remove the Labs from the elves, because making an exception to elves 'because they are awesome' and leaving the rest alone is an egregious error of, perhaps, overlooking the code.
. Barbarian also supplies a few gameplay functions. First, it gives the game another Barbarian leader (which it could really use more of), second, it helps temper the otherwise excellent Raiders / Charismatic combination, and finally it allows the Balseraphs to use Loki as a neat pseudo-Ratine, converting barbarian cities.
