Forum Replies Created
OK that would be interesting. Warlord vs Rogue. But my experience is old school Hot Seat )) and like 30 – 40 turns for expansion, research and building before attack another human player on a medium size map. It results in longer campaigns and thus in bigger armies than it happens on-line I guess.
And let me remind that after disjuncting ‘Sadism’ all the bonuses gained still remain! Isn’t that a bug? Because all other mass spells are removed correctly, i e disjuncting Blood Bath removes +5 damage bonus from all units.
have you actually gone into pvp and beat a warlord in a big battle
Yes. And after I noticed it, I’ve made some tests. With comparable armies Rogue is likely to win due to Sadism. Aspecially when there are some weaker units to feed it. As I stated earlier, for big battle 5 kills is just an easy thing. But it already gives +5 damage (as Blood Bath, which is more expensive) and +500 morale.
It’s a situational spell, very impressive and FUN under the right circumstances, but expensive. Not overpowered, in my opinion, due to its infrequent use.
It’s OK when you fight is like 1 vs 1 stack or less. But I’m saying that it’s OP in big battles. And what do you mean by ‘infrequent use’? In most cases a big battle is somthing principal. Loose it only once and you likely loose the game.
What’s the problem already ? Are you talking here to nerf a spell only because you think it’s too powerful or because that would somehow cause an imbalance ?
First variant. Overall balance is good enough, thanx to devs. This particular spell is now ennoying for me because I see how powerful it is /in big battles/. And Rogue seems to beat Warlord on this field which is not right IMO.
At most, I could see the Morale increase dropping to +50. +1 melee can’t be changed.
What’s about increasing the casting cost to like 35 – 40 (it’s really more powerful in general than Blood Bath)? Or giving the bonus to units in some area (around killed enemy unit), not to all?
5 kills is not a problem when you have 3 stacks or even 2. It can really happend on 1st or second round. Warlord even with his advantages can’t win without loses (if only the armies are comparable). I understand your logic of specifics of Sadism but it is still too powerfull. It’s really very original spell and could be nice if they nerf it somehow.
I’m speaking about MP of course. And I still find it quite OP. One more reason: when you disjunct it, the collected bonus still remains! That’s strange that you don’t find it OP. Let us compare:
Warlord’s high level Blood Bath spell: +5 damage to all units, research – 800, casting cost – 30
Rogue’s Sadism spell: +1 damage +100 morale to all units on each kill, research – 300, casting cost – 25.
So just to have the same damage bonus you have to make only 5 kills, which is easy. And you will have +500 morale in addition. And you can increase it further and further! And this bonus will remain even if Sadism is disjuncted. And it’s about 3 times easier to research, being earlier toaccess.
Once again: WTF? Isn’t that too much? Is that fair? Who is master of melee combat here?
Sorry but I see no arguments from you, only some stereotypes like ‘Rorue has weaker units, it dislikes big battles’. But as you see Rogue units with that Sdism become the most powerful ones and even OP in one or two combat rounds.
but rogue units in direct combat are somehow weaker than other classes units
With 15+ damage and 1500+ morale they are I’d say much stronger than even Warlord’s units under all his combat boosts.
and there exist other OP strategies that enemy can use to negate each other.
For example spamming Hellfire having fire immune units. Then your sadism will be useless.
Just to keep logical – if there are other OPs it doesn’t mean that this one is OK 🙂
And I doubt if Hellfire (in case of comparable armies) would so easily counter Sadism. Moreover, hellfire + fire immune units requires much more specific strategy than going Rogue and casting Sadism on any army you want.
it’s nowhere near op and like you said yourself only useful in large scale combat, which shouldn’t happen too often if you’re playing rogue the way it should.
Yes, right you are poinying out ‘playing the way it should’. But having such powerful tool, Rogue can play the Warlord way and be quite effective. Which is not good, I think.
Just my 5 cents on ‘racial T4’: PLEASE NO 🙂
The only possible way – make it on the top of racial governance lines. But in that case it will make ‘monocultural’ ethnic cleaning strategy much more popular… Anyway the idea is doubtful and wouldn’t recoup the devs efforts.
That means only Techno and Theo classes can more or less effectively counter. To balance this, I’d make some ability like ‘pure life’ which prevents ‘invoke death’ or ‘ghoul curse’. Good for different summons and fay dwelling for example, some racial units also gain it (on medals). I do dislike the idea of making ghouls from everything. Both for aesthetic and balance reasons.
Several unit scaling adjustments (c)
Could anybody say which exactly units? I’d also suggest some easy and logical changes of regiment figure numbers:
1. Unicorns, Nightmares and so no – to 3 figures / regiment, like t-2 wolves and boars. Now they look somewhat lonely 🙂
2. Bards (?) Apprentices (?) and Shamans (!) – 3 figures / regiment, like all support units. A crowd of t-3 shamans looks strange in comparison to t-2 racial supports. Apprentices are close in stats to racial priests, so I think they should have a close presentation.
Regrowth was OP.
+1 I always produced it as much as possible to provide all my heroes with only rare exceptions for some unique legendary armor.
I think some diversity here wouldn’t be bad. Still you have tons of units for ghouling.
And that’s an issue?? Then he should complain that elemental (fire, earth, etc) masteries also don’t match Necro class since their t3 summons couldn’t be converted to undead. They are also ‘penaltizaed’ by this logic.
That’s a false equivalency, since you’re assuming that ghoul curse somehow affects the outcome of the battle at hand the same way a flame tank does. Ghoul curse only procs if the necromancer wins the battle in question, and undead have very exploitable weaknesses. Therefore, if your t4 is unlucky enough to get ghouled, and you lose the fight, you have nobody to blame but yourself for that outcome.
The analogy is not full, but that doesn’t make it totally false. Keep logical ) Ghoul curse is a technology of Necro leaders, like flaming is a technology of Techno leaders, though they work differently. If you state that Necro is weak now, that’s another issue. Anyway over 90% of racial and class units are at full Necro’s disposal.
Additionally, you have made no mention at all for what Keeper (or Grey Guard, or Shadowborn) necromancers should do about being able to ghoul their own summons. Why should that particular class/specialization combo be penalized just because you find the idea aesthetically displeasing? What necromancer-specific bonuses would you propose to compensate for this penalty to compensate? This issue has been raised at least twice before, and each time you have chosen to ignore it.
Explain please what penalty you see there, I’ve not got what you mean.
The Dullahan is an undead faerie.
OK OK. But I’ve just imagined AOW wirling fairies with greyish cracked texture and that’s not convincing me at all. Yes, it’s still a matter of taste, but…
Still, I’m left wondering why exactly you think Fey and Angels should be immune. And “why not?” isn’t an acceptable answer.
See the thread above. I’ve explained it already: Ghoul angel or fey contradicts to what I know by that words and to what I see looking on that units. Feys! Can ghouls fly that way? LOL
And let us look from another side – from the gameplay standpoint. I like restrictions and asymmetries because they deepen your strategy. They are species of the game. When you play against Necro leader, you should have an option to focuse on creatures which are immune to ghouling. Like playing against Dreadnought you ought to have some fire-resistant units to prevent flame tank rush, right?
And no, Arch Angels aren’t closer to them. Actually, they’re closer to race units. Their classifications abilities are Support, Pikeman and Infantry. No Dragon or elemental has those – they’re just Dragons or Elementals. Racial units however, HAVE those classifications.
That’s an interesting aspect as well as Bone Dragon (still smth more specific then a ghoul). I can not agree with you when it comes to the description, but here you are right. So I can only repeat to summarize the discussion from my side:
The problem is that some part of users (like me) sees the problem here ) Ghoul angel just hurts my eyes. That’s it. If this part is negligibly small or ‘ghoul angels’ are smth principal for devs, then OK, let it stay as it is.
Finally, it’s a matter of taste. You want to make ghouls from whatever you see. I prefer the situation, where some groups are immune (angels and feys, ghoul feys are even more rediculous for me) due to their inherent nature, not only pure incorporial ones.
That particular one fought undead, doesn’t mean anything else.
Yes, and that Dragon in its description also was ‘that particular one’ and the descriptions don’t mean anything…
As for the point of the thread, I still have no idea what the problem is.
The problem is that some part of users (like me) sees the problem here ) That’s it. If this part is negligibly small or ‘ghoul angels’ are smth principal for devs, then OK, let it stay as it is. But if the devs hopefully remove ‘zombie angels’ I think nobody will argue much, since I didn’t notice protests like ‘where are my ghoul elementals?’
Read the description of Archangel and notice:
1. It’s very close to one of Gold dregon
2. Archangel comes from Heavens (!) and comes back (!!) after defeating undeads (!!!)
How that corresponds with ‘Ghoul Archangel’ I just can’t understand.
is it really so difficult to accept some people have a different opinion on divine concepts than you have?
Adress this question to yourself too ) I say what I feel and give reasons, so do you. So stop moralizing please. On the subject:
In AOW-3 universe: Elementals – no ghouls, Dragons – no ghouls. That’s OK. Angels – ghouls. I see some lack of logic here, since Angels are closer to Elementals and Dragons than to say Ogres, right?
And I’ll go and read descriptions in TOW now )
‘Angel’ which can be ghoulified ruins the whole concept of what is angelic. It’s smth like warbreed with wings not more. If Dragons are specific creatures which can’t be dominated or ghoulified, then why Angels are not?
Too much of ‘breaking stereotipes’ is a bad taste IMO.
Their bodies are not “pure light or darkness”.
if they were, you couldnt hit them with arrows, could you?
So make them ‘incorporial’ like phantom warriors, ancestor spirits, etc. Notice that these spiritual creatures in AOW also aren’t 100% immune to physical damage.
Ghoul is a reanimated corpse, right? Just say ‘corpse of an angel’ – that sounds OK for you? Angel is something high and supernatural. They don’t shit, barf and they can’t be ghoul 🙂 Or call them something else.April 18, 2015 at 22:15 in reply to: Two races I wish to see- if Triumph makes another expanion(s) for AoW3 #184044
Briefly on other old races:
Alien (Syron) – OK, vacancy is open. Mind control, lightning, low physical strength, high resistance.
Insectoid (Shadow Demons) – also OK, just give up the demonic influence, which is class / summon stuff (like undead). Lorewise it could be some ancient race possessed by demons long time ago, but now refused to be their minions. Could be very specific: Cities like giant anthills, unique insect features like ‘collective intelligence’ wWhatever it could mean, it should result in some specific stategy.
Dark Elves – OK, it would take less time / labour for devs to design them (just recolor buildings and change some units). Underground and poison classics, T3 – Spider Queen no doubt.
Ancient Greek / Roman (Archons) – also possible, specific skills related to spirit.April 18, 2015 at 21:49 in reply to: Two races I wish to see- if Triumph makes another expanion(s) for AoW3 #184037
My YES to Lizardmen and Azracs. But with reptilian Draconians and desert-dwelling ‘egyptian’ Tigrans there is less space for these AOW-1 oldies. Some thoughts:
Lizardmen: How to balance their unique feature – swimming? They should be very terrain-dependant. Hate arctic and dislike(?) moderate climate. Like only swamps. BTW all swamp features I’d remove from Goblins (they specialize on caverns) and give to Lizardmen. Aesthetically they can have some Oriental style in architecture (pagodas) and unit appearance (samurai and so on). Core units – small and numerous, close to Goblins. Fast healing. Vulnerable to frost and fire (+ to balance swimming?), resistant to poison. T3 – turtle ballista (somebody suggested here).
Azracs: It isn’t an easy task -to introduce another fire / desert race into the game. Design and aesthetics could be Arabian / Middle-East. Good archers and cavalry, high attack / low defence. But what can make them unique?
I’ll never understand people who are OK with ‘ghoul angels’. For me it’s too much absurdly. I think the best decision – ‘elemental’ status for angels, since they are creatures of pure light (or darkness) and their ‘bodies’ are of a very different nature, than flesh and bones which produce a ghoul.
You could perhaps call it so when you’re focussing your manual combats on maximizing it
Exactly. I like hot-seats which can last about a month )) so it’s my personal concern. But in general OK you guys are more experienced, so I can rely on your opinion when it comes to balance. Will power provides immunity, that’s good, just haven’t notised that in description.
But still what do you think about additional restrictions like ‘dedicated to good’? I think that could be nice and logical feature. On the other hand, how then to balance ‘dedicated to evil’? May be if they are cused and killed ib combat, they should return as ghouls, but on the same side (enemy or neutral)? So it would be even of some risk for Necromancers and take additional efforts (control undead ability) to get them in their ranks…
I hope they fix halflings and nagas first. That’s quite noticeable. Both of them should be about 30% smaller.
Couldn’t open the link (( What do you think about improving elemental specializations with those existing spells?