Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.33
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.15
Unless new issues arise, I will release tomorrow.
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Ageless Era 4.16 is out on the 1.12 add-on server
Code: Select all
Version 4.16:
* Units and Factions
* Ukian Witch has two variations, accessible through AMLA (as opposed to a level 4 branch)
* New units: Dwarvish Plainsmaster, Devlings Little Ninja, Ninja, Grand Hero and Grand Chief
* Graphics
* New images from Archaic Era
* Portraits for the Elementals
* New sprites for many Era of Myths units
* More animations for the Devlings
* Balance
* Yokai, Emperors Guard, units with backstab, Floating Swords, Ukian Civilian
* Bug Fixes
* Formation reducing resistance values
* Missing sounds
* Other
* Partial translations for some languages [experimental]
* General EoM update
Full notes
How you can help
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
MERCS - Enchanters - Shadown Blade has a GRAVE issue, more than a balance problem is reported as a bug. We're talking about a Lv3 unit with 9-4 drains on its atack and already frantic resistances, but something that was meant to be -40% arcane resistance is actually being 70% arcane resistance.
Requesting for an update for bug fixes soon, maybe in middle of October or in end of October with few balance changes. and this bug fixing.
Requesting for an update for bug fixes soon, maybe in middle of October or in end of October with few balance changes. and this bug fixing.
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
I see. Supposed to be pierce. (done)
Additionally, I noticed statue line http://units.wesnoth.org/1.12/Ageless_E ... tatue.html has 60% resists(in archaic too) in addition to steadfast, could you check them?
Additionally, I noticed statue line http://units.wesnoth.org/1.12/Ageless_E ... tatue.html has 60% resists(in archaic too) in addition to steadfast, could you check them?
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
For sure, I will check statues and all Despair units.
Also, in the first week of October (probably between 5th - 9th of october) I will post here a .txt file which will contain all my observations during summer. Mostly I can describe that this .txt is mostly about MERCS ranged unit's mele balance and The Blight rebalance. Some surprises are on that .txt file.
Also, in the first week of October (probably between 5th - 9th of october) I will post here a .txt file which will contain all my observations during summer. Mostly I can describe that this .txt is mostly about MERCS ranged unit's mele balance and The Blight rebalance. Some surprises are on that .txt file.
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Well those attachment is all I have for now.
Note that for statue balance I'm not taking in consideration steadfast, but even with the changes I've done, statues with steadfast would be weaker than they're right now (mostly because no longer 60% res & lower terrain defense and no longer fire resistant)
edit:
- forgot to coment that bacterium (lv1) must be -25% to both cold and fire.
- Quenoth Revager mele 11-4 to 10-4, in the notepad I said the oposite.
Note that for statue balance I'm not taking in consideration steadfast, but even with the changes I've done, statues with steadfast would be weaker than they're right now (mostly because no longer 60% res & lower terrain defense and no longer fire resistant)
edit:
- forgot to coment that bacterium (lv1) must be -25% to both cold and fire.
- Quenoth Revager mele 11-4 to 10-4, in the notepad I said the oposite.
- Attachments
-
- Balance note 1.txt
- A somehow large list with balance improvements.
- (18.77 KiB) Downloaded 265 times
-
- IPS_-_Ageless_-_The_Blight.gz
- Can't remember well this game, but I remember I've seen many balance irregularities in blight.
- (173.12 KiB) Downloaded 267 times
-
- Ageless_4.6_-_IPS_-_Kharos.gz
- IPS playing as Kharos, only 1 Kirios lived and defenders have won.
- (189.57 KiB) Downloaded 299 times
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
- Gyra_Solune
- Posts: 263
- Joined: July 29th, 2015, 5:23 am
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Played a bit with the EoC Chaos Empire! Random observations.
-I noted not too long ago you moved the Shaxthals over to the Dark Legion. I do quite agree that they had a few too many units (and the Shaxthals are questionable in their balance), but it had the effect of giving the EoC Chaos no water-capable unit! Not sure if this is on purpose or not. It does seem to me like Chaos is meant to be a bit less mobile than the obvious Loyalists of compare? But hm.
-I'm not sure the Bowman even needs to be there. I don't know why but I kind of feel like two units in a faction that do basically the same thing but one is just better if more expensive isn't the best thing? The Gunner basically does everything the Bowman does but simply better at all levels (aside from how the Bowman's alt promotion gives it poison, which is sort of overkill on a rather high-damage faction). And the Gunner looks a lot cooler while the Bowman is just the older Legion one!
-Speaking of which I'm not totally sure what the deal is with all the different versions of the Chaos/Dark Legion? EE has one that shares most of the same units with a few differences, and then there's the WoL one that strikes me as mostly what eventually became the Chaos Empire. (Not sure as well about the general 'existing default faction but modified' type of things in there, since a lot of them are just the main faction but with some more units...particularly a tendency to just give both the Loyalists and Rebels every merfolk unit, which kind of means absolute naval dominance).
-I think EoC also recently updated with a new, slightly nicer look to the Headhunter line, especially giving the Soulhunter a mask and in general artistic improvements, so that could be an update.
-Given the Chaos Cavalier and Cataphract (should probably be Chaos Cataphract by the by, since just Cataphract is usually a name assigned to the Eastern Invasion heavy cavalry) have a spear in their imagery, shouldn't their main attack be pierce instead of blade? Also since their name implies that they're heavy cavalry, it's weird that they get the +1MP while the Pillager stays slow even though it's lighter-armed and not as powerful.
-I noted not too long ago you moved the Shaxthals over to the Dark Legion. I do quite agree that they had a few too many units (and the Shaxthals are questionable in their balance), but it had the effect of giving the EoC Chaos no water-capable unit! Not sure if this is on purpose or not. It does seem to me like Chaos is meant to be a bit less mobile than the obvious Loyalists of compare? But hm.
-I'm not sure the Bowman even needs to be there. I don't know why but I kind of feel like two units in a faction that do basically the same thing but one is just better if more expensive isn't the best thing? The Gunner basically does everything the Bowman does but simply better at all levels (aside from how the Bowman's alt promotion gives it poison, which is sort of overkill on a rather high-damage faction). And the Gunner looks a lot cooler while the Bowman is just the older Legion one!
-Speaking of which I'm not totally sure what the deal is with all the different versions of the Chaos/Dark Legion? EE has one that shares most of the same units with a few differences, and then there's the WoL one that strikes me as mostly what eventually became the Chaos Empire. (Not sure as well about the general 'existing default faction but modified' type of things in there, since a lot of them are just the main faction but with some more units...particularly a tendency to just give both the Loyalists and Rebels every merfolk unit, which kind of means absolute naval dominance).
-I think EoC also recently updated with a new, slightly nicer look to the Headhunter line, especially giving the Soulhunter a mask and in general artistic improvements, so that could be an update.
-Given the Chaos Cavalier and Cataphract (should probably be Chaos Cataphract by the by, since just Cataphract is usually a name assigned to the Eastern Invasion heavy cavalry) have a spear in their imagery, shouldn't their main attack be pierce instead of blade? Also since their name implies that they're heavy cavalry, it's weird that they get the +1MP while the Pillager stays slow even though it's lighter-armed and not as powerful.
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
I will start implementing suggestions from both of you once I have more time, next week maybe.
- Gyra_Solune
- Posts: 263
- Joined: July 29th, 2015, 5:23 am
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Probably a bigger thing I ought to have mentioned first! And that is that in most cases leader choices shouldn't be any units that have more than 6 MP, or more than 1MP cost on land. Judging by the Units site the errant ones are the two Desert Elves horsemen, Steelhive Scout and Vector, Despair's Black Shadow, Khthon's Noble Beast, EE Chaos's Hell Crab, the Monsters' Water Serpent and Great Wolf, Windsong's Pathfinder, Chaos Empire's Marauder, Brungar's Dwarvish Huntsman, Nordhris' Dire Reaver and Frostdasher, Welkin's Talon Warrior, Whirlwind, Midnight Stalker, and Quickdraw, Arendians' Bowknight, Chief, and Mounted Warrior, Cavernei's Observer, Marauders' Raider, and Sidhe's Tracker.
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Started implementing.
Balance note 1 https://github.com/ProditorMagnus/Agele ... d919315bdd
Balance note 1 https://github.com/ProditorMagnus/Agele ... d919315bdd
Sylvans - Dusk Faerie
later, pending.
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Mmmm... Ravana, just realizing that all Feyborns are becoming pierce atack when I intended to only make Witches pierce type, in order to make them more atractive to consider.
Also I can remember that xp of feyborns from lv2 to lv3 is unnusually low compared to most of mages, which in oricia or in other survival maps gives an huge adventage. Thinking about the case of Feyborns, I have a proposal to offer before just shifting them to pierce:
General idea is to give all +Lv2 feyborns a bonus pierce ranged atack at the cost of requiring more xp to Lv3.
Feyborn lv1:
6-3 blade ranged magical atack
nothing else.
Kitsune lv2:
8-4 blade ranged magical atack
NEW ATACK V1: 11-2 pierce ranged magical atack
NEW ATACK V2: 13-2 pierce ranged (no magical) atack
xp: 60 -> 75 (25% higher, which is 52.5 xp at 70% modifier)
Feyborn Witch lv2:
8-3 PIERCE ranged magical atack (this one has pierce as main source of damage)
NEW ATACK: 7-3 blade ranged magical atack
Bonus from no having lv3: Charm aura (already inherent) and +10% to both cold/fire (not yet added)
Note: only witches are meant to have the 10% cold/fire resistances.
Tengu Lv2:
We're only going to focus at ranged atack. Mele will be left unchanged.
5-4 blade ranged (magical)
NEW ATACK: 6-3 pierce ranged magical
Nine Tailed fox Lv3:
Mele will be left unchanged.
7-7 blade ranged magical
NEW ATACK: 13-3 pierce ranged magical
Note: this bonus atack is just a little bonus, mostly for the lv2 and the need of dealing pierce damage for the faction apart from Swarms! It's not intended to be an efficent atack at lv3 afterall. With this bonus atack Feyborns can be more effective againist units like calvarymen that usually counter most of Yokai units.
Already made a calculus and gift to Kitsune 13.2 damage per strike (which is 26) compared to the other atack which would be 5.6 per strike (6-4). Meaning a little more damage to mounted units than main atack. You can try the V2 for Kitsune, but it's meant to counter all those fast and nasty mounted tanks which are only weak to pierce. But I don't want that pierce bonus atack compete in a fair fight next to the primary atack which is intended to be blade.
And as last note, I don't want Feyborns become as a kind of magical archer in balance terms, their are unique from being blade ranged magical and that's what makes Feyborn an unique unit.
Also I can remember that xp of feyborns from lv2 to lv3 is unnusually low compared to most of mages, which in oricia or in other survival maps gives an huge adventage. Thinking about the case of Feyborns, I have a proposal to offer before just shifting them to pierce:
General idea is to give all +Lv2 feyborns a bonus pierce ranged atack at the cost of requiring more xp to Lv3.
Feyborn lv1:
6-3 blade ranged magical atack
nothing else.
Kitsune lv2:
8-4 blade ranged magical atack
NEW ATACK V1: 11-2 pierce ranged magical atack
NEW ATACK V2: 13-2 pierce ranged (no magical) atack
xp: 60 -> 75 (25% higher, which is 52.5 xp at 70% modifier)
Feyborn Witch lv2:
8-3 PIERCE ranged magical atack (this one has pierce as main source of damage)
NEW ATACK: 7-3 blade ranged magical atack
Bonus from no having lv3: Charm aura (already inherent) and +10% to both cold/fire (not yet added)
Note: only witches are meant to have the 10% cold/fire resistances.
Tengu Lv2:
We're only going to focus at ranged atack. Mele will be left unchanged.
5-4 blade ranged (magical)
NEW ATACK: 6-3 pierce ranged magical
Nine Tailed fox Lv3:
Mele will be left unchanged.
7-7 blade ranged magical
NEW ATACK: 13-3 pierce ranged magical
Note: this bonus atack is just a little bonus, mostly for the lv2 and the need of dealing pierce damage for the faction apart from Swarms! It's not intended to be an efficent atack at lv3 afterall. With this bonus atack Feyborns can be more effective againist units like calvarymen that usually counter most of Yokai units.
Already made a calculus and gift to Kitsune 13.2 damage per strike (which is 26) compared to the other atack which would be 5.6 per strike (6-4). Meaning a little more damage to mounted units than main atack. You can try the V2 for Kitsune, but it's meant to counter all those fast and nasty mounted tanks which are only weak to pierce. But I don't want that pierce bonus atack compete in a fair fight next to the primary atack which is intended to be blade.
And as last note, I don't want Feyborns become as a kind of magical archer in balance terms, their are unique from being blade ranged magical and that's what makes Feyborn an unique unit.
Creator of: Deathmatch new in 1.12 server.
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Co-creator of: Era of Magic in 1.16 server
Developer of: Empires in 1.12 server, Ageless Era in 1.10 to 1.16 servers (but innactive recently)
Try My winning Orocia Guide
Both leaders die at once = both lose game (with replay)
Title says it all. Thought this was kind of funny.
- Attachments
-
- both_lose_1v1.gz
- (46.71 KiB) Downloaded 269 times
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Devs wouldnt be able to do anything about this.<05:28 Ben24626-> no one wins
<05:28 Ben24626-> ill ask devs
<05:28 Ben24626-> if its on purpose
<05:29 Ben24626-> ill post forum
<05:29 Ben24626-> the replay
I believe this is not intentional, you would have to replicate it with original, EoMa, and ask inferno8 for that.
But I believe it is not really problem, usually you do not have leaders so close to each other.
Should several people want this changed, it is easy to make it harm leaders only to 1 hp.
-
- Posts: 4
- Joined: July 24th, 2015, 3:32 pm
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
Hello, Ravana.
I've played Ageless for quite a while (especially with Quenoth) and I have to disagree with two of the latest balance suggestions.
First, I do not think that Lurkers are overpowered. From my experience, their most common usage is a covering of critical points at nighttime. They're fairly good at it, but inferior to Hunters as a general purpose melee. With their damage nerfed, Lurkers might lose their niche to Hunters (due to their 3-5 damage being no better than nighttime 4-4, combined with less Lurkers' versatility). Damage comparison to Orcish Assassins does not seem correct to me: marksmanship improves their offensive capability for quite a lot, and they have better terrain defenses.
I also strongly disagree with Stalker and Assassin damage nerf. Compared to their Default human counterparts (Rogue and Assassin), after proposed nerf they would have similar framework (with better movement costs and limited hiding ability on the elves' side vs. skirmishing and better due to non-neutrality damage output on humans' side). I think that such a trade would be unfair, and current base damage difference offsets absence of skirmish capability quite fine.
Second, I disagree with Moon Enchantresses damage nerf. Protection aura is generally inferior to leadership or healing, and their damage seem to be in line with other mage-leaders/healers. Price, though, might be higher: I suppose 37-38 gp would be better.
The Hunters were a problem and I agree with their nerf. I feel, though, that employing a scheme from UtBS with different Fighter (cheap, higher damage) and Hunter (expensive, ranged slow) lines might be better, but I'm not sure about it.
When in comes to other factions, I'm glad to see Avian Dart line nerfed, but it seems that Avians as a faction still have some issues.
First, there is an issue with Jackdaw and Pigeon lines' village and castle defenses. If they are set to 40% intentionally, an analog of 'feral' trait is needed: for now there is a major issue with mixed terrains (and a major silliness when it comes to mixed-terrain castles - like side castles on the Freelands, for example). I suppose, though, reducing terrain defenses to be unnecessary, and propose setting it to 60%: damage nerf seems to be more universal.
Second, Jackdaws: very good terrain defenses, MP 8 flight, decent melee damage, decent HP without serious vulnerabilities. I suppose they would be fine with 5-3 attack and maybe less HP: still decent scouting, but no more overshadowing line infantry. Their upgrades (both lines) also seem to require nerf, as well as all Pigeon upgrades.
Third, the Watchmen are clearly underperforming for his price. I suggest reducing price to 14 gp or increasing damage to 10-2 & 6-4.
Fourth, I do not suppose that HI types should effectively exploit mountains, and propose reducing Grounded mountain defense to 50%. I also think that their role should be more anti-impact and less line infantry; therefore, I suggest increasing their impact resistance to 20% (to better offset Avians' overall weakness to impact), but also increase their price to a psychological threshold of 20 gp.
I've also noticed a visual bug: Arendian Shaman's sprite changes to Arendian Warlock's one when attacking.
I've played Ageless for quite a while (especially with Quenoth) and I have to disagree with two of the latest balance suggestions.
First, I do not think that Lurkers are overpowered. From my experience, their most common usage is a covering of critical points at nighttime. They're fairly good at it, but inferior to Hunters as a general purpose melee. With their damage nerfed, Lurkers might lose their niche to Hunters (due to their 3-5 damage being no better than nighttime 4-4, combined with less Lurkers' versatility). Damage comparison to Orcish Assassins does not seem correct to me: marksmanship improves their offensive capability for quite a lot, and they have better terrain defenses.
I also strongly disagree with Stalker and Assassin damage nerf. Compared to their Default human counterparts (Rogue and Assassin), after proposed nerf they would have similar framework (with better movement costs and limited hiding ability on the elves' side vs. skirmishing and better due to non-neutrality damage output on humans' side). I think that such a trade would be unfair, and current base damage difference offsets absence of skirmish capability quite fine.
Second, I disagree with Moon Enchantresses damage nerf. Protection aura is generally inferior to leadership or healing, and their damage seem to be in line with other mage-leaders/healers. Price, though, might be higher: I suppose 37-38 gp would be better.
The Hunters were a problem and I agree with their nerf. I feel, though, that employing a scheme from UtBS with different Fighter (cheap, higher damage) and Hunter (expensive, ranged slow) lines might be better, but I'm not sure about it.
When in comes to other factions, I'm glad to see Avian Dart line nerfed, but it seems that Avians as a faction still have some issues.
First, there is an issue with Jackdaw and Pigeon lines' village and castle defenses. If they are set to 40% intentionally, an analog of 'feral' trait is needed: for now there is a major issue with mixed terrains (and a major silliness when it comes to mixed-terrain castles - like side castles on the Freelands, for example). I suppose, though, reducing terrain defenses to be unnecessary, and propose setting it to 60%: damage nerf seems to be more universal.
Second, Jackdaws: very good terrain defenses, MP 8 flight, decent melee damage, decent HP without serious vulnerabilities. I suppose they would be fine with 5-3 attack and maybe less HP: still decent scouting, but no more overshadowing line infantry. Their upgrades (both lines) also seem to require nerf, as well as all Pigeon upgrades.
Third, the Watchmen are clearly underperforming for his price. I suggest reducing price to 14 gp or increasing damage to 10-2 & 6-4.
Fourth, I do not suppose that HI types should effectively exploit mountains, and propose reducing Grounded mountain defense to 50%. I also think that their role should be more anti-impact and less line infantry; therefore, I suggest increasing their impact resistance to 20% (to better offset Avians' overall weakness to impact), but also increase their price to a psychological threshold of 20 gp.
I've also noticed a visual bug: Arendian Shaman's sprite changes to Arendian Warlock's one when attacking.
Re: Ageless Era - Current Version: 4.16
I plan to look this during this year, with that release being last for 1.12.