RIPLIB violators... a roll call

Glowing Fish · Post by **Glowing Fish** » February 15th, 2007, 9:34 pm

What units are currently in violation of RIPLIB?

Website · Post by **Sapient** » February 15th, 2007, 10:37 pm

Mage of Light for Rebels fighting against Loyalists?

Post by **zookeeper** » February 15th, 2007, 11:05 pm

Sapient wrote:Mage of Light for Rebels fighting against Loyalists?

Huh. How is MoL worse than White Mage?

Anyway, IMHO the most important thing is to make sure the normal recruitable units (lvl1 units) have proper RIPLIB advancements. Even if MoL was worse in some way than a White Mage, you still could have chosen Red Mage initially, instead. Having RIPLIB advancements for all units is nice to have, but not really necessary as you very rarely get to recruit lvl2 units (and also level those up).

Stilgar · Post by **Stilgar** » February 15th, 2007, 11:26 pm

I haven't taken it upon myself to memorize every stat and stat change of the units, but off the top of my head, I think there's:

Paladin/Grand Knight (Lose blade damage vs. Lose movement)
Wraith/Shadow (Lose cold melee)
Shyde/Sylph (Gain impact weakness)

Post by **turin** » February 15th, 2007, 11:29 pm

zookeeper wrote:
Sapient wrote:Mage of Light for Rebels fighting against Loyalists?
Huh. How is MoL worse than White Mage?

Anyway, IMHO the most important thing is to make sure the normal recruitable units (lvl1 units) have proper RIPLIB advancements. Even if MoL was worse in some way than a White Mage, you still could have chosen Red Mage initially, instead. Having RIPLIB advancements for all units is nice to have, but not really necessary as you very rarely get to recruit lvl2 units (and also level those up).

Illuminates is a negative, not a positive, when you are facing lawful units, especially when your own units are not lawful. Actually, it could be argued that the MoL is a RIPL-IB violator in any situation where it is against lawful enemies, even when with the Loyalist faction.

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » February 16th, 2007, 10:44 am

i am not really sure if that is a violation...

but as an undead player i say: remove illumination...

Post by **Noyga** » February 16th, 2007, 1:32 pm

It is, since it raises the ennemy damage.

Btw all those RIPLIB violation are soo minor that to me, they aren't a really a problem.

Post by **Noyga** » February 16th, 2007, 1:44 pm

Master Stilgar wrote:I haven't taken it upon myself to memorize every stat and stat change of the units, but off the top of my head, I think there's:

Paladin/Grand Knight (Lose blade damage vs. Lose movement)
Wraith/Shadow (Lose cold melee)
Shyde/Sylph (Gain impact weakness)

The loss of a damage type is not always a problem, if the damage of the levelup is still superior in the worst case.
AFAIK, it is the case with the Skeleton archer -> Bone shooter advancement. (impact melee -> blade melee)
I'm not 100% sure, but it might be the case for the Ghost too.

For the Paladin, i can confirm there is a loss of sword damage versus white mages (white mage, mage of light, mermaid diviner, mermaid priestess).

Gus · Post by **Gus** » February 16th, 2007, 4:02 pm

Noyga wrote: The loss of a damage type is not always a problem, if the damage of the levelup is still superior in the worst case.

Assuming RIPLIB is strictly applied, this is too dangerous of a reasoning: it means that if a unit should reach mainline, which had 100% resist against the "new damage", then RIPLIB would not apply any longer.
To clarify my confusing wording: if there was a unit with 100% resistance against Blade, then the Skeleton Archer would deal more damage to it than the Bone Shooter would => RIPLIB violation.

That being said, i think RIPLIB is very good as a broad guideline, but shouldn't be applied strictly. As for every other situation, gameplay is the king.

Post by **Darth Fool** » February 16th, 2007, 4:47 pm

It should be noted that RIPLIB does not apply to an individual advancement option, but rather to all options for a single unit. As long as a unit has at least one advancement option that is stictly as good as it in all senses except its level, then there is not a riplib problem.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » February 16th, 2007, 5:39 pm

True, but the real question is: Should it apply to every level, or is it enough that there is one RIPLIB-compliant option at the beginning of a tree?

That is to say, would it be okay for the Royal Guard to be less efficient than the Swordsman since Javelineer was a RIPLIB-compliant advancement of the Spearman? I would think no.

Post by **Noyga** » February 16th, 2007, 6:26 pm

Gus wrote:
Noyga wrote: The loss of a damage type is not always a problem, if the damage of the levelup is still superior in the worst case.
Assuming RIPLIB is strictly applied, this is too dangerous of a reasoning: it means that if a unit should reach mainline, which had 100% resist against the "new damage", then RIPLIB would not apply any longer.
To clarify my confusing wording: if there was a unit with 100% resistance against Blade, then the Skeleton Archer would deal more damage to it than the Bone Shooter would => RIPLIB violation.

Yes but :
- This is unlikely to happen in mainline.
- You don't usually care much about the melee attack on this unit : this will only be a minor issue, that happen in very rare case.

Post by **Darth Fool** » February 16th, 2007, 6:47 pm

Gus wrote:True, but the real question is: Should it apply to every level, or is it enough that there is one RIPLIB-compliant option at the beginning of a tree?

That is to say, would it be okay for the Royal Guard to be less efficient than the Swordsman since Javelineer was a RIPLIB-compliant advancement of the Spearman? I would think no.

I would say that it applies at every level. Obviously campaign developers might have some strange story line where RIBLIB violation for a unit makes sense, but for generic units leveling up should be strictly better. The only forced penalty for leveling should be the increased upkeep.

Post by **F8 Binds...** » February 16th, 2007, 6:54 pm

merman netcaster -> merman entangler

9-2 vs 8-3

This makes it so the netcaster has a better chance to kill a unit with 9 hp than the L3 advancement

Imp · Post by **Imp** » February 17th, 2007, 1:48 am

Noyga wrote:
Gus wrote: Assuming RIPLIB is strictly applied, this is too dangerous of a reasoning: it means that if a unit should reach mainline, which had 100% resist against the "new damage", then RIPLIB would not apply any longer.
To clarify my confusing wording: if there was a unit with 100% resistance against Blade, then the Skeleton Archer would deal more damage to it than the Bone Shooter would => RIPLIB violation.
Yes but :
- This is unlikely to happen in mainline.
- You don't usually care much about the melee attack on this unit : this will only be a minor issue, that happen in very rare case.

No, you don't care when it's your turn, but it makes all the difference in retaliation during the opponent's turn.