Extended Era revived - version 36
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Kalis: to me, the whole point of the Aragwaithi is to be hard-hitting, but fragile. They do get some almost-tanks at level 2, so of course the challenge is living that long. They are also fairly inexpensive - consider the Swordsman: 6-4 blade damage and 20% blade resistance for 13 gold. Pretty nice.
Regarding the Longswordsman vs Guard: the choice is really between the Guard's better resistances, and the Longswordsman's superior movement. I tend to prefer Longswordsmen. I wouldn't mind making the choice a bit more stark, perhaps by reducing the Guard's blade damage from 12-3 to 11-3.
As for the Archer, it is again more fragile than an Elvish Archer, but does 50% more melee damage, and costs less.
The Chaos Demon has more hp than the Winged, better defences in some terrains, and has a level 3 upgrade. I never seem to use the Winged Demon myself, except as a fine unit for the Berserker Amulet in Temples of the Nagas
Regarding the Longswordsman vs Guard: the choice is really between the Guard's better resistances, and the Longswordsman's superior movement. I tend to prefer Longswordsmen. I wouldn't mind making the choice a bit more stark, perhaps by reducing the Guard's blade damage from 12-3 to 11-3.
As for the Archer, it is again more fragile than an Elvish Archer, but does 50% more melee damage, and costs less.
The Chaos Demon has more hp than the Winged, better defences in some terrains, and has a level 3 upgrade. I never seem to use the Winged Demon myself, except as a fine unit for the Berserker Amulet in Temples of the Nagas
-
Legowarrior
- Posts: 40
- Joined: February 10th, 2007, 9:47 pm
My mistake, I see they only have 6 movement.
Still, while we are on the subject of the Kalifa. How come there cavalry unit is both better then the standard Lancer of the loyalists, and a lot cheaper then them?
I haven't played that much of the Kalifa, but I find that against the AI, I have an easier time beating them as the Kalifa, regardless of side I'm against, then I do any other side in the game.
I might just run some test games, AI vs. AI, and see how everyone stacks. This won't be a great test, since certain sides rely on specialized tactics to win the day, but it should give some rough ideas of what is going on.
On an aside, why do I always have trouble posting to this forum?
Still, while we are on the subject of the Kalifa. How come there cavalry unit is both better then the standard Lancer of the loyalists, and a lot cheaper then them?
I haven't played that much of the Kalifa, but I find that against the AI, I have an easier time beating them as the Kalifa, regardless of side I'm against, then I do any other side in the game.
I might just run some test games, AI vs. AI, and see how everyone stacks. This won't be a great test, since certain sides rely on specialized tactics to win the day, but it should give some rough ideas of what is going on.
On an aside, why do I always have trouble posting to this forum?
You might want to notice that the Ghulam does not have the Charge ability, and as you have noticed now, only 6 movement.
Apparenly, the Kalifa fit your style. I have some comments reagring them that I am saving for a future discussion - right now this thread has too many topics being discussed at once for me to want to add another.
As for why you have trouble posting, perhaps it has something to do with your browser, but how could anyone possibly know?
Apparenly, the Kalifa fit your style. I have some comments reagring them that I am saving for a future discussion - right now this thread has too many topics being discussed at once for me to want to add another.
As for why you have trouble posting, perhaps it has something to do with your browser, but how could anyone possibly know?
-
Legowarrior
- Posts: 40
- Joined: February 10th, 2007, 9:47 pm
Once again, a mistake I made. Still it's worth comparing cavalry units. I like to take for my examples, the Aragwaith Scout, the Kalifa Ghulam al Rami, the Loyalist Horseman, and Elvish Scout. Now, before I do a comparison, I do want to say that the balance of the unit isn't everything, since the game is based on balanced sides, not balanced units, and I'm no longer sure that I'm right about my earlier statements, so this comparison is as much for my benefit, as well as benefit any argument.
I'm going to compare the following traits.
Movement: Since they all are cavalry, movement should be of some importance, as well as movement in different terrains
Attack types: Number of different types of damage each can do and whether its ranged or close.
Best Attack: Damage, including charges
Worst Attack: Attack under the worst conditions.
Terrain Defense and resistance: I'm putting both of these together for this argument.
Hitpoints:
Cost:
Movement: The Elvish scout, with its High movement of 9, Great movement in Forests, and overall movement ability is the obvious winner. Scouts and Horsemen have the same movement, but the Scout has much less terrain penalties then the the horsemen, and so is in second place. Ghulam al Rami, with it's low 6 movement, inability to move in swamps and mountains, is the obvious loser.
Best Attack:
The Elvish Scout also win this competition, as it has two types of attack, blade and piercing, as well as both ranged and melee attack.
Ghulam al Rami comes in next with both of it's attack types, piercing and blunt.
Scouts and Horseman tie for last place, as both have only one piercing attack.
Best Attack: Overall, the Horseman can out damage all them, on a charge, with a chance of doing 36 points of damage. During the day, that's up to 45 Damage.
Scouts and Ghulam al Rami are very close, but I'm putting the Ghulam al Rami 2nd, because they can do between 18 (with blunt) to 20 damage, but during the day, that amount increases to 22..5 Damage blunt, or 25 Damage with the lance.
The scout deals 20 damage, no matter what.
The Elvish Scout is a poor third, only able to do 12 damage with either attack.
Worst Attack: Note, good cavalry shouldn't be put in a position of worst attacks often, that's not their role.
First is the Scout. Being Neutral, with one attack, and no specials, there aren't as many things that can go wrong for them. They do 20 damage no matter what.
Second is Ghulam al Rami, with the lance doing only 15 damage at night, and only 14 with the mace. Still, not bad on the defense.
The horseman place third, with the 14 damage with a lance at night.
And last is still the 12 damage of the Elvish Scout.
Resistance:
When it comes to Resistance, the Scout and the Horseman do equally well. The Ghulam al Rami is at 3rd because, though they are not as weak to piercing as the first two, they are weaker to blunt then the first two.
The Elvish scout comes in at 4th, since the weakness to piercing is equal to their strength against holy. Although Holy is not often used type of damage.
Defense Terrain
Elvish Scouts rule this category, especially with their high defense in forests, and the decent defense in hills.
The Ghulam al Rami is my 2nd pick, because they get great defense on sand or hills.
Scouts are third, they do better then horseman, who are a trailing 4th.
Hitpoints is probably is easy.
Horsemen and Ghulam al Rami are tied at 1st with the most. Then the Elvish scout, and then the Scout.
Cost
The Ghulam al Rami comes at a bargain, at 17.
Both scouts are a decent 18.
The horseman is an expansive 23.
End thoughts.
I agree the Ghulam al Rami doesn't excel in any one area, it does have some of the best staying power of all the cavalry, with it's good defense, multiple attacks and high hitpoints. It also gives a lot for the lowest cost.
I would suggest that the Ghuulam al Rami isn't awesome, but may be a little low for the cost.
It would seem that the best 'scout' is the Elvish scout, able to survive on it's own, and travel fast.
The horseman is the most damaging, but in this case, seems a little over priced. That is, until you do 45 damage to a unit left by itself, killing it in one blow.
I hope this helps the discussion a bit though.
I'm going to compare the following traits.
Movement: Since they all are cavalry, movement should be of some importance, as well as movement in different terrains
Attack types: Number of different types of damage each can do and whether its ranged or close.
Best Attack: Damage, including charges
Worst Attack: Attack under the worst conditions.
Terrain Defense and resistance: I'm putting both of these together for this argument.
Hitpoints:
Cost:
Movement: The Elvish scout, with its High movement of 9, Great movement in Forests, and overall movement ability is the obvious winner. Scouts and Horsemen have the same movement, but the Scout has much less terrain penalties then the the horsemen, and so is in second place. Ghulam al Rami, with it's low 6 movement, inability to move in swamps and mountains, is the obvious loser.
Best Attack:
The Elvish Scout also win this competition, as it has two types of attack, blade and piercing, as well as both ranged and melee attack.
Ghulam al Rami comes in next with both of it's attack types, piercing and blunt.
Scouts and Horseman tie for last place, as both have only one piercing attack.
Best Attack: Overall, the Horseman can out damage all them, on a charge, with a chance of doing 36 points of damage. During the day, that's up to 45 Damage.
Scouts and Ghulam al Rami are very close, but I'm putting the Ghulam al Rami 2nd, because they can do between 18 (with blunt) to 20 damage, but during the day, that amount increases to 22..5 Damage blunt, or 25 Damage with the lance.
The scout deals 20 damage, no matter what.
The Elvish Scout is a poor third, only able to do 12 damage with either attack.
Worst Attack: Note, good cavalry shouldn't be put in a position of worst attacks often, that's not their role.
First is the Scout. Being Neutral, with one attack, and no specials, there aren't as many things that can go wrong for them. They do 20 damage no matter what.
Second is Ghulam al Rami, with the lance doing only 15 damage at night, and only 14 with the mace. Still, not bad on the defense.
The horseman place third, with the 14 damage with a lance at night.
And last is still the 12 damage of the Elvish Scout.
Resistance:
When it comes to Resistance, the Scout and the Horseman do equally well. The Ghulam al Rami is at 3rd because, though they are not as weak to piercing as the first two, they are weaker to blunt then the first two.
The Elvish scout comes in at 4th, since the weakness to piercing is equal to their strength against holy. Although Holy is not often used type of damage.
Defense Terrain
Elvish Scouts rule this category, especially with their high defense in forests, and the decent defense in hills.
The Ghulam al Rami is my 2nd pick, because they get great defense on sand or hills.
Scouts are third, they do better then horseman, who are a trailing 4th.
Hitpoints is probably is easy.
Horsemen and Ghulam al Rami are tied at 1st with the most. Then the Elvish scout, and then the Scout.
Cost
The Ghulam al Rami comes at a bargain, at 17.
Both scouts are a decent 18.
The horseman is an expansive 23.
End thoughts.
I agree the Ghulam al Rami doesn't excel in any one area, it does have some of the best staying power of all the cavalry, with it's good defense, multiple attacks and high hitpoints. It also gives a lot for the lowest cost.
I would suggest that the Ghuulam al Rami isn't awesome, but may be a little low for the cost.
It would seem that the best 'scout' is the Elvish scout, able to survive on it's own, and travel fast.
The horseman is the most damaging, but in this case, seems a little over priced. That is, until you do 45 damage to a unit left by itself, killing it in one blow.
I hope this helps the discussion a bit though.
Here is my ideas about Sidhe elves :
- i think i'll add Mythological's bear line as it it except i would make them neutral.
Perhaps changes the names to :
level 1 : young bear
level 2 : bear
level 3 : grizzly bear
perhaps someone will come with beter names and/or some descriptions
- i don't like the icecaster line as it is, btw i think a snowcaster line might be a good idea
they would have more or less the same stats as Mythological's icecaster line, except the ranged attack.
I think giving them an attack with a lot of low damage strikes of cold damage will reflect well the character of the snow. Of course, since the attack come from magical casting, they won't get the dextrous trait (which would be really bad here).
I'm thinking of :
level 1 (hoarfrost caster) : 3-6 ranged, 15 gold ?
level 2 (snowdancer) : 4-7 ranged
level 3 (blizzard lord) : 5-8 ranged
(perhaps someone will come with better names ?)
some rough idea for the background : those are sidhe that try to learn magic by imitating the nobility. Or course they don't have the same skill as the nobility, but they end up with another kind of magic. Instead of casting lightning, they cast snow.
=> they should look something like raindancers with black or brown hair
- do we need some more unit for the Sidhe elves ?
Any idea ?
About the kalifa, i think if an unit is overpowered it it the falcon. They look a little too good for the price. I have two ideas to fix it :
- raise their price
or
- remove their traits
About the Naga hunter, yeah a levelup would be nice...
Also i kinda find the chaos lesser daemon a little overpriced, perhaps it should cost 1 or 2 gold less.
What do you think ?
- i think i'll add Mythological's bear line as it it except i would make them neutral.
Perhaps changes the names to :
level 1 : young bear
level 2 : bear
level 3 : grizzly bear
perhaps someone will come with beter names and/or some descriptions
- i don't like the icecaster line as it is, btw i think a snowcaster line might be a good idea
they would have more or less the same stats as Mythological's icecaster line, except the ranged attack.
I think giving them an attack with a lot of low damage strikes of cold damage will reflect well the character of the snow. Of course, since the attack come from magical casting, they won't get the dextrous trait (which would be really bad here).
I'm thinking of :
level 1 (hoarfrost caster) : 3-6 ranged, 15 gold ?
level 2 (snowdancer) : 4-7 ranged
level 3 (blizzard lord) : 5-8 ranged
(perhaps someone will come with better names ?)
some rough idea for the background : those are sidhe that try to learn magic by imitating the nobility. Or course they don't have the same skill as the nobility, but they end up with another kind of magic. Instead of casting lightning, they cast snow.
=> they should look something like raindancers with black or brown hair
- do we need some more unit for the Sidhe elves ?
Any idea ?
About the kalifa, i think if an unit is overpowered it it the falcon. They look a little too good for the price. I have two ideas to fix it :
- raise their price
or
- remove their traits
About the Naga hunter, yeah a levelup would be nice...
Also i kinda find the chaos lesser daemon a little overpriced, perhaps it should cost 1 or 2 gold less.
What do you think ?
"Ooh, man, my mage had a 30% chance to miss, but he still managed to hit! Awesome!" -- xtifr
-- xtifrTruper:
I'm not that good at explaining what I mean I guess.
I understand that Aragwaiths hit harder but have less HP.
My complaint is that a quick archer has a 25% chance of dying to a single unit attacking it like the orcish grunt due to 23HP. even Quick/strong only has 24 which is still in the killing range.
It's one thing for a unit to be fragile so 2 unit strikes can kill it, but it's another entirely to be able to be killed by a single enemy attack! It's why I didn't mention anything about the swordsman or pikemen. They are tough enough to require 2 enemy attacks to kill.
For the rest, my complaints were more that their level 2s don't have enough survivability. For purposes of comparison, look at the elvish hero vs the guard or longswordsman. 51hp base vs 38 (even with 20% blade resist), or 40 with resists, but 4 speed and a horrendous movetype.
About chaos daemon: I suppose it depends on the map. forest mountains and villages is where it has more defense. In fact, I freely admit I just might be wrong on that point
I'm not that good at explaining what I mean I guess.
I understand that Aragwaiths hit harder but have less HP.
My complaint is that a quick archer has a 25% chance of dying to a single unit attacking it like the orcish grunt due to 23HP. even Quick/strong only has 24 which is still in the killing range.
It's one thing for a unit to be fragile so 2 unit strikes can kill it, but it's another entirely to be able to be killed by a single enemy attack! It's why I didn't mention anything about the swordsman or pikemen. They are tough enough to require 2 enemy attacks to kill.
For the rest, my complaints were more that their level 2s don't have enough survivability. For purposes of comparison, look at the elvish hero vs the guard or longswordsman. 51hp base vs 38 (even with 20% blade resist), or 40 with resists, but 4 speed and a horrendous movetype.
About chaos daemon: I suppose it depends on the map. forest mountains and villages is where it has more defense. In fact, I freely admit I just might be wrong on that point
Last edited by Kalis on March 28th, 2007, 10:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Would the Hoarfrost Caster get a melee attack? If not, then it becomes the 3rd cold mage in the Era without one. If it does, then 15 gold might be too cheap.
I dislike the idea of giving the Sidhe another mage, since so much was made in the background story of the idea that the Raindancers were unique - even to the point of giving them a different hair color than other Sidhe. You're free to modify or even disgard the background story of course.
What was it about the Icebow line that you didn't like?
I dislike the idea of giving the Sidhe another mage, since so much was made in the background story of the idea that the Raindancers were unique - even to the point of giving them a different hair color than other Sidhe. You're free to modify or even disgard the background story of course.
What was it about the Icebow line that you didn't like?
Currently i have:
- Hoarfrost caster : 5-2 melee blade 3-6 ranged cold - 15 gold
- Snowdancer : 5-3 melee blade 4-7 ranged cold
- Blizzardlord : 7-3 melee blade 5-8 ranged cold
They don't have the magical special
or perhaps between 16 and 20 gold with +1 ranged strike (L1: 3-7, L2: 4-8, L3: 5-9) ?
About the background ... i think we can find a room for them. Another idea is they could be part of the nobility too.
About the icebow line i don't like much the Sidhe using bows (even if they don't shoot normal arrows).
- Hoarfrost caster : 5-2 melee blade 3-6 ranged cold - 15 gold
- Snowdancer : 5-3 melee blade 4-7 ranged cold
- Blizzardlord : 7-3 melee blade 5-8 ranged cold
They don't have the magical special
or perhaps between 16 and 20 gold with +1 ranged strike (L1: 3-7, L2: 4-8, L3: 5-9) ?
About the background ... i think we can find a room for them. Another idea is they could be part of the nobility too.
About the icebow line i don't like much the Sidhe using bows (even if they don't shoot normal arrows).
"Ooh, man, my mage had a 30% chance to miss, but he still managed to hit! Awesome!" -- xtifr
-- xtifrSidhe children have always played at war with balls of snow. As with humans, some of these elves never lose their inner child, and have turned their childhood pastime into a skill applicable in the battles they once imitated, dealing deadly damage with their barrage of snow and ice, which they carry in insulated bear-skin bags on their back.
If enough people bang their heads against a brick wall, The brick wall will fall down
Alright I thought some time to think about this some more, and this is the conclusion I came to. I offer these for discussion.
I would appreciate any response, even ones which completely disagree with what I say.
In theory, aragwaith are awesome. They would be a faction which does high damage and has low hit points. In addition, they would have lots of synergies like Flagbearer protection to increase resistences, and wizards who heal and hit hard!
In fact, their level 1s often fit these criteria and work very well.
Unfortunately, their level 2s are incredibly fragile when compared to any other faction's level 2s. Even worse, the lack of leadership and neutral units often means they end up doing damage similar to other factions. It all adds up to mean they're just really fragile.
Aragwaith Archers: hit points to 26.
By doing this, the only "suicidal" archer would be the quick/int one. The others would have decent hit points to survive.
quick/int: 24hp (25% chance to die by single grunt attack)
quick/strong: 25hp (1hp survival now)
The rest of the attributes are fine. The main attraction of this 1hp boost would be decreasing the chance of getting a suicidal archer from 33% to 16%
int/strong: 27hp
quick/resilient: 29hp
resilient/int: 33hp
resilient/strong: 34hp
Flagbearers: Hit points to 40.
Currently, they have 34hp. Even with steadfast, it's very tough to keep them alive. Resilient would boost their HP by 6 to 40.
For purposes of comparison, a Chaos armourer (which is the unit closest in stats I can think of) has 52hp. A resilient one would get 8 additional HP, for a total of 60. That's a 50% HP increase over the flagbearer!!!
Neither the 7-4 marksman melee / 14-2 vs 9-3 attack doesn't make up for this hit difference. And while protection is awesome, it doesn't mean much if your flagbearer can't survive to provide it to the other units!
With 40 hit points, a resilient flagbearer would have 47hp, which should be enough to survive the enemy attack.
A secondary comparison would be the dwarvish guardman, which begins at 42, goes to 48, and finally 56. Note that 1.3.1 increases their hit points to 42 / 54 / 68 because Guardsman level 2s and 3s needed a buff. I believe flagbearers are in the same situation at this time. They are a great concept, but I firmly believe they need a bit more survivability to work.
Guard: Fine.
The closest unit is the chaos armourer (again). 40 hit points means 47 with resilient, vs 60 of armourer. Acceptable I suppose since it's 12-3 attack vs 9-3 (note at night this means armourers hit at 11-3). A few more hit points could work, but then you do have wizards that heal - assuming you survive the attack.
Longswordsman: Desperately need more hit points. I would suggest around 46.
At 38hp, 20% blade resist, and 9-4 melee attack just doesn't compare in any shape or form to any other faction's level 2 melee unit.
Elvish heroes have 51hp, 8-4 melee attack, AND a ranged attack.
Orcish warriors are 10-3 with 58 hit points.
Chaos knight are 8-4 with 51 hit points.
I would appreciate any response, even ones which completely disagree with what I say.
In theory, aragwaith are awesome. They would be a faction which does high damage and has low hit points. In addition, they would have lots of synergies like Flagbearer protection to increase resistences, and wizards who heal and hit hard!
In fact, their level 1s often fit these criteria and work very well.
Unfortunately, their level 2s are incredibly fragile when compared to any other faction's level 2s. Even worse, the lack of leadership and neutral units often means they end up doing damage similar to other factions. It all adds up to mean they're just really fragile.
Aragwaith Archers: hit points to 26.
By doing this, the only "suicidal" archer would be the quick/int one. The others would have decent hit points to survive.
quick/int: 24hp (25% chance to die by single grunt attack)
quick/strong: 25hp (1hp survival now)
The rest of the attributes are fine. The main attraction of this 1hp boost would be decreasing the chance of getting a suicidal archer from 33% to 16%
int/strong: 27hp
quick/resilient: 29hp
resilient/int: 33hp
resilient/strong: 34hp
Flagbearers: Hit points to 40.
Currently, they have 34hp. Even with steadfast, it's very tough to keep them alive. Resilient would boost their HP by 6 to 40.
For purposes of comparison, a Chaos armourer (which is the unit closest in stats I can think of) has 52hp. A resilient one would get 8 additional HP, for a total of 60. That's a 50% HP increase over the flagbearer!!!
Neither the 7-4 marksman melee / 14-2 vs 9-3 attack doesn't make up for this hit difference. And while protection is awesome, it doesn't mean much if your flagbearer can't survive to provide it to the other units!
With 40 hit points, a resilient flagbearer would have 47hp, which should be enough to survive the enemy attack.
A secondary comparison would be the dwarvish guardman, which begins at 42, goes to 48, and finally 56. Note that 1.3.1 increases their hit points to 42 / 54 / 68 because Guardsman level 2s and 3s needed a buff. I believe flagbearers are in the same situation at this time. They are a great concept, but I firmly believe they need a bit more survivability to work.
Guard: Fine.
The closest unit is the chaos armourer (again). 40 hit points means 47 with resilient, vs 60 of armourer. Acceptable I suppose since it's 12-3 attack vs 9-3 (note at night this means armourers hit at 11-3). A few more hit points could work, but then you do have wizards that heal - assuming you survive the attack.
Longswordsman: Desperately need more hit points. I would suggest around 46.
At 38hp, 20% blade resist, and 9-4 melee attack just doesn't compare in any shape or form to any other faction's level 2 melee unit.
Elvish heroes have 51hp, 8-4 melee attack, AND a ranged attack.
Orcish warriors are 10-3 with 58 hit points.
Chaos knight are 8-4 with 51 hit points.
-
Legowarrior
- Posts: 40
- Joined: February 10th, 2007, 9:47 pm
You seem to make some good points with the aragwaith units, especially about the archers. It makes it hard to make a defense play with them. The level two units are really not that great at all. And the wizard seems to powerful for it necessary role. I would consider splitting the wizard into to units, but that isn't the question at the moment.
Yes, the level two units of the Aragwaith are weak. This is especially true since by the time they level up, they are usually in a weak position, more then any other sides level 2 unit, simple because of the level of aggression needed.
On the other hand, I find that Aragwaith units level up fairly quickly, when they don't die. So, maybe it is a counterbalance.
Talking about level two units, the both Kalifa cavalry can level up to the same unit, for the same amount of XP, but one cavalry unit is cheaper then the other. Maybe the cheaper cavalry unit should require slightly more XP to level up, to make up for the savings on Gold?
Yes, the level two units of the Aragwaith are weak. This is especially true since by the time they level up, they are usually in a weak position, more then any other sides level 2 unit, simple because of the level of aggression needed.
On the other hand, I find that Aragwaith units level up fairly quickly, when they don't die. So, maybe it is a counterbalance.
Talking about level two units, the both Kalifa cavalry can level up to the same unit, for the same amount of XP, but one cavalry unit is cheaper then the other. Maybe the cheaper cavalry unit should require slightly more XP to level up, to make up for the savings on Gold?
The Ghulam and Karadis both have 52 required XP... if anything I might give the karadis less xp to level, as it isn't used nearly as much as the ghulam, and has less damage, less hp, and worse resists. But that's just me. Dropping traits from the Falcon seems fine for me, now on to the Aragwaith:
I find it very fitting that their highest hitter also be their sole healer and weakest unit. I might give them a unit with regeneration though, (perhaps the eagle rider, they are supposed to be magic eagles, and currently they aren't that useful damagewise as far as I can tell) and they really need a unit that can tank for just enough time to allow healing, because AFAIK the main reason people don't like their low hp is that once they deal damage they never have time to recover... I can't think of a faction that doesn't have a unit with either high hp or good resists to soak up a little bit of damage, and while I think uniqueness is good, there are some times when standing out for no reason is just stupid. I think that a unit with an extra ring of ZOC (2 hexes away from it) for all units of the same level or lower (no 3rd level) and low movement might be a good solution...
I find it very fitting that their highest hitter also be their sole healer and weakest unit. I might give them a unit with regeneration though, (perhaps the eagle rider, they are supposed to be magic eagles, and currently they aren't that useful damagewise as far as I can tell) and they really need a unit that can tank for just enough time to allow healing, because AFAIK the main reason people don't like their low hp is that once they deal damage they never have time to recover... I can't think of a faction that doesn't have a unit with either high hp or good resists to soak up a little bit of damage, and while I think uniqueness is good, there are some times when standing out for no reason is just stupid. I think that a unit with an extra ring of ZOC (2 hexes away from it) for all units of the same level or lower (no 3rd level) and low movement might be a good solution...
If enough people bang their heads against a brick wall, The brick wall will fall down
-
Temuchin Khan
- Posts: 1800
- Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
- Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map
Well, I did name many of the Frost Elf units. I'll see what I can do.Noyga wrote: level 1 (hoarfrost caster) : 3-6 ranged, 15 gold ?
level 2 (snowdancer) : 4-7 ranged
level 3 (blizzard lord) : 5-8 ranged
(perhaps someone will come with better names ?)
Do they have to be Elves? Or could they be some other sort of creature, like a snow elemental or a storm elemental? If so, we could save the Sidhe backstory while at the same time adding this snowcaster unit.Noyga wrote:some rough idea for the background : those are sidhe that try to learn magic by imitating the nobility. Or course they don't have the same skill as the nobility, but they end up with another kind of magic. Instead of casting lightning, they cast snow.
=> they should look something like raindancers with black or brown hair
- do we need some more unit for the Sidhe elves ?
I'll hold off on looking for new unit names until I get a response to this question, as it would clearly make a difference as to which unit names were used.
I vote for removing their traits.Noyga wrote:About the kalifa, i think if an unit is overpowered it it the falcon. They look a little too good for the price. I have two ideas to fix it :
- raise their price
or
- remove their traits
Check out my new book!
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1956715029/re ... oks&sr=1-1
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1956715029/re ... oks&sr=1-1
Feel free to do so. I'm quite happy with my lvl 2 & 3 names which IMHO mesh well with the other Sidhe elves units names.Temuchin Khan wrote:Well, I did name many of the Frost Elf units. I'll see what I can do.Noyga wrote: level 1 (hoarfrost caster) : 3-6 ranged, 15 gold ?
level 2 (snowdancer) : 4-7 ranged
level 3 (blizzard lord) : 5-8 ranged
(perhaps someone will come with better names ?)
They doesn't have to be elves, and we already have 1 undead + maybe 1 bear...Do they have to be Elves? Or could they be some other sort of creature, like a snow elemental or a storm elemental? If so, we could save the Sidhe backstory while at the same time adding this snowcaster unit.Noyga wrote:some rough idea for the background : those are sidhe that try to learn magic by imitating the nobility. Or course they don't have the same skill as the nobility, but they end up with another kind of magic. Instead of casting lightning, they cast snow.
=> they should look something like raindancers with black or brown hair
- do we need some more unit for the Sidhe elves ?
I'll hold off on looking for new unit names until I get a response to this question, as it would clearly make a difference as to which unit names were used.
I do think the bear + snow caster extra unit would be enough, btw i did not playtest them much, i might be missing something...
About the snow casters, i think sidhe elves snow casters makes sense, works with the faction background and i doesn't look very difficult to me to end with some sprites (with modified raindancer line sprites).
"Ooh, man, my mage had a 30% chance to miss, but he still managed to hit! Awesome!" -- xtifr
-- xtifr