Afterlife Rated 1.18 Statistics

[Ravana]

Unreported games should time out and count as both sides lost.

[WarolKojtyla]

One could force people having <5 unreported games, and add commands "lost" and "unranked" for handling all possible cases of yet-unreported games.

Then you cannot not report a game, even if both opponents agree not to play it (bad matchup, emergency, whatever).
If people are being forced to report a game, some would be inclined to report a win instead of loss, if they know their opponent is not reporting games.

Unreported games should time out and count as both sides lost.

This is pointless. People who previously had 100 unreported games, 150 lost games and 1000 rating, will now have 250 lost games and even lower rating.

[L29Ah]

One could force people having <5 unreported games, and add commands "lost" and "unranked" for handling all possible cases of yet-unreported games.

Then you cannot not report a game, even if both opponents agree not to play it (bad matchup, emergency, whatever).

That is what "unranked" command for.

[WarolKojtyla]

One could force people having <5 unreported games, and add commands "lost" and "unranked" for handling all possible cases of yet-unreported games.

Then you cannot not report a game, even if both opponents agree not to play it (bad matchup, emergency, whatever).

That is what "unranked" command for.

There is no such command.

[lhybrideur]

That's the point. He proposes to add an unranked command

[WarolKojtyla]

Huh, must have not read it carefully.
I guess it's a good idea then.

[WarolKojtyla]

Gays, and what do you think about increasing leader's movement speed?
Sometimes you want to make the leader your MVP unit... But you have to waste XP upgrading MP...

What if the leader got extra 3 MP, that would not copy to your opponent's side, so you wouldn't have to waste XP just to be able to quickly return to the keep, but still would have to spend XP if you want him to be fast on your opponent's side?

Would that even be possible to do?

[L29Ah]

Also kicking a player from the newly-setup game until the player reports the victory/defeat of the previous one would be nice. There are plenty of players who never report anything and screw up games for people who wanted to play with similarly-skilled opponent, as there's no way to get a match until they leave or find a less picky partner.

[WarolKojtyla]

I just lost by running out of tiles for copies to spawn on... I think you should add it to defeat conditions, since it is...

And maybe make the AI attack? It happened because I didn't recruit anything at first, which would be fine, except AI just surrounded my leader and refused to attack for some reason...

[dwarftough]

I just lost by running out of tiles for copies to spawn on... I think you should add it to defeat conditions, since it is...

And maybe make the AI attack? It happened because I didn't recruit anything at first, which would be fine, except AI just surrounded my leader and refused to attack for some reason...

Makes sense. Regarding attack, AI aggression in Afterlife is slightly below 1. I've thought about making it exactly 1. Maybe it can be exploitable, like in a lone Lich scenario, but at least AI will attack always

[Cremember]

stat update plz

[WarolKojtyla]

Regarding attack, AI aggression in Afterlife is slightly below 1. I've thought about making it exactly 1. Maybe it can be exploitable, like in a lone Lich scenario, but at least AI will attack always

I did lone lich yesterday and AI attacked me normally 95% of the time, often even in melee.

[WarolKojtyla]

Will u add dunefolk to afterlife?

[momom2]

It's clear to me that Drake vs ud is the least fun mu in afterlife.
For ud, adepts clearly outclass other units in almost all situations. Skeletons are useless, ghouls can be useful for tanking, chip damage and offensive poison, ghosts have rare uses, zombies are great. This means there are very few viable strategies: you can choose to make a zombie horde or not, to solo lich or have multiple sorcerers... and that's about it.
Drakes are better, even though burners are very dominant, because fighters, clashers and skirms can all be used against adepts, even if their roles overlap a lot.

The problem is that there isn't enough room for diversity, and given ud's damage is all in a few big bursts, and that they're all offence no retal, it ends up feeling very reliant on RNG.

How to fix it: make saurians resist +20% cold instead of being vulnerable to it. That way, undead will be forced to get some skeletons, and make drakes more vulnerable -60% to cold including burners. That way they can't go mass burners and the skeletons will be useful.

[WarolKojtyla]

How to fix it: make saurians resist +20% cold instead of being vulnerable to it. That way, undead will be forced to get some skeletons, and make drakes more vulnerable -60% to cold including burners. That way they can't go mass burners and the skeletons will be useful.

But if you do that drakes will get absolutely destroyed by adepts... ... ... You will be forced to go full saurians...
And saurians are just weak generally... One of their only strengths is decent defense, which is irrelevant against adepts, so they will get destroyed even with cold res... I think...