time to another post in style "i was beaten so lets nerf everything that let it happen" : what about increasing level of tornado?

Mmm, I very rarely see tornado being casted in online games, not for months me thinks...
If prepared properly, one can cast it for 50 mana and still have all his mana left for the fight.
Meanwhile, it can throw out the main forces. (I think most often 3 or 4 units disappear from about a 3 squares stack right?)
This all indeed enhances clickety click skills, which was one of the reasons why I preferred Dwiggs to the normal games.
Maybe stranger can tell us more about it? Does it att vs def or res? How big is the area of it? Can it be made smaller?
Can the radius in which the units are thrown away be smaller?

I think 50 cp is currently much too cheap, it should be about... 150! *feels like a market man...*
Although that might make it rather expensive compared to others, such as web.
(most global spells are rather cheap in my opinion, such as the woods etc.)

Mmm, I very rarely see tornado being casted in online games, not for months me thinks...

Lev has cast it in virtually every game he has joined since returning as Manticoreee - you should play online more often, Joepo!

Hi Stranger.

Some praise:
Thanks for stating the changes in the D version in top post!
I think the strengthening of lizards and goblins mentioned in the top post is a good idea, and I like the new heroes etc. etc. Is the problem Merkraad mentioned with the phoenix hero solved? In the game I played with her using 5.0c resources, she did not resurge.
And I really like the unit progression schemes, but I do think conqueror has to be more expensive now, and that
the races without these "development prospects" should be somehow compensated.

And some points of criticism:
Now that you write you hope you're approching a final release, I'd like to comment that you have been
virtually deaf to requests for changing the skill system, and the method is very far from being conducive
of any sort of "community mod", but since dwiggs is the most played mod atm I have to play it or resort to single
player, which isn't a lot of fun - otherwise I wouldn't bother to discuss here on the forum...
Even if you intend to keep cast spec I at high cost and as requirement for several other skills (and none of the
reasoning behind this convinces me), neither you nor anyone else on the forum (at least as far as I have seen)
have provided any reasonable explanation for explorer and expander costing 2 skill picks. I have NEVER, so far
(2-3 months), seen ANYONE picking explorer OR expander in dwiggs, and I'm pretty certain I've played the game more
often than you in this period.
Maybe other people than I have noticed that picking conqueror alone from start is now one of the more
popular choices; that is logical given that this skill is more valuable in dwiggs than in MP/Upatch,
and it has a low cost (oh, and with the new progression of units in the D release, it is now THE most valuable
skill) - but it also defies what seems to have been your the stated intention with this new skill system, namely more diversity.
Now comes the question: If the new skill system does not fulfil its stated objective, do you change it - or simply keep it, pretending it works? The way things are set up now, the SIMPLEST (not necessarily best) thing do to do balance this just a little is that conqueror should cost 2 skill picks.
Secondly, I don't see you reducing upkeep of enchantments despite earlier promises, same comment to this as above.

Now that Gandalf mentioned it, the Archon Saint also has the wrong resurgence type; it does not work properly.

Didn't even notice the D version before Gandalf's post.

Too bad numerical values of skills can't be changed, they're so rigid and difficult to balance. Expander probably isn't worth 2 picks since it tends to become useless as the game progresses. Not sure about Scholar. I guess Scholar + Cast. Spec. + let's say Pacifist might be op. Not sure what to say about explorer either, too bad it can't cost 1.5 picks I guess... :/ Conqueror does look more appealing now. As an alternative solution to raising its pick price maybe some other skills (like expander, explorer, scholar?)could be made cheaper to create some more competition/options.

No one has yet commented on the new Farcaster. It seams more logical to me that it should remain a cheap way of expanding your domain and if more income is needed for cities in general, Farcaster's bonus could be distributed among tower upgrades (which in turn could be made just slightly more expensive). And nothing in the word "Farcaster" tells me that it has anything to do with income as opposed to towers which may hold libraries, alchemy labs (for making gold ), and other magical doodads.

Everything else looks pretty great, I'm especially looking forward to some Lizard Spearman ownage.

[This message has been edited by Jean_Luc (edited 11-04-2007 @ 11:07 AM).]

I don't know whether people have tried the D version but Expander does cost only 1 pick in that. Making Conqueror cost 2 picks is quite ridiculous, IMO, just because of the unit progression lines - given that most of the unit progressions is for weak units like shrublings, imps, black spider, etc. These units can be leveled up mostly in TC. FC kills them pretty much in the first round. The berserker alone has a high probability of reaching gold status in that entire list. People who pick conqueror usually tend to play a heroes-game - purely for that RPG aspect, not for easier leveling up of units!

Quoted from Gandalf:

...you have been virtually deaf to requests for changing the skill system, and the method is very far from being conducive of any sort of "community mod"...

Can't please everybody

If the new skill system does not fulfil its stated objective, do you change it - or simply keep it, pretending it works?

And what if he really feels that the new system works?

Btw, I have never seen anyone research Conqueror when not starting with it - which does imply that it is not as valuable as other skills.

Quoted from Jean Luc:

No one has yet commented on the new Farcaster. It seams more logical to me that it should remain a cheap way of expanding your domain and if more income is needed for cities in general, Farcaster's bonus could be distributed among tower upgrades

Makes sense

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-04-2007 @ 02:17 PM).]

OK, if expander only costs 1 pick now, that is a good change, but the top post saying it costs 2 should probably be corrected; I was under the (false?) impression that Stranger was listing the changes in the D version here. TL, you may have noticed that we played the D version yesterday?

Quoted from Timelord:

People who pick conqueror usually tend to play a heroes-game - purely for that RPG aspect, not for easier leveling up of units!

That is what you usually do, TL, and the skill system is now tailored so that this is one of the most effective ways of playing; therefore it would be surprising if you didn't like it. That people only choose conqueror for leveling up heroes, and not for units is a bit of a statement though, for instance I'm doing dwarves with conqueror now to see how many veterans I can mature; it would also be silly not to take advantage of conqueror with normal units now that you've picked it, wouldn't it?

[This message has been edited by Gandalf_DK (edited 11-04-2007 @ 03:07 PM).]

Some interesting changes in the Lizard "tech tree". Pteradon Rider in barracks?

I did say Berserker was the only unit that has a good possibility of using the morphing system so if a skill has to be changed for a particular unit, I figure changing the unit is better.

That is what you usually do, TL, and the skill system is now tailored so that this is one of the most effective ways of playing

I would hardly call it effective. In yesterday's game, for example, I was Orcs with conqueror. We had a battle at about, turn 35? I had 4 heroes - lvl5, 3, 2 and 2 and one veteran cavalry ( The lvl5 and 3 were with me from the start). Conqueror doesn't work always...perhaps you should try it and see...instead of always playing Pacifist+Constructor. IIRC, even with Pacifist yesterday, you had more veteran units and heroes at about the same levels as mine.
Besides, for units, there's always the war shrine or the arena.

Casting Spec 1/Summoner/Pacifist is a good start too as is Pacifist/Constructor or Pacifist/Explorer. Or Casting Spec 1/Summoner/Anarchist with pure life/death spheres with good/evil races. Obviously you need a good race selection for the combos to work. Eg: Explorer with Humans - 48 mp 1-turn cavalry from turn 1. Can you imagine the rushing possibilities?

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-04-2007 @ 03:48 PM).]

tremors cost 30 mana? pure insanity and great hail 40 mana? very cool, its supposed to be like hellfire i guess, but seems it has minor disadvantage....... ops it can hit only 3 units, but with double strength, but only 3 vs hellfire's 24, but can freeze a couple of them and blazing comet became only 1 mana point cheaper, i m sure its not enough. cosmic spray seems not very good now too. what about 2 shoots with 3 damage? btw maybe anyone will comment if he likes merchant excluding survivalist or not?

and seems writing 10 times same thing isnt so bad idea : lets add lightning strike and immunity to wyrm, so it can enter city with hall of enchantment without loss of half power

i noticed there so many cool undead units, but producing list still same while we have temple and monastery for some of them. cant be warhall for more than 2 units? also waiting stranger and gandalf using spectres a lot

Quoted from Air:

btw maybe anyone will comment if he likes merchant excluding survivalist or not?

Maybe you could list what you think is good or bad about merchant excluding survivalist (without any sarcasm, preferably)

Quoted from Air:

also waiting stranger and gandalf using spectres a lot

Are you implying that spectres are too weak now - and does it really matter anyway, if there are so many exciting new undead units?

Great Hail for 40 mana is a bug. I'll change it asap

Has anyone else noticed the racial structure not working for the Orcs? Joep mentioned it in a game yesterday.

In version C, I reduces nearly every enchantment upkeep by 2 points, a cost equaling a 20% or more reduction for every spell except Static Shield. In one particular game, I had my main stack and half another stack wearing concealment, stone skin, free movement, enchanted weapon, and liquid form, and was still getting 40 mana a turn with full research. So, did anyone else notice an appreciable difference? The fact that some people don't seem to think I reduced the cost at all tells me that maybe the effect was negligible. Maybe we can decide on a few particular enchantments that people don't find as strong as others, and we can reduce those.

In regards to unit progression lines, I think if a few units, such as the Berserker, are easily exploited, then we should change the unit, as Timelord suggests.

Explorer is still a very valuable skill imo....I'll trying playing it more this week, but I'm pretty confident that it's more valuable than conqueror, though one must use a very aggressive strategy to take advantage of it.

Tremors: a hard spell to balance. You can send in a hero against a large stack of units, cast tremors and severely wound them, then back out again. Maybe giving it a low attack, so that races inclined to use it, like Dwarves, can cast it without so much fear of getting hit....

Lizard Tech Tree: yes, I made two changes here. I'll update the main thread.

I did change the flying Phoenix hero to the other form of resurgence for the d version, so this should work right! I'll change the Archon Saint as well, Merk, cheers

Oh, and for those who like the unit progression lines, please thank Merk...I couldn't have implemented it without his useful guide to hex editing

tremors hit units very strange it can miss vs half of archers, but hit half of your attacking 15 def units, so i think making it more expensive not good idea. sending little high army with tremors vs huge army of (ranged) defenders can work, but its dangerous anyway. also if u are using it for actual siege - most part of tremors power is negated by regenerate walls.

merchant excluding survivalist has 1 disadvantage : merchant just better, and all ppl research it, and survivalist never used. merchant is better because it works in the time u still haven't big high level army, even if u got 3-4 stacks early, 5-6 gold less per stack (heroes,summons and low lev units) isnt much impressive. and there is no advantages

Pteradon Riders in barracks seams like a pretty good idea actually. It's not really useful early game because they're to expensive and slow to build but later on you don't have to build Warhalls if you want to make Pteradons, you can just spam them from the barracks which most cities will already have. In any case it's an interesting way to strengthen the Lizards.

Like the Spearman too, that buckler on it's back is pretty cute

I'm quite satisfied with enchantments as they are now. One has to put some thought into their use instead spam them on every unit. Let's say you have a stack with a Lizard Shaman hero lvl5, a Wyvern, a Basilisk, a Hydra, a Stegadon Rider and 2 Pteradon Riders. On which unit do you place Static Shield (let's assume you can afford only one)? I'd say the Hydra because double strike gives it twice the chance of stunning (without being retaliated against) and spread attack allows it ti potentially stun multiple units (including flying ones) in a single stroke. One just needs to optimize.

ps: Thank you Merkraad for the unit progression lines.

Shikari needs marksmanship III to justify the high price?

PS: Thank you Merkraad for the unit progression lines

[This message has been edited by RogerRabid (edited 11-05-2007 @ 09:45 PM).]

Cost of enchantments:
Stranger I apologize for not noticing your reduced the upkeep cost of unit enchantments; but on the other hand you promised to LIST changes on the top post, and I can't see you've listed that change - so I think you are mostly to blame for it.

SHIKARI:
I checked the cost of Shikari and compared stats and price with that of elf and dark elf archer. As you know, they cost 30 and 60 gold respectively. The shikari costs 60 gold (not 80 as I thougth), and /requires war hall/ to build, so it's a level 2 where the others are level 1. Thus you should expect it to be a bit stronger than the dark elf archer, which costs the same, but it is in fact inferior, at least in terms of ranged attacks.

Stats listing:

Att, Def, Res, Dam, HP, MP, abilities:
Shikari: 7, 5, 8, 5, 14, 30, Fire W, Snow & Concealment, Vision I, Forestry, C. Imm, MM1, Poison darts (=3x att 8 dam 4 with MM1 and MEDIUM RANGE). Silver: Wall climbing, Gold: Trap, MM2. Price: 60 gold

DE Archer: 2, 3, 8, 2, 9, 30, vision I, N. Vis. Cave crawl, Archery (=3x att 8 dam 4 and LONG RANGE, but with enc. weapon that is att 10 dam 5), Enc. Weapon. Silver: MM1, Gold: MM2.

Elf Archer: 3, 3, 7, 3, 9, 30, Forestry, MM1, Concealment, Vision I, Life domain, Archery (3x att 9 dam 5 with MM1 and LONG RANGE) Silver: MM2, Gold:MM3, Seeker). Price: 30 gold.

Since DE archer and Shikari cost the same, they are easiest to compare; of course the shikari has better melee stats (and can also trap units in the unlikely event it should reach gold (this would require some1 building them in the first place ), but it does less damage with 3 shots than the DE archer (12 vs. 15) and not only is the attack of its darts lower (8 vs 10), it also has a SHORTER RANGE! (I do realize the darts poison units and may lower their defense, but I don't think that compensates adequately for the lower attack value and range)

I suggest the Shikari gets MM3 from start as a minimum; that would give it 3 x att 10 dam 6 from start, which is actually a little better than the DE archer - but it would still have the shorter range. I suggest MM4 at silver and MM5 or seeker or enchanted weapon at gold - or enc weapon at silver and MM4 at gold. It could be added to the description that they use powerful composite bows made from mammoth tusks, which gives them a powerful shot on short distances, or something like that. I have to add that since the graphics is a BOW, they really should be shooting arrows, not darts - that would also solve the problem with the shorter range. Assume they get archery instead of poison darts and start with MM3 too (and the suggested gold and silver upgrades), then they should cost 70 or maybe even 80 gold - and make sense as a war hall unit. I would prefer this, because I don't think there's a lot of sense in having what is really a boosted level 1 archer in the war hall, unless it IS superior; the frostlings have the excellent snowscapers (whose bolts both target res only and freezes units) as level 1 ranged defense. There are few cold immune units in dwiggs, so a frostling player has absolutely no reason to build the shikari unless it really works as a ranged defender. (It is possible to imagine some1 attacking a town with a horde of silver shikaris with wall climbing, but I admit I don't think it has ever happened (or will happen) when you can build swordsmen with block and cold strike and much superior fighting stats).

Oh, before Air comments: Nope, I haven't lost any battles defending with shikaris; I rarely play frostlings, but if I do, I don't build shikaris - the reason should be obvious

[This message has been edited by Gandalf_DK (edited 11-06-2007 @ 11:46 AM).]

great idea! we also have rogue with poison darts and it even costs 70, lets make it with mm4 from start! and assassin is lev3, cost 120 and have poison darts - mm8 minimum i think! though return wallclimbing at start would be good idea really

of course the shikari has better melee stats (and can also trap units in the unlikely event it should reach gold (this would require some1 building them in the first place ), but it does less damage with 3 shots than the DE archer (12 vs. 15) and not only is the attack of its darts lower (8 vs 10), it also has a SHORTER RANGE! (I do realize the darts poison units and may lower their defense, but I don't think that compensates adequately for the lower attack value and range)

I don't think one can ignore their melee capabilities, their wall-climbing ability at silver and compare only their ranged ability. Also, a poisoned unit can be hit more easily or frozen by the snowscapers or swordsmen and that wall-climbing allows you to bypass door-blocking units in a siege.

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-07-2007 @ 01:02 PM).]

Hey, Air and TL.

I am tired of discussions about balancing or changing units etc. always seems to deteriorate into personal attacks, sarcasm and self-flattery.

I dislike the way you respond to people and will try to avoid your company; I will also refrain from discussing dwiggs in this thread and take any suggestions I have up with Stranger instead. I hope your need for ridiculing and critizing people can be covered by finding other victims.

[This message has been edited by Gandalf_DK (edited 11-06-2007 @ 02:11 PM).]

Edited Out

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-07-2007 @ 01:02 PM).]

My comment about the Shikari needing MM3 was based on being told it cost 80, which the person concerned (not Gandalf) said that they had checked in the editor. The other people in the game also agreed about the changes, but obviously they were also basing it on a cost of 80 for the Shikari, not 60

Looking back with hindsight you could possibly argue that your first sentence was directed at Air, Timelord, but that certainly wasn't clear. To me the whole post appeared to be an extremely sarcastic and caustic response to Gandalf's detailed suggestions, and certainly not an ideal reaction from a moderator. Although Air has a very detailed knowledge of the mod, his comments often don't help

It would certainly be a pity if we stopped receiving Gandalf's proposals for improvements to the mod because of the way he is currently being treated here, but I can't say I blame him, the overall reaction to his proposals to date hasn't exactly been enthusiastic, has it?

Edited Out.

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-07-2007 @ 01:03 PM).]

Quoted from TL:

Or if someone does chooses to argue, he shouldn't use sarcasm?

It depends who that someone is, and the fact that a very sarcastic post by Air was followed by one from you could be taken to imply that you (and therefore the whole moderation team) are backing his aggressive, sarcastic and confrontational attitude

Obviously you are 100% entitled to voice your own opinion and disagree with suggestions that people make, and as you are a part of the team that has been making the mod some will even give your opinions more weight

Good point Roger.

Its just that I get carried away a bit in these Dwiggs discussions about balance.

[This message has been edited by Timelord (edited 11-07-2007 @ 01:04 PM).]

its very cool to write here absurd suggestions and then feel to be offended by not serious and sarcastic discussions of it, but what about thinking before posting? polite and serious discussion appeared once all ppl post logical and constructive suggestions and if someone is trying to talk something as loud as possible and not less than 10 times to get some influence on modmaker decisions - what discussion can be possible?

what about thinking before posting?

Ever heard of a phrase that "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones", Air?

if someone is trying to talk something as loud as possible and not less than 10 times to get some influence on modmaker decisions - what discussion can be possible?

Gandalf has posted once about the Shikari, AFAIK. We discussed it in the online game that we were playing, we were under the impression that the cost was 80, that was confirmed by somebody who checked it out in the editor (!) and Gandalf came up with some constructive and detailed suggestions on how to sort out the apparent (but mistaken) imbalance. Bearing in mind what a detailed knowledge you have of the mod, Air, I still don't think your way of putting your point across really does you justice, your posts come across as being very sarcastic at times

Roger if u suppose suggestions made by comparing shikari and only dark elf archer and only their ranged attack logical and constructive - then my suggestion about mm8 on assassin is logical and constructive too, (i compared even more units and even more their abilities!)but u consider it sarcastic for some reason

Air, I think what's required here is a little more politeness, that's all, regardless of how an idea appears to us. So, for all of us, myself included, let's offer constructive criticism or none at all...or learn to bite our tongues, without screaming!

On some cosmetic notes:

Joep has edited the wizard portraits, and added many new ones, and they look much better.

Igoraki has enhanced and resized many of the unit bodies for heroes, which also look far better.

I am organizing heroes and wizards by races, so portraits will be easier to find for map makers. I am also going to place all the units again by hand over the 1.4 resource set, so hopefully many "bugs" will be a thing of the past.

Regards,

Brad

Some things I was thinking about:
- Strike item: Can give hero strike ability (perhaps +3 ATT and +2 DAM, -2 DEF like?) Would this be possible at all? (For centaur like heroes)
- Entangle immunity (For tree-like units) Is this possible?
And an item with the same immunity?