EitB v12 Wishlist/Progress

[Qgqqqqq]

Anyway, some more things to consider:

1. Why don't we give Abashi the Black Dragon the hero promo? It's a slight buff, but he's never been built before anyway, and it gives the Sheaim a proper hero of their own, allowing Resurrection, SotC and similar mechanics to work better. I'm not married to the idea, but I don't see any problems with it.

2. Champions are quite expensive, compared to iron axes. As in, 4x more, if I'm not mistaken (which I might be - my last test game was with Clan Ogres, and I can't open to test). And I'm not sure if I'd every rather 1 8str champ over 4 6str axes. I'm wary of buffing the melee line further, though, and there are a lot of other balance points to consider. They win at mithril, of course, but very few games get that far.

3. Queen of the Line's. They cost 150% of the hammers of a frigate, come way later, and are slower and weaker. The only advantage is the 10 cargo. IMO, they should be able to serve as true Queens of the Line, so to speak, all but obsoleting earlier naval ships but being considerably more expensive. Thus I propose a large strength increase to {15 or 16str, 10 cargo, and 3 moves}. That still leaves open a niche for galleons, as they have slightly more moves. Generally, we thus have frigates /galleons as earlier, cheaper units, galleons as slightly nippier, but with QotL ruling the roost in pitched naval combat. Thoughts?

4. Actually, looking at that, I think Frigates still come too early. I think they should go back to Astronomy (from Optics).

5. Dragons Horde. For some reason or another we've been enabling Acheron again these days. I think ol' Red is balanced, I think his minions are balanced. But I don't think the Horde itself is. The Horde is unbalanced in two ways:
I. It gives too much culture.
II. It gives too little reward.
The cultural control can easily be seen if you look at the map in a game where he's built, or even preplaced. +8cpt means fourth ring comes all too easily, and fifth isn't even too far away. And that's all land that surrounding players can't get to, meaning that a non-preplaced Acheron is screwy in that he can be a massive nerf to a nearby player, even just in his culture. And a preplaced Acheron is also annoying, as that's a lot of land that has to be determined pre game not to be in use in realistic terms.
Secondly, Acheron is a lot of effort to kill, and for questionable reward. It gives +8cpt, +4gpt, +2 commander GPP, free EB promo to units in that city, and a free gold and gems resource. Which is all a bit...meh, really. Decent-Good if you could kill him with Bronze Axes, but for something which normally takes tier 4 units...meh. I think the best comparison to the effect it should give is Brigit. Same sort of investment/era (well, as vamps or vs. AI, that is), but one gives considerably more than the other. This bit is less important, obviously, but it's still something that I think needs fixing.
For I. I think the solution is obvious - +1-2cpt, +100% culture instead of +8.
For II. There are any number of solutions. I have an idea for what I think is best, but I'll just list the ideas I have so you can get an idea for yourself:
Plus 1 Gold, Pearls, and/or Gems Resources.
Plus 1 Iron or Mithril Resource (Mithril is more thematic, but much more powerful/potentially broken)
Plus x gold per turn
Plus x% gold per turn
Plus x% military production
Plus x experience
Free X promotion for units built in this city.
Plus 1 fire mana
Do remember that anything you give a player, you also give barbs. So free mithril weapons promotion to units built in this city, which I considered, is...problematic.

[Bobchillingworth]

Champs only cost as much as 2.66 Axes on Quick. Given that they have an innate bonus vs. melee, they're def. worth building.

[Kragroth]

Axemen are under costed for their benefits. EITB changed it from 40 hammers to 30 hammers. Compare 30 hammer axemen to 30 hammer archers. No comparison. I'd say Axemen should be at least 35 hammers.

[Qgqqqqq]

Cool, champs are fine. Probably some normal/quick conversion messing with me.

Kragroth, axes need to be that cheap to compete with warriors.

[Tasunke]

It's unneeded, anti-thematic, works more as a nerf than a buff to a weakish civilization, and you've given no arguments or reasons why it's a good idea or should be done.

Refute that


Ellimist, I agree, to some extent. The main issues are that it's long-lasting and unfun, though. What were the results of that test you ran?

All of those arguments are subjective, therefore they need no refutation. Anti-thematic? Having a buildable unit vs a nonbuildable unit isn't anti-thematic. Having a unit to never see the light of day is anti-thematic. Luannotar were not particularly encouraged by the government but they were still around.

Fanatacism is far earlier than Strength of Will, and it is on the way to useful techs like Rage/Divine Essence ... for Berserkers and Immortals. Luoannotar is game-mechanic wise, a 'useless' druid that basically has only a role to kill enemy Eidolons and enemy Paladins. It has no other function than to neutralize the enemy's utility of their similar units. Luoanotar at Fanatacism makes it relevant ... and since, like the Druid, it doesn't require Iron ... well I certainly don't see how its a nerf.

Currently only lv6 rangers can upgrade into Luannotars, which is FAR less thematic (or more 'anti-thematic' as u might say)

[Terkhen]

One question, though, is the Khazad change that he made alongside it, displaying the vault-levels in a similar way, with increments and so on. Is this a UI change that we want to include?

I'm now also using the same bar to display the remaining time of the Elohim Sanctuary spell, and in the future I was thinking about using it too for displaying the remaining times of Stasis and Arcane Lacuna for the caster player. I'm not 100% sure about these world spell duration bars being a good idea, though... mostly for the reasons you mentioned in your post.

Does Terkhen lurk this forum? What an awesome dude

Yes, I do follow the discussions here but I rarely post as usually I can't contribute much with regard to discussing balance. And, given the amount of enjoyment and improvements for my games I've gotten from using the work done here, adapting the adventurer counter certainly isn't enough to show my gratitude. As I mentioned in CFC, let me know if any other of the things I have coded are deemed interesting for Erebus in the Balance.

5. Dragons Horde. For some reason or another we've been enabling Acheron again these days. I think ol' Red is balanced, I think his minions are balanced. But I don't think the Horde itself is.

With the new adventurer counter implementation, the Hoard could be changed to grant adventurer points too. With the adventurer counter changes, adventurer GPP are never added by the game to the normal GPP reserves, and the adventurer counter itself has a hardcoded limitation to work only for the Grigori. Therefore, other civilizations (including the Barbarians) would not be affected by this change when they get the Hoard. This would give the Grigori an ingame benefit for using their usually forgotten dragon slaying skills.

[Qgqqqqq]

It's unneeded, anti-thematic, works more as a nerf than a buff to a weakish civilization, and you've given no arguments or reasons why it's a good idea or should be done.

Refute that


Ellimist, I agree, to some extent. The main issues are that it's long-lasting and unfun, though. What were the results of that test you ran?

All of those arguments are subjective, therefore they need no refutation. Anti-thematic? Having a buildable unit vs a nonbuildable unit isn't anti-thematic. Having a unit to never see the light of day is anti-thematic. Luannotar were not particularly encouraged by the government but they were still around.

Fanatacism is far earlier than Strength of Will, and it is on the way to useful techs like Rage/Divine Essence ... for Berserkers and Immortals. Luoannotar is game-mechanic wise, a 'useless' druid that basically has only a role to kill enemy Eidolons and enemy Paladins. It has no other function than to neutralize the enemy's utility of their similar units. Luoanotar at Fanatacism makes it relevant ... and since, like the Druid, it doesn't require Iron ... well I certainly don't see how its a nerf.

Currently only lv6 rangers can upgrade into Luannotars, which is FAR less thematic (or more 'anti-thematic' as u might say)

Of course they're subjective - you didn't give me anything to respond to! It's not even a change I had any opinion on - I'd simply flat-out never considered it as a change. I gave you my straight gut reactions simply to try and get you to elaborate.

I don't think you understand what anti-thematic means. It's anti-thematic because the entire point of the Grigori lies in the rejection of Fanatacism in specific and religions in general. Based on their flavor, Lunnonaters are no exception to this.

A unit not seeing the light of day is theme-neutral. It's irrelevant to that matter. And real-world Luonnators are irrelevant to their in-game portrayal, too, so don't bring that into it.

It's a nerf because all I remembered about Lunnonaters was that they came at SoW. The removal of the level requirements, then, is a boost. But I still disagree that the move to fanaticism is a boost - the Grigori have no business being in that part of the tree, so it's 2600 beakers expended solely for the purpose of getting the (pretty crappy, really) Luonnattor. SoW, OTOH, is very much on a potential tech path for them - you basically either go adepts/mages or melee - so even though it's more expensive to reach, it's much more likely to be reached.
Grigori basically only go Fanatacism if they want Basium for some reason or another, and if not will never go Rage/Divine Essence either outside of a SP game.

(And btw, you're supposed to promote Medics to Luonnotars. Rangers can do it too, and they're more likely to reach the level threshold, but clearly the intention is for medics.)

The function of the Luonnator is to combat high-level disciple units, sure, (and to use inquisition ) though they can be decent at stack-protection with the magic-immune promotion. But that doesn't have any bearing on them being available at the same tech. Whilst FFH has less of a rock-paper-scissors combat style, assassins, for example, are a counter to mages, but they don't appear at the same tech. And the same is the case for basically every unit in BTS.


Based on your feedback, I'm interested in doing the following:

Luonnator loses level requirement, remains unbuildable, potentially moves back to Arcane Lore (?), becomes a independent unit (divorced from Druid - there's no real reason for Luonnators to replace them except keeping Druids/Eidolon/Paladin's out of their reach, but Druids aren't so good as to be scary, and come out at a tech far removed from Grigori normal paths). Ranger->Luonnator upgrade path disconnected (it makes no sense).

The following is more tenuous:

Archmages can now promote to Luonnators. (Lich equivalent. Definite buff, but hell, they need it atm, and I don't think it's overpowering.)


Here's what I'd like to do, but won't because it's a nerf to the already weak Grigori:

Set Luonnators up as the next stage in Grigori Medic progression. Grigori Medics lose Medic 3, promotion options are restructured so that Luonnators can take Medic 3 with Channeling 3 and Medic 2.

...actually. That could work, if we move medics forward to Sanitation, and then put Luonnators forward to Medicine. Luonnators would need a bit of a price/strength cut, and Medics a price cut. And the ability of Luonnators to combat late-game disciple units is hurt there, as is much of their identity. So I'm not sure how much I like this idea. The positives are that it gives them a multi-stage medical assistance, with priest-equivalents at an earlier date and all. Thoughts?

[Qgqqqqq]

I'm now also using the same bar to display the remaining time of the Elohim Sanctuary spell, and in the future I was thinking about using it too for displaying the remaining times of Stasis and Arcane Lacuna for the caster player. I'm not 100% sure about these world spell duration bars being a good idea, though... mostly for the reasons you mentioned in your post.

Yeah, I think that's a bit too much IMO. I do think it would be good if Sanctuary was displayed somewhere (the others are fine, really), but that's a bit obtrusive IMO.

With the new adventurer counter implementation, the Hoard could be changed to grant adventurer points too. With the adventurer counter changes, adventurer GPP are never added by the game to the normal GPP reserves, and the adventurer counter itself has a hardcoded limitation to work only for the Grigori. Therefore, other civilizations (including the Barbarians) would not be affected by this change when they get the Hoard. This would give the Grigori an ingame benefit for using their usually forgotten dragon slaying skills.

That would be nice for the Grigori, and is worth considering, but it needs to go alongside enough changes to the Hoard to make it "good enough" for non-Grig's as well.

[Qgqqqqq]

Progress Report:

Key:
Done and untested: Blue
Done and Tested: Green

Implemented:
Naval units gain +50% vs. Disciple units (Mod Notes: hard-coded in.)
Conquest Civic: Moves back to Warfare (from Education).
Military Strategy: Moves back to Military State (from Warfare).
Decius: Decius gains the Tolerant trait.
Summer Palace: Pedia Background and Strategy Entries updated/filled in.
Winter Palace: Pedia Background and Strategy Entries updated/filled in.

[Tasunke]

Qgqqqqq, slow your roll.

A few things.

1) Medics are to be unchanged

2) it was only recently that Medics were allowed to upgrade to Luannotars

3) Medics can be switched from Melee to Arcane w/o casting other spells ... just remove Channeling 1, add Arcane unitcombat, and maybe add potency. Voila, they can now get exp for once. (as to buy which promotions, im uncertain)

4) If you want you can change Luannotar from Disciple to Arcane .. but that is a bit of a grey area.

5) Just remove the level requirement. This makes them buildable BY DEFAULT.

6) At one point I considered having *any* tier 2/ tier 3 unit able to upgrade to Luannotar because its going from one thing to a completely different thing .... without the level requirement, it is perfectly valid for Luannotar to have nothing that upgrades INTO them. Sort of like how warriors can't just upgrade into Medics.

7) Having Rangers/ Medics upgrade into Luannotar only seems plausible due to Role/DnD Role, etc ... but there is no rational explanation for this. Luoannotar are one of those units that were way too useful as a gimmick (building altars of Luannotar) and therefore were nerfed into almost non-existence. Having them straight up buildable now that they cannot simply sacrifice themselves to become new stages of the altar is perfectly acceptable.

8) Just remove their level requirement, have them buildable, and possibly lower their cost to that of a Pally or Eidolon


IN SUMMARY

1) Having them as their own unitclass is a VERY GOOD IDEA.

2) changing Medics is a VERY BAD IDEA

3) keeping Strength of Will as a tech is DECENT/ACCEPTABLE

4) making them buildable/ removing level requirement is a NECESSITY


Ultimately after that, it matters not which units can upgrade into it b/c such a process was only a necessary evil before, it doesn't need to have any types of units upgrade into it. Sure you could have mages upgrade into it, keep the level requirement, and have them as alternate archmages but whats the point? I feel as though adding an extra pair of archmages would just be pointless and anti-thematic.

Instead, simply make the unit relevant by removing the Level Requirement and making unto it its own unitclass. Really that is perhaps all that needs to be done. POSSIBLY reducing its hammer cost to the Pally/Eidos (I recommend either doing this, or re-increasing pally/Eido hammer cost to their previous hammer cost ... which I recommend far more strongly).

CONCLUSION: Remove level requirement/ make buildable, and make into their own unitclass .... all that needs doing.