patch 2.08 is out [Archive] - .com.unity Forums

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 03:53 PM

New Features / Game Balance Changes v2.08:

This patch is the second patch for Dominions II. Version 2.08 can read save files from older Versions but not the other way around. This means that everyone in a multiplayer game must upgrade at the same time.

* New theme for Arcoscephale, The Golden Era.
* Selectable number of starting provinces.
* Armor modding.
* Basic weapon modding.
* Basic spell modding.
* Epic Messages for some global enchantments.
* Dominions can now connect to name ip addresses like mydomserver.cnn.com.
* Improved spell AI.
* Commander renaming.
* Speedup of particle effects.
* Trippled maximum nbr of particles on screen.
* Symbols for Ocean Sailing, Inquisition Bonus, Supply Bonus and more.
* New switches: --closed, --easyai, --normai, --hardai, --impai
* New switches: --preexec, --startprov.
* Sphinx cannot teleport.
* Most travel spells (all but teleport) cannot be used by immobiles.
* New battle afflictions.
* AI can use new dominion themes as well.
* New resolutions, 1600x1200, 2400x1800.
* New monster mod commands, #gemprod, #startdom, #pathcost, #noheal, #demon.
* Leadership is now moddable.
* Resistance modding (#fireres etc.) fully implemented.
* Atlantian scout protection 4 -> 2.
* Jotun Hirdman ring mail -> chain mail.
* Ermorian Cultists are holy.
* Serpent Acolyte gained 50% poison resistance.
* Units with 'Hold & attack' fire during hold if possible.
* Can cancel on 'enter name of god' screen.
* Cold blooded is printed among enc modifiers.
* Sphinx cost 100 -> 60.
* Nether darts dmg 20 -> 15.
* Jade Emperor gets air magic.
* Jaguar Warriors not capital only
* New weapon, Light Lance.
* Charriots have lower defence
* The 'View Active Mods' button now displays the active mods.

Bug Fixes:

* Microsoft C-compiler upgraded 5 service packs. That should fix a whole lot of bugs according to Microsoft's change log. Also an impressive almost 1% speedup. This fix is Windows only.
* Unix systems slept for too short a time. This resulted in a non working --fps switch and a higher cpu usage than necessary.
* Caelum likes cold +3 again (bug introduced in 2.06).
* It was possible to summon many of one unique Heliophagus, fixed.
* Fixed battle weirdness when troops would refuse to attack.
* Many non area spells were twice as effective and/or hard to resist as they should be.
* No longer possible to give assassinate order to non assassins.
* AI no longer chooses a special dominion after they have been disabled in a mod.
* Shortcut 'P' didn't work for sneaking preachers.
* No more 'lost one eye' for eyeless beings.
* Local province defence is now affected by Gift of Health too.
* Flaming Arrows works with composite bows too.
* Description for Sanguin Heritage.
* One Ulm Commander had wrong weapon.
* Astral Serpent & Stone Bird no longer yield attack reduction.
* Fires of the Faith could raise dominions too high.
* No more underwater void summons overwater.
* Witch doc, research 5 -> 3 and cost 90 -> 80.
* Demons no longer affected by Burden of Time.
* Carrion dragon has wrong bless effects, fixed.
* Modding commands #startscout and #clear didn't work.
* Mod Version numbers are printed correctly.
* Some typos fixed.

fahdiz

February 16th, 2004, 04:09 PM

Thank you Illwinter! My game is supposed to arrive today...so I'll be downloading this patch posthaste. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Wauthan

February 16th, 2004, 04:10 PM

Meaty patch indeed. No wonder you guys seemed so tired. Best support ever.

BTW, Nerid still got the wrong gender. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

CharonJr

February 16th, 2004, 04:11 PM

I really like the "Improved spell AI" part, with R'lyeh it should be fairly easy to see if that one is working http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

CharonJr

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 04:12 PM

Beware of this patch if you play Jotunheim. The Seithkonas are no longer commanders, and have no magic paths! I've posted this as a bug ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

I can't believe they broke an entire theme like this. Be on the lookout for similar bugs in other themes ...

[ February 16, 2004, 14:16: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Teraswaerto

February 16th, 2004, 04:12 PM

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

No magic site modding though. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

fahdiz

February 16th, 2004, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
Beware of this patch if you play Jotunheim. The Seithkonas are no longer commanders, and have no magic paths! I've posted this as a bug ...

I can't believe they broke an entire theme like this. Be on the lookout for similar bugs in other themes ... Are you using any mods for Jotunheim? I only ask because I know you're using the Ashikaga mod and thought maybe you had modded Jotun too. It's possible that the patch breaks a particular mod rather than the core stuff.

On the other hand, if you're not using any Jotun mods...then that's a bug they'll want to fix quickly.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by fahdiz:
Are you using any mods for Jotunheim? I only ask because I know you're using the Ashikaga mod and thought maybe you had modded Jotun too. It's possible that the patch breaks a particular mod rather than the core stuff.

On the other hand, if you're not using any Jotun mods...then that's a bug they'll want to fix quickly. I have not used any mods that affect Jotuns, and no mods not posted on the IW site.

My AAR is dead until this is fixed ...

[ February 16, 2004, 14:25: Message edited by: Arryn ]

gibson

February 16th, 2004, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
* New battle afflictions.Gotta catch em all!

Looks to be a good patch, thank you Illwinter! I'll be trying this after classes today. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Graeme Dice

February 16th, 2004, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
* Jaguar Warriors not capital only
Now this one I really like. It's probably all Mictlan needs to take them from difficult to pretty good.

KRNVR

February 16th, 2004, 04:32 PM

Why were the witchdoctors nerfed? And why was this listed under 'bugs'?

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by fahdiz:
On the other hand, if you're not using any Jotun mods...then that's a bug they'll want to fix quickly. I just got a PM back from KO saying he's found the bug, which was essentially a typo in the code.

fahdiz

February 16th, 2004, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
I just got a PM back from KO saying he's found the bug, which was essentially a typo in the code. Did he say whether the patch would be pulled and fixed, or if there will be a temporary mod to fix it like the coldcaelum mod?

[ February 16, 2004, 14:41: Message edited by: fahdiz ]

Wendigo

February 16th, 2004, 04:40 PM

Maybe we can get a v2.09 patch released like fast?

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by fahdiz:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Arryn:
Beware of this patch if you play Jotunheim. The Seithkonas are no longer commanders, and have no magic paths! I've posted this as a bug ...

I can't believe they broke an entire theme like this. Be on the lookout for similar bugs in other themes ... Are you using any mods for Jotunheim? I only ask because I know you're using the Ashikaga mod and thought maybe you had modded Jotun too. It's possible that the patch breaks a particular mod rather than the core stuff.

On the other hand, if you're not using any Jotun mods...then that's a bug they'll want to fix quickly. <hr /></blockquote>A comma and a zero has sneaked into the utg�rd stats causing several problems for the theme. Some of the problems can be fixed by a mod, but ongoing games might suffer.

They get a smouldercone!
They get mooses!

Bah http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
Some of the problems can be fixed by a mod, but ongoing games might suffer.Like my popular AAR, which is dead without an official fix. poo

But I did my job in reporting the problem, and I'll trust IW to deal with it. It won't help me (or anyone else) to pester them about getting a patch for the patch. heh They get mooses!

Bah http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon8.gif I saw them big mooseys. At first I mistook it for a two-hump camel and thought "what in the hell?" http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

[ February 16, 2004, 14:54: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:01 PM

By the way, if anyone knows how the new commander rename functionality works, please let me know.

Other than the rather pesky bug I found http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif , this patch looks to be great! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Peter Ebbesen

February 16th, 2004, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
Like my popular AAR, which is dead without an official fix. poo
Strictly speaking, you can make a 2.06 installation and play your AAR game finished under the old patch level. Nobody forces you to play that AAR game with the most recent patch. Dead? Only if you choose so, which I hope not.

Heck, in Europa Universalis II, I currently have 1.06, 1.07, and 1.07 beta Versions installed due to different ongoing AARs that I want to complete under the conditions I started them in. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Wendigo

February 16th, 2004, 05:05 PM

In Dom I it was done hitting 'R' key while in the unit stats screen. Try that.

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 05:08 PM

You can only rename if renaming was enabled in the setup.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by Peter Ebbesen:
Heck, in Europa Universalis II, I currently have 1.06, 1.07, and 1.07 beta Versions installed due to different ongoing AARs that I want to complete under the conditions I started them in. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif On the same Windows machine?

Presuming that Dom doesn't write to the Windows registry in a fashion that precludes multiple copies in different directories, installing a 2.06 Version is an option. But I'm not going to go to that bother unless I know that (1.) IW isn't going to fix it today, and (2.) that I can have more than one Dom installed on the same XP machine.

EDIT: close examination of the XP registry shows that installing a second Version in a separate directory may break the ability to uninstall (or perhaps even to run) the first-installed copy. Until I get definite confirmation from someone that you can have two copies of Dom installed on the same XP machine, and that they both operate flawlessly, this is not something that I'll be doing.

[ February 16, 2004, 15:50: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
You can only rename if renaming was enabled in the setup. Game setup? Okay, thanks Kris for the prompt answer. Useful to know. Too bad that won't help in the half-dozen SP games I've already got. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Jasper

February 16th, 2004, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
New Features / Game Balance Changes v2.08:
* New theme for Arcoscephale, The Golden Era.Very nicely done! Hard to play due to the combination of forced sloth and high resource cost, but looks fun.

* Many non area spells were twice as effective and/or hard to resist as they should be.
Does this include Paralyze?

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by Wendigo:
Maybe we can get a v2.09 patch released like fast? I imagine they are scrambling right this moment to fix the code in the demo Version before they release those, since they still have time to avoid having those go out with the Seithkona bug. I also presume that once they've done that, they'll decide how to correct the full-game patch.

fahdiz

February 16th, 2004, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by Jasper:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Arryn:
New Features / Game Balance Changes v2.08:
* New theme for Arcoscephale, The Golden Era.Very nicely done! Hard to play due to the combination of forced sloth and high resource cost, but looks fun.<hr /></blockquote>That caught my eye as well...any information on what units are replaced, and what new ones are added?

fahdiz

February 16th, 2004, 05:30 PM

Also, please forgive me if this is a stupid question, but: Are all the changes from 2.06 included in the 2.08 patch? Or will I have to install 2.06 first, and then 2.08 on top of it? I don't have a problem with it either way, but I'd like to know for sure.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by fahdiz:
Are all the changes from 2.06 included in the 2.08 patch?Yes.

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by Jasper:
Does this include Paralyze? Yes. All spells with area 0 struck twice. Paralyze, Soul Slay, Nether darts, orb lightning, etc.

Area spells (fireball etc) were not affected by the bug.

Nether darts was particulary nasty. If a unit was hit and survived the first he got the feeble minded affliction and had less resistance when the twin strike got him.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
All spells with area 0 struck twice. Paralyze, Soul Slay, Nether darts, orb lightning, etc.

Nether darts was particulary nasty. If a unit was hit and survived the first he got the feeble minded affliction and had less resistance when the twin strike got him. This explains why those spells you listed were so almost-invariably fatal. Thanks for fixing this! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
On the same Windows machine?

Presuming that Dom doesn't write to the Windows registry in a fashion that precludes multiple copies in different directories, installing a 2.06 Version is an option. But I'm not going to go to that bother unless I know that (1.) IW isn't going to fix it today, and (2.) that I can have more than one Dom installed on the same XP machine.

EDIT: close examination of the XP registry shows that installing a second Version in a separate directory may break the ability to uninstall (or perhaps even to run) the first-installed copy. Until I get definite confirmation from someone that you can have two copies of Dom installed on the same XP machine, and that they both operate flawlessly, this is not something that I'll be doing. 1. We wont fix it today.
2. It is possible to have several Versions. Just rename one dom_206.exe or whatever you like. Be sure not to play the same game with different Versions though.

Buzzbomb

February 16th, 2004, 06:04 PM

Some people are whining a little to much on this thread. Mistakes happen so get over it, this is the first game ive played in YEARS, maybe ever, where I have had responses from the game developers so I just want to say great job,great game and keep it coming. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Dont ruin our interaction with the devs by complaining. I want them to look forward to coming to the forum to post.

One thing though.....

I would like a few more Aran size maps though done in the same graphics like Aran(4-6 players). That map is just fabulous! It seems everyone just wants to see very small maps or huge maps.

BB

P.S: Go make all your friends buy this game, we want them to have plenty of money to do Dom III.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 06:11 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
1. We wont fix it today.Thanks for the warning. I appreciate it. 2. It is possible to have several Versions. Just rename one dom_206.exe or whatever you like. Be sure not to play the same game with different Versions though. Not quite that simple. I'll have to 'hack' the entries in the Windows Registry too, for the Version that is already installed before I install a second copy, else the second installation will overwrite the first's settings. (5 years experience as an installation engineer has taught me a lot about the Registry.) Even so, I may still have problems with the keys "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Curr entVersion\Uninstall\Dominions2" and "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\NSIS_dom2inst", since the key names are hard-coded and do not change based on user input during installation. Which, speaking from my experience, is bad installation programming practice.

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by Buzzbomb:
Some people are whining a little to much on this thread. Mistakes happen so get over it, this is the first game ive played in YEARS, maybe ever, where I have had responses from the game developers so I just want to say great job,great game and keep it coming. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Dont ruin our interaction with the devs by complaining. I want them to look forward to coming to the forum to post.

One thing though.....

I would like a few more Aran size maps though done in the same graphics like Aran(4-6 players). That map is just fabulous! It seems everyone just wants to see very small maps or huge maps.

BB

P.S: Go make all your friends buy this game, we want them to have plenty of money to do Dom III. Thanks!

I do not think they are whining (at least not intentionally). I've heard lot worse.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 06:20 PM

Originally posted by Buzzbomb:
Some people are whining a little to much on this thread.No one has whined on this thread. Not even myself. When I whine, there's nothing subtle about it. this is the first game ive played in YEARS, maybe ever, where I have had responses from the game developersYou must not play many strategy games. I play a lot of them and the devs for all of them that I've played in the past 2 years hang out in their respective forums. IW, though, is the most responsive of any of them. Dont ruin our interaction with the devs by complaining.No one's complaining, either. Even KRNVR's post on witch doctors -- which has not been replied to by anyone -- was a polite question.

[ February 16, 2004, 16:24: Message edited by: Arryn ]

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by KRNVR:
Why were the witchdoctors nerfed? And why was this listed under 'bugs'? What happened to the Witchdoctors ?? Hopefully nothing hurt/weakened my units from Machaka !

[ February 16, 2004, 16:25: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by KRNVR:
Why were the witchdoctors nerfed? And why was this listed under 'bugs'? Because huts make poor libraries and guys living in huts do not read books http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

It felt thematic.

Jasper

February 16th, 2004, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Jasper:
Does this include Paralyze? Yes. All spells with area 0 struck twice. Paralyze, Soul Slay, Nether darts, orb lightning, etc.

Area spells (fireball etc) were not affected by the bug.

Nether darts was particulary nasty. If a unit was hit and survived the first he got the feeble minded affliction and had less resistance when the twin strike got him. <hr /></blockquote>Yowch. Nether Darts is brutal enough by itself! I had thought it was a MR penetration issue, but this would have similar results.

What about the broken effects of Paralyze (ie that it Lasted forever)?

Arralen

February 16th, 2004, 06:29 PM

As Kristoffer is talking about renaming the .exe, I wonder if he means that we would be able to run 2 or more different .exes from the same directory?

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 06:34 PM

Paralyze (the spell) is supposed to Last 30-40 turns (more or less the entire battle). MindbLast paralyze 2-8 turns or so.

New spell modding tools are available. There is an example mind duel mod available.

I havn't tested the fixed paralyze much, but if it still bothers you research level, path level and fatigue can be altered with the modding tools. Duration cannot be modded.

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Arralen:
As Kristoffer is talking about renaming the .exe, I wonder if he means that we would be able to run 2 or more different .exes from the same directory? Yep.
You must copy and rename the exe.

[ February 16, 2004, 16:36: Message edited by: Kristoffer O ]

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 06:36 PM

Originally posted by Arralen:
As Kristoffer is talking about renaming the .exe, I wonder if he means that we would be able to run 2 or more different .exes from the same directory? {snip comment after KO's Last post}

So any other changes to files in the directory tree are backwards-compatible?

[ February 16, 2004, 16:38: Message edited by: Arryn ]

LordArioch

February 16th, 2004, 06:36 PM

I have no problem with my two installs of dominions, although I admit I haven't tried to uninstall them. Amusingly enough I was somehow running one copy through a shortcut in the other copies directory, so my saved games went into program files but the exe I was actually running was in the games directory. And here I was thinking I was at least half computer-literate and I go and do something like that accidently. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Jasper:
What about the broken effects of Paralyze (ie that it Lasted forever)? [/QB]This is definitely a problem... I've seen a unit paralyzed (2) remain frozen solid for 12 rounds of combat !! It would be great if this was fixed too.

ioticus

February 16th, 2004, 06:57 PM

I didn't see mention of fixing the (turn 2?) scales bug and the AI not building forts bug. Were these addressed?

Teraswaerto

February 16th, 2004, 07:02 PM

So to be 100% clear, if I make a renamed copy of my current dom2.exe and then patch, I can play 2.06 with the renamed .exe and 2.08 with dom2.exe? Nothing else is required to have two Versions?

Jasper

February 16th, 2004, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
Paralyze (the spell) is supposed to Last 30-40 turns (more or less the entire battle). MindbLast paralyze 2-8 turns or so.I've never seen paralysis wear off. Even units who've received Parayzed(1) from Astral Shield (easiest way to test paralysis) never recover. I haven't tested MindbLast, but I imagine it works the same.

This is especially nasty with Petrify -- which is essentially an area effect Paralyze without a MR save.

[Edit]By my tests, this still happens in 2.08

[ February 16, 2004, 17:08: Message edited by: Jasper ]

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Teraswaerto:
So to be 100% clear, if I make a renamed copy of my current dom2.exe and then patch, I can play 2.06 with the renamed .exe and 2.08 with dom2.exe? Nothing else is required to have two Versions? Correct

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 07:08 PM

Originally posted by LordArioch:
I have no problem with my two installs of dominions, although I admit I haven't tried to uninstall them.I now have both 2.06 and 2.08 installed on my system. FYI, LordArioch, you won't be able to properly uninstall the first copy unless you do some Registry hacking. OTOH, after you uninstall the 2nd copy, all you really need to do to get rid of the 1st copy is to delete it's directory tree, since the Registry entries would be purged during the 2nd copy's uninstallation.

I can continue my Utgard AAR now, with 2.06, and patiently wait (grumble, grumble) for 2.09 ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

OTOH, I can play nations besides Utgard with 2.08 and enjoy all the neat changes that IW gave us! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif So many new things to try out! R'leyh should be significantly more difficult to play with the reduced-duration Mind BLasts. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon6.gif

PhilD

February 16th, 2004, 07:24 PM

The link to the Linux Intel patch does not work.

I can download the Windows patch all right, but not the Linux patch, so it must be a bad link.

(I'm surprised that nobody else noticed before me!)

PhilD

February 16th, 2004, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by PhilD:
The link to the Linux Intel patch does not work.

I can download the Windows patch all right, but not the Linux patch, so it must be a bad link.

(I'm surprised that nobody else noticed before me!) Actually, the only one I can download is the Windows patch. The MacOS redirects to a site that I cannot find, and the other links are broken.

Taqwus

February 16th, 2004, 07:31 PM

Ah, so now my composite bowmen will be able to set their foes alight. *fwoosh* http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Lovely. TC S&A was missing this before.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 07:53 PM

Kris & Johan,

Can we get some sort of clue as to what you mean by "improved spell AI"? What sort of behavior(s) it no longer does, or things it will now do that it didn't used to?

I am also curious as to what the significance is of now having GoH affect PD? (It seemed that before, once a battle was over, all the PD would miraculously heal all hits/wounds anyway.) Obviously I'm missing something here.

TIA.

WraithLord

February 16th, 2004, 08:00 PM

Where can I DL the patch?

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by Jasper:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
Paralyze (the spell) is supposed to Last 30-40 turns (more or less the entire battle). I've never seen paralysis wear off. Even units who've received Parayzed(1) from Astral Shield (easiest way to test paralysis) never recover.
[Edit]By my tests, this still happens in 2.08 <hr /></blockquote>I've never seen any game until this one where paralyze is suppose to Last the entire battle (30 thru 40 turns). I've played all kinds of games from ranging from RTS, RPG and TBS... most have been TBS.
Why have the description read Paralyze(2) when it's going to Last 25 turns ???
---shouldn't it be changed to Paralyze(25) so at least we'll have a clue of when the unit will wake up ??

ioticus

February 16th, 2004, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
Kris & Johan,

Can we get some sort of clue as to what you mean by "improved spell AI"? What sort of behavior(s) it no longer does, or things it will now do that it didn't used to?

This is the only fix that really caught my eye. I too would really like to know the specifics here.

Arryn

February 16th, 2004, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by izaqyos:
Where can I DL the patch? Dominions II download page (http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/d2/6.htm)

Taqwus

February 16th, 2004, 08:25 PM

Arryn --
GoH not only heals afflictions, but also increases hit points within dominion -- up to doubling the original max hp.

SurvivalistMerc

February 16th, 2004, 08:32 PM

NT Jedi,

Did you ever play AD&D? Paralyzation effects effectively Lasted the entire battle in that game and, if memory serves, often had to be countered by a remove paralysis spell or some such.

I don't view paralyze's Lasting the entire battle as objectionable and in fact like this as a counter to supercombatants. Everything ought to have a counter.

SalsaDoom

February 16th, 2004, 08:45 PM

I'm with PhilD.. the link to the Linux patch is dead! Whats up with this? Anyone know an alternative download link? Illwinter?

Damnit, I wish companies would host their own damn patches.... ;(

--SD

February 16th, 2004, 08:48 PM

My only question right now is: Is there going to be a quickfix for Utgard? (who enjoy their new Abysian Units). (Within the week or so, not today)

If not. Can you mod specific themes as of right now or is it still limited to only the base theme.

[ February 16, 2004, 18:53: Message edited by: Zen ]

PhilD

February 16th, 2004, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by SalsaDoom:
I'm with PhilD.. the link to the Linux patch is dead! Whats up with this? Anyone know an alternative download link? Illwinter?

Damnit, I wish companies would host their own damn patches.... ;(

--SD Unfortunately, Illwinter doesn't seem to host their own patches. I tried... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Gandalf Parker

February 16th, 2004, 08:52 PM

We might have jumped in too quick. I havent seen any official post saying that the patch was out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

[ February 16, 2004, 18:53: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

PhilD

February 16th, 2004, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
We might have jumped in too quick. I havent seen any official post saying that the patch was out. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif Check the Shrapnel home page... or the Illwinter site, for that matter.

Only, it isn't out for everybody http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 08:57 PM

This patch seems to be off to a rather rocky start. So far, I've had run into the following:

1. Game vomits up an "SDL Parachute Deployed" error in stderr.txt when I try to play a turn: It occurs most frequently after I have hit Host to go to the next turn: Restarting the game entirely often clears the problem and allows me to play, even though I have changed nothing else. The bug manifests often, but with no guaranteed consistency: Sometimes it will occur even after a game restart, sometimes not.

2. Games with more than one nation designated as human controlled sometimes hang on turn generation: Once again, no consistency: Sometimes it hangs, sometimes it proceeds.

Has anyone else observed this behavior?

For a patch, this seems to have broken more than it's fixed....

Teleolurian

February 16th, 2004, 08:58 PM

Anybody played around with the new theme yet?

Johan K

February 16th, 2004, 09:01 PM

Here's a temporary link for the linux and os x patches. I don't know why the Shrapnel one didn't work.

* Edit: It's working again. No more temporary links.
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Illwinter/d2/6.htm

[ February 16, 2004, 19:17: Message edited by: Johan K ]

Richard

February 16th, 2004, 09:04 PM

The patches from our site should work now.

SalsaDoom

February 16th, 2004, 10:04 PM

Woah, that was quick. I -just- posted that little complaint ;P Yup, and sure enough its a good link now.

Thanks for being on the case so fast!

--SD

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 10:32 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
NT Jedi,

Did you ever play AD&D? Paralyzation effects effectively Lasted the entire battle in that game and, if memory serves, often had to be countered by a remove paralysis spell or some such.

I don't view paralyze's Lasting the entire battle as objectionable and in fact like this as a counter to supercombatants. Everything ought to have a counter. 
There is a serious problem with paralyzation Lasting the entire battle. I will describe why:

I had one of those supercombatants which was paralyzed during battle and surrounded. Well the units which surrounded him were doing hardly any damage and my supercombatant was regenerating what little scratches were being done. Then the battle was Lasting so long... my remaining units fled... except for the supercombatant who was paralzyed. Eventually most the defenders that surrounded my supercombatant fled too because the game has units retreat after a certain period of time.
THE PROBLEM:
A few of the defenders could not flee because my paralyzed supercombatant was standing in their way. Only a few spirits and a longdead which continued to add paralyzation. Once in a blue moon they could scratch him but he would easily regenerate. Another 20 turns went by... then the game just killed him. THUS he died because every battle has a certain amount of time until all remaining attackers are just killed.

what killed him:
He died because the battle exceeded the maximum time limit. That's just wrong.

Either he should have been set free from paralyzation so he could flee off the battlefield OR he should have been automatically kicked into one of my friendly provinces.

KRNVR

February 16th, 2004, 10:42 PM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by KRNVR:
Why were the witchdoctors nerfed? And why was this listed under 'bugs'? Because huts make poor libraries and guys living in huts do not read books http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

It felt thematic. <hr /></blockquote>Somebody living in those huts forges platemail hauberks, though... Hmmm... must be using those books in the forge.

"Makuto mighty Fire mage! Magic book... Fire!" (chucks it in the forge, and smiles proudly)

The Black Sorceror (played by John Cleese) leans in to speak to his God discretely, "This latest generation of Witch Doctors _are_ a bit dim, My Lord. But we are paying them less. We save enough on their recruitment to buy an entire unit of archers!"

"And how many in a unit?"

"Ah... _one_, Sir."

"Hrmm", growled the Lord of the Desert Sun pensively... "One, two, three, four, five becomes 1,3,6,10,15. Or what was once 75 has become 45... And five archers."

"I do not understand, Lord. These numbers, are they... a prophesy?"

"Yes. Of doom."

(OK, so I'm whining. But it's a _Classy_ whine.)

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

SurvivalistMerc

February 16th, 2004, 10:47 PM

NT Jedi,

In the AD&D system, if the only enemy left on the battlefield were paralyzed, that enemy could simply be slain in the following combat round at the discretion of the victorious party. So I don't really see anything wrong with the fact that your pretender dies.

(For those of you who are wondering why the AD&D combat system is relevant to this discussion, please see NT Jedi's prior post.)

I think it would be much cleaner to just autokill all paralyzed enemies when they don't have non-paralyzed defenders. That way folks wouldn't become unhappy about how their pretender died due to the "time out" feature. I'm not a fan of the time out feature myself and agree that nonparalyzed attackers who are berserk or otherwise unable to retreat who survive 50 rounds ought to wind up in an adjacent friendly province if such exists.

Kristoffer O

February 16th, 2004, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by KRNVR:
Somebody living in those huts forges platemail hauberks, though... Hmmm... must be using those books in the forge.

"Makuto mighty Fire mage! Magic book... Fire!" (chucks it in the forge, and smiles proudly)

The Black Sorceror (played by John Cleese) leans in to speak to his God discretely, "This latest generation of Witch Doctors _are_ a bit dim, My Lord. But we are paying them less. We save enough on their recruitment to buy an entire unit of archers!"

"And how many in a unit?"

"Ah... _one_, Sir."

"Hrmm", growled the Lord of the Desert Sun pensively... "One, two, three, four, five becomes 1,3,6,10,15. Or what was once 75 has become 45... And five archers."

"I do not understand, Lord. These numbers, are they... a prophesy?"

"Yes. Of doom."

(OK, so I'm whining. But it's a _Classy_ whine.)

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif That almost made me want to reduce the research of other machakans as well. Hilarious!

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 10:52 PM

Oh, paralyzation gets more interesting than that.

Suppose an SC goes into battle with a raised Astral + Fire shield, Personal Luck, Ethereal, Mirror Image, Mistform, Invulnerability. He becomes paralyzed and cannot move. Opponents continue to strike him: Some of THEM are paralyzed. Due to his awesome armor rating, and many protective spells, the opponent is unable to hurt him, but many enemies set themselves on fire and die trying to kill this paralyzed, immobile target. Eventually, the others decide they've had enough, break, and flee.

Now the battlefield consists entirely of two paralyzed sides that stare at each other, both unable to move: The routing Messages flash for both sides, yet neither can clear the field because all are immobilized.

Eventually, your SC is auto-killed because the battle drags on indefinitely....and paralyze appears to NEVER WEAR OFF. Ever! If it did, the paralyzed sides would eventually unparalyze and clear the field.....but they never do!

In this particular case, an SC that uses Astral Shield in the presence of paralyzers may as well be signing his own death warrant, because while paralyzation is deadly, it's not an instant game over....unless you manage to paralyze somebody while paralyzed!

[ February 16, 2004, 20:52: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Pocus

February 16th, 2004, 10:54 PM

about Arco golden age:
Very amusing theme, with a lot of inspiration too. I like the Icarus warrior susceptibility to fire for example. Congratulations! The graphics are cool too.
A bad point is that I spotted at once several typos (though I'm a foreigner who speak badly english). I would have though that the Shrapnel component of the team would make a double check?
Not a big deal anyway.

Thank again Illwinter for this patch, and all the efforts you are putting into this game.

[ February 16, 2004, 20:56: Message edited by: Pocus ]

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
NT Jedi,

In the AD&D system, if the only enemy left on the battlefield were paralyzed, that enemy could simply be slain in the following combat round at the discretion of the victorious party. So I don't really see anything wrong with the fact that your pretender dies.
If you've paralzyed an Ancient Red Dragon for 50 turns while playing AD&D... it's not going to make any difference if you can't hurt him during those turns. That's what happened they could not hurt him and he was killed by the game... NOT the units attacking. Also he wasn't the pretender just one of my supercombatants.

Being killed by the game because time exceeded the limit is wrong. Either they need to fix paralyzation so it doesn't Last the entire battle or they need to fix the auto-kill all attackers after X amount of turns has passed.

===============

I agree with Norfleet and his example... paralyzation is definitely a problem. At the very least this auto-kill after X turns should be changed to auto-flee instead.

[ February 16, 2004, 21:01: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 11:01 PM

It's pretty easy to tell when a unit, especially an HoF unit, has been timekilled, too: A dead unit in the Hall of Fame has negative hitpoints denoting how heavily he was killed.

A timekilled unit, and maybe anything slain by an instant death spell, has some -9000 hitpoints....and there is nothing in the game which does that kind of damage normally.

Coffeedragon

February 16th, 2004, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:

* New theme for Arcoscephale, The Golden Era.
* Selectable number of starting provinces.
* Commander renaming.
* New battle afflictions.
* New weapon, Light Lance.
WOW!! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

One (relatively) small thing I�d really like to see in the next patch:

Dominion Overview Page. Shows all your choices made in the Create a God menu on one single page.

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 11:02 PM

Originally posted by Coffeedragon:
One (relatively) small thing I�d really like to see in the next patch:
One relatively small thing I'd *REALLY* like to see in the next patch is for it not to crash every time a combat occurs!

SurvivalistMerc

February 16th, 2004, 11:08 PM

NT Jedi,

Just so that we understand what we're discussing... In the AD&D combat system, your statement would be correct if the Red Dragon was somewhere that you could not reach him at all. For instance...he's across a river and you paralyzed him with paralyzation poison. You can't damage him because you can't reach him. Therefore, he's going to live.

In the AD&D system, you can automatically hit a paralyzed target, regardless of that target's AC. I realize that Dom 2 doesn't use that system and still makes you roll and get through protection. My hunch is that this is present due to the immobile pretenders who in effect start out unable to move yet magically active and must still be slain.

In the AD&D system, you also automatically damage the paralyzed target. It's either triple damage or in some places (some Versions of the game) you can just automatically slit the "helpless" target's throat...if it has a throat. Now...you have to be using a weapon that can affect the creature...and some creatures require magical weapons to hit them. If you don't have a magical weapon, you're not going to autokill a paralyzed creature that requires a magical weapon to hit.

Still, accounting for these intricacies, I think it would be imminently fair to allow the winning side to "autokill" helpless paralyzed targets on the Dominions battlefield. There is never that issue of whether you can physically reach the target. You always can. And no creature in Dom 2 is immune to normal weapons.

My proposed change is this: If you are helpless and don't have any defenders who aren't likewise helpless, you will be automatically killed if any opponent can reach you before the effect wears off. (This way if you're at the back of the battlefield and you're out 2 rounds you might be safe.) As a consequence of this proposed change, the "time out" factor wouldn't matter. Because your opponents wouldn't have to roll to hit you and sometimes miss. They would just automatically kill your SC due to his or her helpless condition.

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 11:19 PM

This would make the durability of an immobile pretender chassis completely irrelevant:

Since an immobile creature is ALWAYS "helpless", as it cannot move, dodge attacks, or strike enemies, wouldn't it always be killed instantly?

Furthermore, in D&D, AC is an overly abused measure of too many things. In Dominions II, it's much more clearly defined: Defense represents a unit's ability to dodge: When paralyzed, this falls to Zero, and enemies pretty much always hit him. Penetrating his protection rating, on the other hand, is an entirely different matter: A big chunk of rock may very well be nigh indestructible by your puny weapons, no matter how easy it is for you to strike. I believe protection value is penalized if you become paralyzed or surrounded, but sometimes, even that is not enough to allow a weak unit with a poor weapon to damage you.

And it still doesn't address the real threat of paralyzation...that of being stuck on a battlefield with similarly paralyzed opponents, unable to move or otherwise end this battle because everyone is stuck and paralyzation Lasts forever!

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 11:30 PM

SurvivalistMerc:

Even if those units from dominions or units from AD&D were doing triple damage it doesn't matter because the regenerating portion was so great the damage done is gone at the start of next turn. This is what was happening.

MY MAIN POINT:
As of right now it's NOT the units killing the supercombatants. The problem is that paralyzed units cannot flee and are then killed by the game. In Dominions_2 units are not making the kill... THE GAME is making the auto-kill. That is wrong.

[ February 16, 2004, 21:34: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

SurvivalistMerc

February 16th, 2004, 11:36 PM

NT Jedi,

I understand and accept your point. I agree that the time limit system currently in place has a "wrong" feel to it.

I would prefer an autokill of paralyzed and other "helpless" creatures who have no defenders and are in reach of any unit.

I will point out, however that the AD&D system does not use "protection" to reduce damage of successful hits. And...come to think about it...if someone is paralyzed the attackers probably ought to be able to do better than hack at the armored portions of the target....

My point: I agree with you that the mechanism by which the result is achieved is unsatisfying and that you have a right to be unhappy with the mechanism (time limit) by which the result is achieved. But I like and support the result, though I would achieve it by a different game mechanic. It seems that you have a problem with both the mechanic (time limit) and the result (supercombatant dies). Or am I wrong?

SurvivalistMerc

February 16th, 2004, 11:39 PM

Norfleet,

Under my proposed mechanic, merely being immobile would not make one "helpless" if one were a hunk of rock. The hunk of rock would not be considered "helpless" unless it were paralyzed or rendered incapable of casting any spells.

I suppose immobile hunks of rock with no magic skills would be considered "helpless" under my system. But I would count the defenders that are part of structures like most fortifications as defenders for purposes of saying that even these helpless units do have active, non-helpless defenders.

Does that sense?

Graeme Dice

February 16th, 2004, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
Under my proposed mechanic, merely being immobile would not make one "helpless" if one were a hunk of rock. The hunk of rock would not be considered "helpless" unless it were paralyzed or rendered incapable of casting any spells.The problem with autokilling someone who is paralyzed is that it makes paralysis as good of a spell as soulslay, for a smaller fatigue cost, easier casting, and one less research level.

I suppose immobile hunks of rock with no magic skills would be considered "helpless" under my system. But I would count the defenders that are part of structures like most fortifications as defenders for purposes of saying that even these helpless units do have active, non-helpless defenders.Why should something like a spellcasting Sphinx or a Colossal Stone Head be destroyed just because there's nobody standing in front of it when a soulless punches it once?

Norfleet

February 16th, 2004, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
But I would count the defenders that are part of structures like most fortifications as defenders for purposes of saying that even these helpless units do have active, non-helpless defenders.

Does that sense? Nope. I have no clue what you're going on about. Fact of the matter is, however, that Dominions II already *HAS* helplessness: A unit which is immobilized has a defense skill of 0, and is easily surrounded, which penalizes his protection.

Of course, I'm not quite sure how you would cut the throat of a rock, or how, exactly, doing that would really harm a golem....

There's just too many different, really weird creatures in Dom2 to simply declare an autokill. People should have to work for the kills.

Also, what if the paralyzed unit is protected by spells such that killing him would kill YOU? A fire-shielded and astral-shielded unit with a Phoenix Pyre is no pushover, even if you can simply walk up and stab him in the face....only to have him STUN YOU, BURN YOU, and EXPLODE IN YOUR FACE. And come back.

[ February 16, 2004, 21:49: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

NTJedi

February 16th, 2004, 11:55 PM

The problem with the game is that units which cannot flee are auto-killed. This is not a manuever or attack being done by units... the game does an auto-kill. That's wrong.

For my case these were weak units which clearly lacked the weapons and power to permanently wound my regenerating Tartarian Cyclops(size-6). It would be like someone asking you to destroy a 20-foot bronze statue with a fork... and the statue regenerates.

Just because a unit is paralyzed doesn't mean the unit should be auto-killed. Sure it can be more vunerable... but I'm quite certain even in AD&D low level characters with ordinary weapons wouldn't be able to kill a paralyzed Ancient Red Dragon.

=========
Norfleet and Graeme Dice also have excellent points.

[ February 16, 2004, 22:01: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

Norfleet

February 17th, 2004, 12:02 AM

Originally posted by NTJedi:
Just because a unit is paralyzed doesn't mean the unit should be auto-killed. Sure it can be more vunerable... but I'm quite certain even in AD&D low level characters with ordinary weapons wouldn't be able to kill a paralyzed Ancient Red Dragon.Well, a dragon, yeah: You could stab it in the eyes and try to gouge out its brains. Try killing a golem with a fork, or chopping down the mightiest tree in the forest with....a herring!

[ February 16, 2004, 22:03: Message edited by: Norfleet ]

Zapmeister

February 17th, 2004, 01:13 AM

One relatively small thing I'd *REALLY* like to see in the next patch is for it not to crash every time a combat occurs! How bad is this problem? Should existing games upgrade, or will they grind to a halt if they do?

Norfleet

February 17th, 2004, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
How bad is this problem? Should existing games upgrade, or will they grind to a halt if they do? I've found it to be pretty bad: Nearly every time a combat starts, the game will lock up during turn generation, at least on the Windows Version. I wonder if this has anything to do with the new improvements to the combat AI?

johan osterman

February 17th, 2004, 01:45 AM

Send your .trn file and serial key to support@illwinter.com.

Note: If you have a cracked cd key this could cause similar problems.

Kristoffer O

February 17th, 2004, 01:47 AM

None of the betatesters have had this problem, nor anyone of us.

josh_f

February 17th, 2004, 01:52 AM

I don't know if any one has mentioned this yet, but on the OS X Version of Golden Era Arcos, if you try and look at the the priestess' stats the game quits without an error. Also the icarids (?) are mooses.

Johan K

February 17th, 2004, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by josh_f:
if you try and look at the the priestess' stats the game quits without an error. Also the icarids (?) are mooses. Moosies... now how did they get into arcoscephale? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Could you start the game from a terminal window and post what it says when it crashes on the priestess info.

Pillin

February 17th, 2004, 02:55 AM

The whole discussion on paralyzation is just.. silly. Your paralyzed unit is only lost if thats you attacking and you dont win. So basicly what happens, is that the province gets together for a big party. Where they either build a fire around you and burn you, or simply chisle away at you untill your a pile of ruble. See, no need to discuss that anymore. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Edit: spelling (yeah its still bad)

[ February 17, 2004, 01:18: Message edited by: Pillin ]

josh_f

February 17th, 2004, 03:49 AM

Originally posted by Johan K:
QUOTE]Moosies... now how did they get into arcoscephale? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif Could you start the game from a terminal window and post what it says when it crashes on the priestess info. [/QB]N?got gick fel!
sprnbr too high for this file
N?got gick fel!
sprnbr too high for this file
Abort trap

hope this helps

Aikamun

February 17th, 2004, 04:14 AM

I agree with Pillin. Auto-death of the paralyzed works fine. All of my provincial defenses have been well-trained in the elimination and disposal of battlefield detritus. After all, they have a whole month to do the deed. And the death was caused by an opposing unit after all (not self-paralyzed).

Aikamun

[ February 17, 2004, 02:18: Message edited by: Aikamun ]

Arryn

February 17th, 2004, 04:18 AM

Originally posted by Pillin:
Edit: spelling (yeah its still bad) Well, aren't Vikings more noted for pillaging (and bawdry ballads) than scholarship? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Pillin

February 17th, 2004, 04:39 AM

Thats actually a common missconseption. The vikings where mostly peacefull traders, farmers and craftsmen. There where occasional times when they would go "on viking" as they called it, but this was really a minor part of the culture.

This however is reaaaly offtopic so lets not discuss it further http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

NTJedi

February 17th, 2004, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by Pillin:
The whole discussion on paralyzation is just.. silly. Your paralyzed unit is only lost if thats you attacking and you dont win. So basicly what happens, is that the province gets together for a big party. Where they either build a fire around you and burn you, or simply chisle away at you untill your a pile of ruble. See, no need to discuss that anymore. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Edit: spelling (yeah its still bad) That was the most far-fetched and bizarre response I have seen. Considering that 95% of the province defense was killed in the battle... leaving only citizens/farmers...
the regenerating powers of the Tartarian Cyclops(size 6) would easily keep him alive from their sticks and stones. Most of the citizens/farmers would also be too afraid to approach him since he also carried 'cause fear +2' .
He had items which gave him his regeneration and other enhancements.

When the game auto-kills a unit just because X amount of turns passed... that's just wrong.

The fix we need is to remove the auto-kill and replace it with auto-flee. OR
Change/Adjust Paralyzation OR
Change the Last turns of battle so units can wake up and properly flee.

velk

February 17th, 2004, 08:42 AM

The optional coup de grace rule for AD&D is just for conveniences sake in fights - do you really want to have to roll 40 attack rounds against an immobile opponent when the outcome is inevitable ?

Use of it is tempered by GM common sense though. Having some level 1 mage melee a tarrasque to death with a scrollcase in one combat round because he paralyzed it is so inherently ludicrous that only an idiot GM would go with that outcome.

It's like saying a guy with a hammer wins a fight with mount everest because it can't fight back.

Johan K

February 17th, 2004, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by josh_f:
N?got gick fel!
sprnbr too high for this file
N?got gick fel!
sprnbr too high for this file
Abort trap
Thank you! Now could you also check the size of your army8.trs and res.trs files in bytes. They are located in dominions2.app/Contents/Resources.

SurvivalistMerc

February 17th, 2004, 04:31 PM

Velk,
I agree that the optional coup de grace rules in AD&D should be tempered with common sense. Of course, the mage might just have a dagger with him...that's a common purchase for L1 magi. And the AD&D golems required magical weapons to hit, which of course I addressed in a prior post. You are correct...the golem would not be slain without magical weapons even if it were paralyzed. Of course, let's remember that NT Jedi's example was that of a red dragon.

The explanations offered by Pillin and Aikamun make sense to me. Because let's face it...thousands of folks in the province. Even if they run away in fear a few times, they can always come back the next day and help some more. After all, it is a whole month.

Norfleet,
Most units have better weapons than forks or herrings. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif And I would count all the units able to reach the creature in question after it becomes helpless with no defenders. Not just those still around at turn 50.

NT Jedi,
Even folks who take your side in this discussion of what should happen to paralyzed supercombatants...some of these folks side with me on the red dragon issue. They could gouge out its eyes or slit its throat. Keep in mind that level of experience (unless magical items are present) doesn't have anything to do with the damage done per attack in AD&D, though it may increase the number of attacks you receive per combat round.
The devs have decided to kill these paralyzed creatures, and I agree with them. Paralyze should be less effective now, which I'm sure will make you a bit happier with regard to the survivability of your supercombatants.

Norfleet,
I don't think the present rules truly account for "helplessness." Protection still remains, in my opinion, too effective a counter to blows once one is paralyzed. And I think you know how effective protection is in this game. If your protection is significantly greater than your opponents' damage plus strength, you will rarely take damage. While that makes sense before you are paralyzed, I think it makes less sense, except possibly in the case of immobile hunks of rock, once you are helpless with no defenders. Defense skill of zero isn't really sufficient to model helplessness. Because the helpless creature's armor can be removed...it can't prevent that. The magical accourtrements can likewise be removed...it can't prevent that. And small chinks in spell protection could also be removed or dispelled by skilled magi. (One thing we don't have in Dom 2 that I think would be neat is a form of "dispel magic.")
You have a point with regard to the protection spells which damage attackers. And my answer that they are countered may not prove satisfactory to you because there is no such counter in the game mechanics. Of course...what is possible once one is helpless with regard to enchantments should be different than what is possible if one is hale and moving about the battlefield.

Graeme Dice,
Paralyzation under this system does not become as good as soul slay. The autokill does not go into effect until the unit is helpless and without any defenders whatsoever. Soul slay can slay units even if defenders are present on the battlefield. For paralysis to be as effective, the side using the paralysis must win the battle. Soul slay will kill units even without winning the battle. I view that difference as significant.

The unit itself counts. You specified a spellcasting sphinx. My scenario would not say that a spellcasting sphinx is helpless unless it were paralyzed or otherwise rendered helpless. If they don't move from their fortresses, as in patch 2.08, then choosing a fortress with defenders would render the sphinx always non-helpless. Same goes for the head. However, if a soulless has a month to rip apart a helpless sphinx...well, that soulless must have undead leadership or it wouldn't be on the battlefield at all. So the soulless and its undead leader slowly manage to chip away at the head of the sphinx, not sleeping because they are undead and require no sleep, over a period of an entire Calendar month, thereby expelling the vile spirit that inhabited the sphinx into the void.

Pillin

February 17th, 2004, 04:40 PM

Now your just beeing stubborn NTJedi, do you really think there are noone in a whole province that can kill your splendid... um statue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Your protection spells wont Last all that long after the battle and then its just a simple matter of putting you off a cliff or something.

josh_f

February 17th, 2004, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by Johan K:
Thank you! Now could you also check the size of your army8.trs and res.trs files in bytes. They are located in dominions2.app/Contents/Resources. army8.trs 292 KB
res.trs 76.KB

I also redownloaded the patch to no affect.

[ February 17, 2004, 15:58: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

fahdiz

February 17th, 2004, 05:43 PM

I know the answer to this question is always "When it's done", http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif but I am curious if there is any estimated timeline on the Utgard fix, and whether it will wait for patch 2.09 or be released in a "mini-patch" (2.08a, for example) just to address that one issue.

Thanks for reading and for all the GREAT changes and improvements in 2.08; I know you Illwinter folk are as busy as a one-legged man in an arse-kicking contest.

NTJedi

February 17th, 2004, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by Pillin:
Now your just beeing stubborn NTJedi, do you really think there are noone in a whole province that can kill your splendid... um statue http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Your protection spells wont Last all that long after the battle and then its just a simple matter of putting you off a cliff or something. Again another bizarre response.

First they werent spells... they were items... so yeah it would Last. Second the 'cause fear' was from death magic and the helm means very few citizen/farmers would be brave enough to attack/move the paralyzed titan especialy since they don't know how long before he will wake up!!

Pillin the citizen munchkins are farmers and citizens not fighters.
AND what about the provinces which have ZERO population... that BLOWS your theory dead too.

==========
SurvivalistMerc I was always under the impression Ancient Red Dragons could only be harmed by magical weapons... so a knife or sword in the eye would not cause any harm.
The devs have decided to kill these paralyzed creatures because they needed a way to stop combat from being stuck in a forever loop. The solution used: Auto-kill all units after X amount of turns is wrong. The unit should be allowed to wake-up and flee... not die .

[ February 17, 2004, 18:12: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

SurvivalistMerc

February 17th, 2004, 08:55 PM

NT Jedi,

Under the original rules through I believe the first AD&D revision, magical weapons were not necessary to harm Ancient red dragons.

After Gygax left TSR, the company has continually re-published numerous rules for AD&D. And I have stopped buying the newer publications. Your original point was that you played numerous TBS, RPG, and other games and you were not aware of any other situation in which paralyzation meant death. I have shown you one. I do not speak of any of the "new" rules more than a few years after Gygax's departure because I consider most of those to just be rewriting the rules for purposes of selling additional rulebooks and making more money by doing so...the game was perfectly good in its original rendition judging from its popularity at the time. (I don't intend to get into a discussion of what Version of AD&D you prefer...all of the old AD&D players will confirm that you didn't need magical weapons to kill the original dragons.)

My mechanism of death does not rely on farmers. And even under current rules, if you can defeat or cause the retreat of all opponents by turn 50 then you will win the battle.

I like the fact that paralyze works to effectively counter supercombatants. Something has to. If you take away paralyze, much of the game will come down to duels of supercombatants.

NTJedi

February 17th, 2004, 09:07 PM

The problem is specifically that :
the game auto-kills units after X amount of turns during combat. That is wrong.

Paralyzation is just an effect which causes this to happen. Its one of the variables involved.

Any one of the three variables can be changed to fix this design flaw.

Taqwus

February 17th, 2004, 09:16 PM

Items can be removed, spells wear off, and fear is not nearly as powerful as NT Jedi seems to think it is; it takes even militia quite a while to figure out that poking at the Doom Horror isn't the best idea, and Doom Horrors are a lot more fearful than a mere +2.

SurvivalistMerc

February 17th, 2004, 09:19 PM

NT Jedi,

I actually agree with you that it is unsatisfying to have creatures autokilled after 50 turns. I've had that happen to perfectly functional units that were still attacking at the end of turn 50, still very much alive and kicking. Zap! You're dead! You didn't finish the combat in time!

I still think that the lack of instant protection reductions for "defenseless," paralyzed creatures with no allies on the field of battle is a design flaw. And I'm not sure that you necessarily disagree with me, though you do seem to object to the death of paralyzed SCs.

So that we're actually addressing the other person's concerns in the situation, let me ask you this: What do you think the most detrimental yet fair thing would be that would most likely cause the death of a "defenseless" paralyzed supercombatant? We are talking about a supercombatant...let's leave aside what kind for the moment...which is paralyzed and has no allies on the field of battle either on the ground or associated with any defensive structure.

I can see removal of items that provide defensive shields, including charcoal shields. Because the paralyzed SC can't keep the other unit from taking it out of his hands. The act of removing the item would remove its protections. Can you agree that this might occur?

Let us assume for the moment that the devs would agree not to autokill attackers on the field of battle after turn 50.

Arryn

February 17th, 2004, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
Because the paralyzed SC can't keep the other unit from taking it out of his hands. The act of removing the item would remove its protections. Can you agree that this might occur?Not quite correct. Spells like Fire Shield or Astral Shield may well prevent what you propose. Your argument, while having merit, also has holes. You may want to consider some other rationale to use versus NTJedi ... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

NTJedi

February 17th, 2004, 09:40 PM

Originally posted by Taqwus:
Items can be removed, spells wear off, and fear is not nearly as powerful as NT Jedi seems to think it is; it takes even militia quite a while to figure out that poking at the Doom Horror isn't the best idea, and Doom Horrors are a lot more fearful than a mere +2. TRY removing a ring of regeneration from a paralyzed golem which has a clenched fist. Is not going to happen especially when the units lack the ability to do the necessary damage.

Second... militia are among the weakest military units... but they are still military. Citizens and farmers have a fraction of the military training and bravery to approach a size_6 Titan. Why should a farmer risk his life when he doesn't even know when the paralyzation is going to wear off. Also the scenario doesn't work for provinces with ZERO population.

[ February 17, 2004, 19:52: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

NTJedi

February 17th, 2004, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
NT Jedi,

I actually agree with you that it is unsatisfying to have creatures autokilled after 50 turns. I've had that happen to perfectly functional units that were still attacking at the end of turn 50, still very much alive and kicking. Zap! You're dead! You didn't finish the combat in time!
Yes this needs to be fixed.

What do you think the most detrimental yet fair thing would be that would most likely cause the death of a "defenseless" paralyzed supercombatant?
It all depends on the supercombatant... even a paralyzed supercombatant should be allowed to live if the attackers were all unable to do any permanent damage. Some units are immune to all elemental attacks, some don't have souls, some lack any blood and some are purely moving&attacking because of magic.

Example: Using the new AD&D rules... an Ancient Red Dragon wouldn't be dying from level_2 fighters with regular weapons.

I can see removal of items that provide defensive shields, including charcoal shields. Because the paralyzed SC can't keep the other unit from taking it out of his hands. The act of removing the item would remove its protections. Can you agree that this might occur?

Let us assume for the moment that the devs would agree not to autokill attackers on the field of battle after turn 50. The act of removing the item cannot always be done. The clenched fist of a golem wearing a ring of regeneration. A fire shield held against the chest of the paralyzed titan. These cannot be removed without some form of attack.
And what about scenarios where after the battle which has paralyzation wear off before the fire_shield & astral_shield.

[ February 17, 2004, 20:02: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

SurvivalistMerc

February 17th, 2004, 10:22 PM

NT Jedi,

In Dominions, there are no creatures which require magical weapons to hit them. You may argue that high protection is functionally equivalent to this. But there are some very mundane units with protection of 24 or so (ulm black knights).

Using the open d6 system, there isn't a single situation in which you can categorically say that "x unit" is incapable of doing permanent damage to "y unit."

You say that it depends on the supercombatant. Ok. Care to list a few SCs and describe to me what you feel would be the most detrimental yet fair disadvantages that they should face in the situation in which the SC is paralyzed AND there are no unparalyzed allies to protect the SC such that it is utterly "helpless?" I notice that other than saying that it depends on the SC you really didn't give an answer to this question.

I have always assumed that paralyzed units fall down. Why is it that you don't think a titan's shield could be taken without some form of attack? Why do you think that fists remain clenched when there is no muscle activity due to paralysis? (I concede you might have a point with regard to magically animated creatures...they would likely retain their posture prior to paralysis unless they were knocked down or something.) Of course, if your golem held a weapon, then it wouldn't have its fist clenched so as to keep and protect the regen ring, would it?

I suppose I have always assumed that a mage on the only side with non-helpless troops would assure that the astral and fire shields were removed prior to the expiration of paralyzation.

Taqwus

February 17th, 2004, 10:27 PM

...not to mention that a paralyzed Titan should die of asphyxiation rather rapidly, as would most living units. That would make Illithids and even Dispossessed Spirits rather nasty, however.

Graeme Dice

February 17th, 2004, 11:19 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
You say that it depends on the supercombatant. Ok. Care to list a few SCs and describe to me what you feel would be the most detrimental yet fair disadvantages that they should face in the situation in which the SC is paralyzed AND there are no unparalyzed allies to protect the SC such that it is utterly "helpless?" I notice that other than saying that it depends on the SC you really didn't give an answer to this question.I don't think they should have _any_ disadvantages beyond those already obtained by being unable to move. They can't avoid being hit, and are likely to have their armour pierced. If they have significant natural protection then they should still experience the benefits of it. Their magic items should continue to function as normal, etc. The opposing army should be forced to attempt to kill them through whatever means they have available until the paralyzed unit regains mental control and continues to attack or flee as the situation warrants.

I suppose I have always assumed that a mage on the only side with non-helpless troops would assure that the astral and fire shields were removed prior to the expiration of paralyzation.This assumes that you have a mage with the capability to do such a thing on the battlefield.

Graeme Dice

February 17th, 2004, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by Taqwus:
...not to mention that a paralyzed Titan should die of asphyxiation rather rapidly, as would most living units. That would make Illithids and even Dispossessed Spirits rather nasty, however. Paralysis is defined by the spell to be mentally overloading the victim, not shutting down all bodily functions.

Graeme Dice

February 17th, 2004, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
The unit itself counts. You specified a spellcasting sphinx. My scenario would not say that a spellcasting sphinx is helpless unless it were paralyzed or otherwise rendered helpless.Why is the sphinx more helpless when paralyzed than when not paralyzed? It's still just a hunk of rock. If the military units can't damage it during a battle while it's not responding, then it will wake up soon enough and start spellcasting again.

However, if a soulless has a month to rip apart a helpless sphinx...well, that soulless must have undead leadership or it wouldn't be on the battlefield at all. So the soulless and its undead leader slowly manage to chip away at the head of the sphinx, not sleeping because they are undead and require no sleep, over a period of an entire Calendar month, thereby expelling the vile spirit that inhabited the sphinx into the void.They don't have a month though. They have only as long as it takes for the statue to wake up. And no matter how much it pounds away at a piece of rock, a soulless isn't going to damage it more than superficially with its fists. Especially when it's a piece of rock that automatically rebuilds itself within a months time.

Kristoffer O

February 17th, 2004, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by josh_f:
army8.trs 292 KB
res.trs 76.KB
I also redownloaded the patch to no affect. Seems correct. These files were in the full dominions.app not the patch one right?

Has anyone else tried the OS X patch and if so what was your result?

Saber Cherry

February 17th, 2004, 11:45 PM

I'm surprised that nobody has a fix-mod for the Utgard theme yet. I have been kinda out of contact since I am currently on vacation, but I'll fixe the Seithkona and put it in the bugfix mod later today, and post to indicate when it is done.

-Cherry

NTJedi

February 18th, 2004, 12:37 AM

Graeme Dice has perfectly answered questions during my lunch hour.

I will answer a few questions too:

by SurvivalistMerc
I have always assumed that paralyzed units fall down. Why is it that you don't think a titan's shield could be taken without some form of attack?
The key is that there are so many different types of creatures. Not all creatures would respond the same when paralyzed. How does a sphinx fall down?? How does a Fire Elemental fall down?? Lets say the titan does fall down and fell down lying on top of his fire_shield or ring thus still equipped giving the abilities... how does this artifact get removed when the units are all human size?
It would take serious time moving that Titan and by then the paralyzation could have easily worn off if there's no units to continue his paralyzation. And how could your suggestion be accomplished when the province population is Zero and only 3 spirits remained on the battlefield??

by SurvivalistMerc
Why do you think that fists remain clenched when there is no muscle activity due to paralysis?
you answered this yourself... I could provide other examples if you wish.

======================
Graeme Dice answered all other questions perfectly. All I can say is Ditto.

Xavier

February 18th, 2004, 12:49 AM

Saber Cherry:
I'm surprised that nobody has a fix-mod for the Utgard theme yet. I have been kinda out of contact since I am currently on vacation, but I'll fixe the Seithkona and put it in the bugfix mod later today, and post to indicate when it is done.What should those of us who are playing MP games that have a Jotun Utgard player do (not necessarily a question for Cherry)? We can't use a quickfix mod....

Arryn

February 18th, 2004, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by Xavier:
What should those of us who are playing MP games that have a Jotun Utgard player do (not necessarily a question for Cherry)? We can't use a quickfix mod.... Pretty much the same as those of us doing AARs: sticking with 2.06 until 2.09 is released.

josh_f

February 18th, 2004, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
Seems correct. These files were in the full dominions.app not the patch one right?
[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure I follow what your asking. I copied the files from the patch to the full dominions.app. I also tried the same files from the PPC linux patch with the same result. If I get time I'll try reinstalling.

Pillin

February 18th, 2004, 04:05 AM

When the battle ends the battlefield is cleaned by an army of garden gnomes. They run around zapping anything thats not supposed to be there with they're wands of disintegration (ignores mr).

And btw, since I havent had any military training (ok I've had, but lets ignore that for now) then I cant be brave?

velk

February 18th, 2004, 04:20 AM

Originally posted by Pillin:
The explanations offered by Pillin and Aikamun make sense to me. Because let's face it...thousands of folks in the province. Even if they run away in fear a few times, they can always come back the next day and help some more. After all, it is a whole month. I think the crucial thing you have missed here is that the unit in question isn't going to be paraylzed for a month, they are going to recover a few minutes afterwards.

Unless, of course, you assume that any given province ( including defense 0, population 0 ones ) automatically contains a number of astral magic using farmers who will proceed to cast paralyze ( and never get resisted ) every 30 rounds for the rest of the month 8)

Anyway, it's veering off topic somewhat. Does anyone think that the following is unreasonable :
If both sides are fully routed AND both sides cannot move AND they are not immobile AND the turn limit expires they should both automatically rout rather than automatically die.

Zapmeister

February 18th, 2004, 04:36 AM

I'm not sure what what is meant by:
If both sides are fully routed ... they should both automatically rout ... In any event, considerations of "realism" (whatever that means in a fantasy game) take a back seat to more pragmatic concerns, like ensuring that the hosting terminates.

The auto-die code is in there to ensure that no combat can get "stuck" for reasons involving Paralyze or other reasons not foreseen, and I for one don't particularly care whether or not it can be rationalized in game terms.

February 18th, 2004, 04:58 AM

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
I'm surprised that nobody has a fix-mod for the Utgard theme yet. I have been kinda out of contact since I am currently on vacation, but I'll fixe the Seithkona and put it in the bugfix mod later today, and post to indicate when it is done.

-Cherry You can't change the Utgard theme. You can fix the Seithkona, but you can't fix the fact that they have a smouldercone AFAIK since you are unable to modify a theme, only the base nation.

I have a mod with fixed Seithkona, but either I am to dense to figure it out, or it isn't possible to just modify the Utgard theme.

Saber Cherry

February 18th, 2004, 07:27 AM

I see. I was going to fix Seithkona, but I guess the problems run deeper... I'll wait around a bit. Hard for me to access a computer anyway.

Zurai

February 18th, 2004, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
The auto-die code is in there to ensure that no combat can get "stuck" for reasons involving Paralyze or other reasons not foreseen, and I for one don't particularly care whether or not it can be rationalized in game terms. But why auto-die and not auto-rout? Why not just end the battle with both sides having "fled the field" so to speak? That's how every other TBS I can think of where this situation is possible handles it.

PDF

February 18th, 2004, 11:15 AM

Originally posted by Zen:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
I'm surprised that nobody has a fix-mod for the Utgard theme yet. I have been kinda out of contact since I am currently on vacation, but I'll fixe the Seithkona and put it in the bugfix mod later today, and post to indicate when it is done.

-Cherry You can't change the Utgard theme. You can fix the Seithkona, but you can't fix the fact that they have a smouldercone AFAIK since you are unable to modify a theme, only the base nation.

I have a mod with fixed Seithkona, but either I am to dense to figure it out, or it isn't possible to just modify the Utgard theme. <hr /></blockquote>Are you sure ? I mean that the problem seems to lie with the Utgard Seithkona UNIT, that should have an ID and be moddable independently of whether it's used in a theme or not .
Or does the bug lies elsewhere - ie the unit is fine but stg screw it when it's used by Utgard Jotunheim ?

Johan K

February 18th, 2004, 01:57 PM

Originally posted by josh_f:

I'm not sure I follow what your asking. I copied the files from the patch to the full dominions.app. That sounds like the way to go. Could you do a
ls -l dominions2.app/Contents/Resources and a
ls -l dominions2.app/Contents/MacOS
and mail me the result to johan at illwinter.com.

Tricon

February 18th, 2004, 04:12 PM

On a side note: was something done to the archery AI? Since the 2.08 patch the archers "let go" of their assigned targets as soon as they rout to attack enemy archers and/or rearmost enemy.

For the life of me I think they didn't use to do that with such persistance prior 2.08.
On the other hand, maybe I did not pay that much attention to archers/xbowmen prior to the Last few games.

Anyway, if this is new, I really, really like it. If it's been there - and I was just blind, well, I'm sory to steal your time, guys.

SurvivalistMerc

February 18th, 2004, 04:19 PM

Graeme Dice,

Any unit capable of fighting back in any way currently, or which currently has defenders of any kind isn't "helpless." If the sphinx has astral magic and the knowledge to cast soul slay or paralyze itself...that doesn't even as a practical matter look helpless to me. Any unit that can't fight back either magically or physically is helpless if it has no one else to fight for it. Or does that not make sense?

If there is an astral mage capable of casting paralyze, they probably do have a month. How many additional castings of paralysis can occur during the 30-40 turns that it will take the sphinx to become unparalyzed? And how soon will the sphinx acquire such an affliction, like feebleminded, as to effectively be unable to fight back in any way? In almost all of these paralyzed victim situations, the astral mage remains on the battlefield.

I'm not sure if you understand what paralysis of the voluntary muscles will do. It will not keep a fist clenched unless we're discussing something that is principally animated by magic like a golem. So I do think I answered the question myself...but not in the way you'd like me to have answered it. Keeping a fist clenched requires muscle activity...not only that but it requires continued signals sent by the motor cortex and also by the spinal cord. Without these impulses, the hand relaxes and opens. I will concede that a hunk of rock or a golem wouldn't likely react similarly to paralysis.

NT Jedi,

You think that a charcoal shield would still be effective and count as equipped if a unit falls down on top of it and it faces the ground? Sure...he's touching the shield...but it doesn't appear to be equipped to me.

I'll concede that fire elementals and sphinxes probably don't "fall down." I should have been a bit more specific...voluntary muscle contraction, if such existed before, in the legs of the paralyzed creature ceases. This will cause most creatures to fall down.

Velk,

The astral mage is usually still around. Therefore, I do not need to make your assumption. Paralyze can be cast a large number of times during the 40 turns or so that a creature will be paralyzed. And odds are that it won't be resisted before it extends the paralysis another 40 turns or so....

In your hypothetical, I think the attacker should rout and go to an adjacent friendly province if such exists whereas the defender should stay put.
Both sides routed
Both sides can't move
Both sides not immobile
Turn limit expires

Zapmeister,

I think Velk is referring to situations in which both armies rout yet there are paralyzed units still on the field of battle. These units are unable to rout with the remainder of their armies when turn 50 happens.

NTJedi

February 18th, 2004, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
NT Jedi,

You think that a charcoal shield would still be effective and count as equipped if a unit falls down on top of it and it faces the ground? Sure...he's touching the shield...but it doesn't appear to be equipped to me.
Weapons do not fall off from paralyzation and neither do shields... thus the items are equipped during and after paralyzation. So even an immobile unit which has fell would still have the shield or weapon equipped. Otherwise an entire battle round would have been placed into the game for units recovering from paralyzation as they would need to equip their items again.
Why wouldn't the shield still be equipped... it's still wrapped on his arm and the unit is just lying on the ground??
If you've ever seen or used a shield before you'd see that simply falling down would not unequip most shields.

I'll concede that fire elementals and sphinxes probably don't "fall down." I should have been a bit more specific...voluntary muscle contraction, if such existed before, in the legs of the paralyzed creature ceases. This will cause most creatures to fall down.


What makes you think the paralyzation would cause units to fall down?? There are several different types of paralzation. A unit which has been magically paralyzed may become as stiff as a board. What happens to the skelleton commanders they don't use any muscles to begin with... why should they fall?? In many many games the effects of paralyzation does not cause the units to fall down. And with this game there are no settings or views or signs specifically indicating 'fallen unit'.

[ February 18, 2004, 15:05: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

SurvivalistMerc

February 18th, 2004, 06:50 PM

NT Jedi,

Weapons and shields don't have to "fall off" to cease providing some of their benefits. Surely a shield is not benefitting you as a shield if you are lying on top of it. And if it's not benefitting you as a shield, perhaps its magical powers are also not operating.

Rather than requiring an entire battle round to re-equip items, why not just assume that this time is included and factored into the "duration" of the paralysis?

I have both seen and used shields. And there is not a single one that I think would be of much use to someone who has fallen down and can't move a muscle.

There is nothing in the paralyzation spell description to indicate that you "stiffen up" when paralyzed. In fact, such a "stiffened up" condition would not typically be called paralysis...at least not in English.

Why would you fall down? Because muscular activity...in the voluntary muscles...is required to keep standing.

Surely, given the nature of graphics in Dom 2, you will not conclude that the absence of graphics in which one is lying down is not dispositive on the issue. Graphics aren't exactly a forte of this game, and I don't even want to think about the time the poor devs would have to spend to create lying down graphics for all units. Surely you will concede that most non-magical units do sleep periodically, even though there are no lying down figurines on the overland map.

Arryn

February 18th, 2004, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
{snip long post}I think you've missed NT's point. The magical properties of the shield would still be operative regardless of whether the wearer cannot actually use the shield as a shield, so long as the shield is in contact with the wearer. So a commander that has literally fallen upon his shield would still get the magical benefits of the shield (fire auras, etc.)

You assert that unless the owner of the shield is awake and able to hold the shield properly that the shield's magics won't work. There is no basis for such an argument. The magics are "always-on". Whether permanently after forging, or turned on by some form of command, they'd remain "on" thereafter. Otherwise, by your logic, the wearer would have to keep concentrating on the shield's magic for it to work, which would make fighting or casting sort of impossible.

Endoperez

February 18th, 2004, 07:07 PM

Petrification is an AoE paralyzation, isn't it? Statues stand even without muscular activity...

Anyway, this discussion has gotten little out of hand. Maybe you could move it away from the patch thread? It is interesting to follow, though, and atleast I would be interested to see how it ends (if it ends). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

licker

February 18th, 2004, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
{snip long post}I think you've missed NT's point. The magical properties of the shield would still be operative regardless of whether the wearer cannot actually use the shield as a shield, so long as the shield is in contact with the wearer. So a commander that has literally fallen upon his shield would still get the magical benefits of the shield (fire auras, etc.)

You assert that unless the owner of the shield is awake and able to hold the shield properly that the shield's magics won't work. There is no basis for such an argument. The magics are "always-on". Whether permanently after forging, or turned on by some form of command, they'd remain "on" thereafter. Otherwise, by your logic, the wearer would have to keep concentrating on the shield's magic for it to work, which would make fighting or casting sort of impossible. <hr /></blockquote>Heh, wow, this entire debate has moved to the realm of pointlessness... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Both sides have valid rationalizations for their take on this situation, neither will win any converts from the other, so drop it, move back to game mechanics and effects on gameplay and drop all the useless rationalizations, they are as pointless as they are meaningless in the context of tactical combat as modeled in Dom2.

It may be entertaining to continue your debate, but don't delude yourselves that it should have any bearing on changes (or lack thereof) in the tac model. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

atul

February 18th, 2004, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by Arryn:
The magical properties of the shield would still be operative regardless of whether the wearer cannot actually use the shield as a shield, so long as the shield is in contact with the wearer. Does this apply also to shields with description saying explicitly that those effects appear when someone strikes the shield, for example charcoal shield? A bit many variables you guys are having here if you all insist on putting all imaginable real-life (physics, physique, etc) and fantasy (magic) mechanics into play. Probably hard to agree on anything...

Oh, my mental image of paralyzation spell varies somewhere between old D&D 'hold' spell and epileptic seizure. So it would be possible to get all kinds of nice effects (like spell victims randomly hurting themselves http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif ). Um, it's a game, so if something bugs, saying that really it is like this might not be the best option to sway anyone...

Have to second Endoperez, on both points. Namely putting conversation perhaps to another thread and that it'd be interesting to see how it ends.

NTJedi

February 18th, 2004, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
NT Jedi,

Weapons and shields don't have to "fall off" to cease providing some of their benefits. Surely a shield is not benefitting you as a shield if you are lying on top of it. And if it's not benefitting you as a shield, perhaps its magical powers are also not operating.
The way this game works... if the magic shield is equipped the unit gets the benefits from the shield. AS this game works paralyzed units DO NOT lose the powers of equipped items. That's the way this game works.

Rather than requiring an entire battle round to re-equip items, why not just assume that this time is included and factored into the "duration" of the paralysis?
Because a unit unequipped is not completely helpless or paralyzed... OBVIOUSLY a Titan is still very deadly even if he is unequipped.

I have both seen and used shields. And there is not a single one that I think would be of much use to someone who has fallen down and can't move a muscle.
The game has already included where paralyzed units are more vunerable so that's in the game. However these are magical shields... and paralyzed units do not lose their magical enchantments in this game when paralyzed... thus the items are still equipped.

There is nothing in the paralyzation spell description to indicate that you "stiffen up" when paralyzed. In fact, such a "stiffened up" condition would not typically be called paralysis...at least not in English.
Again as I said early there are many different types of paralyzation and there is nothing in the description of paralyzation which indicates units fall down either.

Why would you fall down? Because muscular activity...in the voluntary muscles...is required to keep standing.
AGAIN... NOT all units can fall down... fire elementals... sphinx... etc... THUS don't go believing it always happens. And as I said before there are DIFFERENT types of paralyzation. Again there have been many other games where paralyzation does NOT cause units to fall down.

Surely, given the nature of graphics in Dom 2, you will not conclude that the absence of graphics in which one is lying down is not dispositive on the issue. Surely you will concede that most non-magical units do sleep periodically, even though there are no lying down figurines on the overland map. [/QB]Doesn't have to be graphics added into the battlefield.

[ February 18, 2004, 17:37: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

NTJedi

February 18th, 2004, 07:51 PM

SurvivalistMerc... you seem to be gravely mistaken in believing that paralyzation will automatically cause units to fall and become unconcious... that's incorrect.

Paralyzation has different types... take a look at description#2 from dictionary.com which lists one example: Paralyzed by Fear

Perhaps those spirits are causing this type of Paralyzation.

[ February 18, 2004, 17:52: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

PhilD

February 18th, 2004, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by PDF:
Are you sure ? I mean that the problem seems to lie with the Utgard Seithkona UNIT, that should have an ID and be moddable independently of whether it's used in a theme or not .
Or does the bug lies elsewhere - ie the unit is fine but stg screw it when it's used by Utgard Jotunheim ? The Utgard theme in 2.08 apparently has a Smouldercone (Abysia site) instead of whatever it should have. Since you cannot mod themes, or sites, whatever you do, Utgard will get a Smouldercone. You can mod the Seithkona, I suppose, but unless you mod the Lava Warrior and Warlock, Utgard will have Abysian units; and if you do, Abysia will lose them. Or anyway, that's how I understand things (I haven't tried to do any modding).

BTW, for the authors of the (IMHO) useless AD&D/rationalization sub-thread: you're getting nowhere, and basically polluting an otherwise useful thread about the patch... if you could take this to another thread, or to PM, that would be nice...

Graeme Dice

February 18th, 2004, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
Any unit capable of fighting back in any way currently, or which currently has defenders of any kind isn't "helpless." If the sphinx has astral magic and the knowledge to cast soul slay or paralyze itself...that doesn't even as a practical matter look helpless to me. Any unit that can't fight back either magically or physically is helpless if it has no one else to fight for it. Or does that not make sense?Why is the sphinx vulnerable to instant destruction when its mind is shut down, but not whne its mind is active? The physical structure doesn't suddenly fall apart, so there's no reason for it for it to be more susceptible to being hit or killed.

If there is an astral mage capable of casting paralyze, they probably do have a month. How many additional castings of paralysis can occur during the 30-40 turns that it will take the sphinx to become unparalyzed?Once he becomes unconscious he has one casting every 4 turns. With a les than 5% success rate on paralyze with a decent MR on the Sphinx, it's not that likely that he will stay paralyzed for the whole month.

And how soon will the sphinx acquire such an affliction, like feebleminded, as to effectively be unable to fight back in any way? In almost all of these paralyzed victim situations, the astral mage remains on the battlefield.Why should it matter if the sphinx can effectively cast spells? It still is difficult to physically destroy even without a mind.

February 18th, 2004, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by PDF:
Are you sure ? I mean that the problem seems to lie with the Utgard Seithkona UNIT, that should have an ID and be moddable independently of whether it's used in a theme or not .
Or does the bug lies elsewhere - ie the unit is fine but stg screw it when it's used by Utgard Jotunheim ? I have tested the Mod and the Seithkona work, but in my 2.08. Utgard has a starting site Smouldercone instead of the Well of Urd. Now while Ironic, it also makes the Theme lose their Norna and Seithkona are regulated to a Unit not a Commander. The Theme also gets Vaetti (for whatever reason) and Demonbred, Warlock and Apprentices, Lava Warriors.

So unless there is a way to modify the beginning site given to a theme (not nation) with the current tools, then I can't fix it as of right now. Which if someone says you can, I'd love to fix it, as at current there are a few games that are in limbo because of it.

PhilD

February 18th, 2004, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Zen:

So unless there is a way to modify the beginning site given to a theme (not nation) with the current tools, then I can't fix it as of right now. Which if someone says you can, I'd love to fix it, as at current there are a few games that are in limbo because of it. You cannot mod a game in progress, right? So I don't think there's much you can do anyway for games that have already started - all you can do is not move them to 2.08. I'd suggest backing the game up before you host it into 2.08, too.

February 18th, 2004, 08:13 PM

It wasn't hosted in 2.08, it wasn't hosted at all actually. It was hosted in 2.06 before the patch was even applied to my system. So the only issue would be if somehow something snuck in there that is 2.08 and is messing with everything.

PhilD

February 18th, 2004, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by Zen:
It wasn't hosted in 2.08, it wasn't hosted at all actually. It was hosted in 2.06 before the patch was even applied to my system. So the only issue would be if somehow something snuck in there that is 2.08 and is messing with everything. Then I'd say you should make sure you back up everything before you host, then try to host with a 2.06 executable. If it crashes, that means someone submitted a turn with 2.08... and you can either ask them to resubmit with 2.06, and decide that the game will go on as 2.06, or make the change to 2.08. Unless you have an Utgard player, though, it should not matter much...

February 18th, 2004, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by PhilD:
]Then I'd say you should make sure you back up everything before you host, then try to host with a 2.06 executable. If it crashes, that means someone submitted a turn with 2.08... and you can either ask them to resubmit with 2.06, and decide that the game will go on as 2.06, or make the change to 2.08. Unless you have an Utgard player, though, it should not matter much... It won't even let you load it in 2.06 is the problem so that's what I'm trying to get it back to. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif Yes and we do have an Utgard player or it wouldn't be as much an issue. Thanks for your help though Philippe.

moodgiesanta

February 18th, 2004, 08:59 PM

It's amazing to me that people discuss things like this paralysis stuff about this game. It shows you how nice it really is, as opposed to a certain soul-crushing sequel which killed my love of space conquering strat games for a good 6 months until I got Gal. Civ. You know, where you were finding yourself on the forums saying, "Why does this game suck so much when the prior one was so awesome and who is Quicksilver anyway and why do I have to use a fan-patch two months after the game is released to get any measure of fun out of it?"

Anyway . . . I do have an on-topic query.

2.08 has the Utgard thing, I know, so I try to get around that by creating a god for Jotunheim that isn't Utgard, playing the race I want and Jotunheim as if it were a two player game, and then abandoning the Jotunheim to the computer at turn one. My issue is, what difficulty will the AI be for such a race that is abandoned midstream?

NTJedi

February 18th, 2004, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by velk:
Does anyone think that the following is unreasonable :
If both sides are fully routed AND both sides cannot move AND they are not immobile AND the turn limit expires they should both automatically rout rather than automatically die. This is completely correct

Units automatically being killed by the game is definitely a design flaw.

Saber Cherry

February 18th, 2004, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by moodgiesanta:
My issue is, what difficulty will the AI be for such a race that is abandoned midstream? I've always wondered that. However, a lot of the difficulty is decided by the race's design points... so turning a race into an AI cannot be truly any difficulty but "normal", though it will not necessarily be "normal" either.

Kristoffer O

February 19th, 2004, 12:07 AM

Originally posted by NTJedi:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by velk:
Does anyone think that the following is unreasonable :
If both sides are fully routed AND both sides cannot move AND they are not immobile AND the turn limit expires they should both automatically rout rather than automatically die. This is completely correct

Units automatically being killed by the game is definitely a design flaw. <hr /></blockquote>Some units cannot move nor rout. I do not think it is a design flaw that the game kills units instead of hangs. Imagine two life draining beasties fighting forever over their collective life force. These can rout, but others can't (Sphinxes for example).

Edit: strange example, but is happened in CoE where there is no routing.

[ February 18, 2004, 22:09: Message edited by: Kristoffer O ]

NTJedi

February 19th, 2004, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by Kristoffer O:
Some units cannot move nor rout. I do not think it is a design flaw that the game kills units instead of hangs. Imagine two life draining beasties fighting forever over their collective life force. These can rout, but others can't (Sphinxes for example).

Edit: strange example, but is happened in CoE where there is no routing. Having the game hang would be even a worse design flaw. But when a game automatically kills units on the battlefield because X amount of turns passed... that's wrong.
There is no explanation or reasoning for their death. {That's a design flaw}

Possible fixes:
units should be allowed to wake-up and properly flee from battle. (this will fix the issue for most units)
~OR~
instead of auto-kill... change it to auto-flee into friendly neighboring province. (this will fix the issue also)

[ February 18, 2004, 23:55: Message edited by: NTJedi ]

February 19th, 2004, 02:45 AM

I personally wouldn't call it a design flaw as much as it was a limitation of the engine. You have commonly called things design flaws in the past which were ignorance. Whereas I don't think the solution at current accurately describes some sort of fantasy game which there is no way to describe it would or wouldn't happen logically, but I would hardly call it a "design flaw".

Just the concept that they changed the engine so that the game wouldn't crash when such a stalemate happens means they have thought about it, and this is the solution they have used.

I'm sure you'd get much more of a positive of a reaction from the Dev's if you didn't try to point out everything as a flaw instead of a limitation.

Arryn

February 19th, 2004, 02:58 AM

Originally posted by Zen:
Just the concept that they changed the engine so that the game wouldn't crash when such a stalemate happens means they have thought about it, and this is the solution they have used.Whether what IW chose as the solution is a "flaw" depends on perspective, and it also depends on whether the very reasonable suggestion that's been made, namely that of auto-retreating into adjacent provinces, was considered by the devs at the time they decided to opt for auto-kill.

I do agree with you, though, that there are more tactful ways to approach the topic than what we've seen.

February 19th, 2004, 03:12 AM

Originally posted by Arryn:
Whether what IW chose as the solution is a "flaw" depends on perspective, and it also depends on whether the very reasonable suggestion that's been made, namely that of auto-retreating into adjacent provinces, was considered by the devs at the time they decided to opt for auto-kill.Well as Kris said, what happens with the immobile units and how are they supposed to Flee? Does that mean that they have to code things specifically for immobiles? And what about if it's in a Castle? Why would the defender flee if he's holding his castle in a titanic struggle? And does he die if he has nowhere to flee to?

There are more ramifications than just blanket ones, which have to be considered and considered for coding.

I'm not saying that something couldn't, wouldn't shouldn't be implemented, but it's hardly cut and dry.

[ February 19, 2004, 01:12: Message edited by: Zen ]

Arryn

February 19th, 2004, 03:22 AM

Zen, as usual you raise valid points. This time in regards to immobile pretenders. Personally, I feel it's silly to just assume that an immobile defender is killed after 50 rounds when the pretender and the intrinsic castle defenses (ie: ballistae, etc) are still alive.

EDIT: The problem comes in that if mobile pretenders auto-retreat, and immobile ones don't (perhaps auto-winning), then game balance goes right out the arrow slit.

[ February 19, 2004, 01:23: Message edited by: Arryn ]

Zapmeister

February 19th, 2004, 03:24 AM

Zen is spot on. The devs get to choose between the status quo, or opening a can of worms that will not leave the critics satisfied until every alleged "unrealistic" scenario is addressed.

If I were a developer in this position, I know which I'd choose. There are way more important issues to worry about.

Gateway103

February 19th, 2004, 04:26 AM

(humour)

Or you can just think that the Gods to whom the Wish spell is directed to are watching every battle as well as the development in whatever lands as "entertainment".

And they simply got bored after the 40-turn time limit and decided to will the combatants out of existence so as to relieve themselves of the boredom (additional "entertainment"). And to be impartial, they willed all sides into nothingness, so as not to favor anybody. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

(/humour)

-Gateway103

navrunner

February 19th, 2004, 05:15 AM

Was the "Automeele: molesting the dead" error fixed in this patch?
I guess there is actually two parts to this question:
1) Was the situation that caused this error fixed so that it will not occur with new, 2.08, games?
2) Or was the error fixed so that old, 2.06, games that got the error will no longer generate the error?
3) Yes, I cannot count http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif , the occurance of this error is low and is toward the bottom of the list?

PDF

February 19th, 2004, 03:19 PM

Why so many complicated solutions for the -simple- stalemate problem ?
I don't even see why the game has to kill anyone in order to stop stalemates.. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
Already battles are stopped on turn 50, the only needed change would be to consider that as a "retreat" for both sides (night falls, everyone tired...), with all spells effect "fastforwarded" to their end (so poison would kill, but paralyze would end)
This would give technically a defender victory, as the attacker wasn't able to beat him. That the 50 turns consisted entirely of arrow shooting or ineffective spell casting is not an issue ...

[ February 19, 2004, 13:20: Message edited by: PDF ]

SurvivalistMerc

February 19th, 2004, 05:23 PM

Arryn,

I like your new picture under your name, by the way...very creative. I don't actually assert that current game mechanics are inconsistent with your "always on" approach to magical items' effects. Merely that a possible rationale for my new proposed mechanic of death for the helpless paralyzed individual would be that the item has ceased to function. There are plenty of situations in which an item needs tobe weilded in order to function. I would argue that a paralyzed individual is incapable of weilding items which must be weilded to function.

NT Jedi,

I do not conclude that the unit is unconscious. Merely that he can become helpless if he has no defenders. Many types of paralyzing poisons do not render one unconscious unless they stop movement of the diaphragm, which will result in death. To the contrary, the paralyzed victim is aware of everything around him or her, can still feel, see, taste, etc. but can't move a muscle.

I don't understand the sort of immobile paralysis in Dom 2 to be "paralyzed by fear."

Really...paralysis should be whatever the devs have in mind for it. And I don't mean to say that I wouldn't defer to them by any of my discussions in this forum. Currently, paralyzed at the end of a battle means death for attackers. I find this to be the outcome I would desire. And it seems also to be the outcome the devs intend, but of course I won't know that unless they actually speak on the issue.

It's good that we both agree on Velk's proposal.

Graeme Dice,

The sphinx is immobile and, if the attacker, will die anyway at the end of turn 50 by the time out period. Also, sphinxes may no longer be able to become attackers post-patch, which I think removed teleporting sphinx abuse.

I take your point that the physical structure doesn't suddenly fall apart. But in the situation you describe the creature is unable to attack and can be attacked repeatedly for a period of a month without opportunity for reprisal. It's vulnerable in a different way because it is incapable of fighting back. When it can cast spells, you have to see what effect those spells will have on the other army. Once it can no longer cast, there is no longer any need to see what happens to the opposing army, just what happens to the sphinx.

Are you sure paralyze has a less than 5% success rate with a decent MR? That did not seem to be folks' experience pre-patch. I know the system is changed post the 2.08 patch, but are you certain of this number?

Moodgiesanta,

You are exactly right...if the game weren't so amazing, we wouldn't be having this paralysis discussion.

Kristoffer O,
Velk in his original example required that the units not be immobile for the retreat rather than a rout to occur. Not that you will necessarily agree with him, but he probably envisions, as I do, that an attacking sphinx, if that still happens after 2.08, would die rather than retreat after turn 50.

Zen,

I agree with you that limitation would be a better word. And it may in fact be what was meant but poorly articulated by those starting the paralysis discussion here.

Arryn,

Defenders would never have to auto-retreat. Because if the battle isn't resolved after turn 50, the defenders auto-win. Which I don't think should be changed. In your proposed solution (which I don't completely support), the only change would be allowing certain attackers to retreat rather than be auto-killed at the end of turn 50. Defenders would not need to retreat because they have "won." I still don't think the paralyzed ones should get to retreat, but that would be for the devs to decide.

Chris Byler,

What will prevent these horrors from attacking the defenders? Or will both sides be destroyed?

PDF,
The game still probably has to kill immobiles in order to stop stalemates when the immobile pretender is attacking. I'm still not so sure I like the paralyzed guys getting to retreat. But that may be my own bias that something has to be able to effectively kill supercombatants.

licker

February 19th, 2004, 05:31 PM

This is still going on? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Here's a new one for you...

Lets say that if a battle isn't finished by turn (whatever) that it is considered drawn, and that the forces will show up again *next turn* to battle again. All afflictions/conditions can be kept (or not) and all movement *out* of that province is disallowed, while movement in (consider it reinforcements) is allowed. That might be a pain to code, but as you can already have castle seiges (this is just a siege with forced combat...) some kind of code for two nations in the same province exists (of course what happens with more than 2 nations in the province... that's tricky...).

Anyway, another suggestion to the percieved problem (which I personally don't see as a problem, but well I'm trying to be helpful http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif )

Graeme Dice

February 19th, 2004, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
Are you sure paralyze has a less than 5% success rate with a decent MR? That did not seem to be folks' experience pre-patch. I know the system is changed post the 2.08 patch, but are you certain of this number?With a magic resist of 25, any given spell has about a 1% success rate with standard penetration. With high astral skill on the victim, the effective penetration will be reduced as well for all astral spells.

SurvivalistMerc

February 19th, 2004, 08:11 PM

licker,

I think that your proposal would favor supercombatants and would certainly be very kind to attacking sphinxes (if such still exist). Castle seiges aren't really forced battles...the attacking force can move away anytime it gets tire of the seige.

Graeme Dice,

If there's a less than 1% chance that you're going to fall victim to paralysis...why would you be too concerned if you to. It's still not as bad as the insta-death of soul slaw. And if the risk is that small...and you die...you exposed yourself to combat and got unlucky and died.

I heard somewhere that paralyze gets a bonus to penetration. At least that was what folks were saying when calling it the "SC killer" pre-patch 2.08. No idea whether that is still true or not since I haven't patched...too many stories of things going wrong.

Gandalf Parker

February 19th, 2004, 09:23 PM

My upgrade on one copy failed because the Command_Line_Switches file was the wrong Version. It was ver2.00
Wont that cause a problem for people who buy the game now and try to upgrade to ver 2.08?

OK deleting the switches file will let it upgrade. But I get no new switches file. Looks like I will need to grab the docs off of my linux Version (which updates alot more files than the Win Version).

Hmmm I dont see anythinga bout a preexec switch.

[ February 19, 2004, 20:07: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Graeme Dice

February 19th, 2004, 09:27 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
I heard somewhere that paralyze gets a bonus to penetration. At least that was what folks were saying when calling it the "SC killer" pre-patch 2.08. No idea whether that is still true or not since I haven't patched...too many stories of things going wrong. The reason it has a penetration bonus is that it's astra 2, so an astral 4 mage gets a bonus of 1, while you need an astral 5 mage for bonus penetration with soul slay. The other reason it was too effective is that it hit the target twice for every cast. As for upgrading to 2.08, the only problems I see are those with the Utgard theme.

SurvivalistMerc

February 19th, 2004, 10:48 PM

Graeme Dice,

There have also been stories of crashes during hosting. I have no idea how common they are or whether they are related to operating system.

dire

February 20th, 2004, 01:37 AM

>I don't know if any one has mentioned this yet,
>put on the OS X Version of Golden Era Arcos, if
>you try and look at the the priestess' stats
>the game quits without an error. Also the
>icarids (?) are mooses.

I dont have the OS X Version, but I was having the same problems in the windows Version (getting "sprnbr too high for this file" errors upon right clicking on certain units). I found out what was wrong - I had copied the old dominions directory (c:\games\dominions2) to a new directory (c:\games\dom2updated) so that I had both Versions for the two multiplayer games I'm in (one where the players wanted the game patched and one that wanted to wait for Jotunheim to be fixed). Originally I had two desktop shortcuts for dom2 that specified the ip address and port numbers in command line switches (so I dont have to type it in each time I play the two different games). What caused the error was that I went to the shortcut properties and changed "target" to the new "c:\games\dom2updated" directory but I forgot to change "start in" directory to the new directory. So the program must have been running the new executable but using the files in the old "c:\games\dominions2" directory. When I changed the "start in" directory to the correct one all problems disappeared.

[ February 19, 2004, 23:40: Message edited by: dire ]

Chris Byler

February 20th, 2004, 02:19 AM

Another nicely evil possibility for preventing stalemates without the forced, artificial feel of the current system: any battle over a certain length has an increasing chance of attracting the attention of Lammashtas, Horrors or other nasties, who will be glad to clean up the paralyzed or unconscious remnants. Both have armor piercing or negating attacks, IIRC, and can hit hard enough to overcome regeneration even on Gods (if the God is defenseless). The longer the battle drags on, the more unpleasant surprises are attracted to the battlefield... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif I don't think there's anything that could survive being surrounded by Doom Horrors while unconscious.

This would still usually have the same *practical* result as the current system (all the paralyzed/unconscious units are eliminated), but would be less likely to offend certain players - at least there's some rationale for the deaths. And it would look cool. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Edit: You might still want a hardcoded time limit to make *sure* the game doesn't hang in the hosting - but move it back another 20 or so turns after the horror attacks start, so that it will be almost impossible for the time limit to actually be triggered. The theoretical possibility won't bother players nearly as much as having it actually happen.

[ February 19, 2004, 12:21: Message edited by: Chris Byler ]

josh_f

February 20th, 2004, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by dire:
[snipped]
What caused the error was that I went to the shortcut properties and changed "target" to the new "c:\games\dom2updated" directory but I forgot to change "start in" directory to the new directory. So the program must have been running the new executable but using the files in the old "c:\games\dominions2" directory. When I changed the "start in" directory to the correct one all problems disappeared. [/QB]Bingo! The problem I had was basicly the same. I had renamed the .app dominions2.8 and had the old 2.6 Version in the same directory as "dominions2". I renamed the old one to dominionsold and renamed the new one as dominions2 and it worked no problems.

DimmurWyrd

February 20th, 2004, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by NTJedi:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Pillin:
The whole discussion on paralyzation is just.. silly. Your paralyzed unit is only lost if thats you attacking and you dont win. So basicly what happens, is that the province gets together for a big party. Where they either build a fire around you and burn you, or simply chisle away at you untill your a pile of ruble. See, no need to discuss that anymore. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Edit: spelling (yeah its still bad) That was the most far-fetched and bizarre response I have seen. Considering that 95% of the province defense was killed in the battle... leaving only citizens/farmers...
the regenerating powers of the Tartarian Cyclops(size 6) would easily keep him alive from their sticks and stones. Most of the citizens/farmers would also be too afraid to approach him since he also carried 'cause fear +2' .
He had items which gave him his regeneration and other enhancements.

When the game auto-kills a unit just because X amount of turns passed... that's just wrong.

The fix we need is to remove the auto-kill and replace it with auto-flee. OR
Change/Adjust Paralyzation OR
Change the Last turns of battle so units can wake up and properly flee. <hr /></blockquote>maybe the local thief snitched his regen item then a wandering herd of carnivorous cows came and chewed him up?

DimmurWyrd

February 20th, 2004, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
I'm not sure what what is meant by:
<blockquote>quote:<hr /> If both sides are fully routed ... they should both automatically rout ... In any event, considerations of "realism" (whatever that means in a fantasy game) take a back seat to more pragmatic concerns, like ensuring that the hosting terminates.

The auto-die code is in there to ensure that no combat can get "stuck" for reasons involving Paralyze or other reasons not foreseen, and I for one don't particularly care whether or not it can be rationalized in game terms. <hr /></blockquote>lol I like that http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

BTW realism has little to do with reality it's just a term describing a logical cause and effect system not a the same as reality system http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

oh, and it could easily end in a TIE with all attackers not dead at the end of combat routing... I would think that would be a preferred method. auto-kill is never a good thing to do just because you wanted to set an arbitrary limit to the number of combat rounds.

NTJedi

February 23rd, 2004, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by DimmurWyrd:
... and it could easily end in a TIE with all attackers not dead at the end of combat routing... I would think that would be a preferred method. auto-kill is never a good thing to do just because you wanted to set an arbitrary limit to the number of combat rounds. I completely agree... and allowing all units to auto-retreat at turn 51 shouldn't be that difficult to change. Simply change the auto-kill into auto-retreat.

SurvivalistMerc

February 23rd, 2004, 08:03 PM

I still like the auto-kill of paralyzed creatures if they're still paralyzed at the end of combat. But I concede that I may be biased against supercombatants. And paralyze-autokill is one of the few simple counters to the SC strategy.

I think I'm going to start a poll to let folks say what they think should happen to paralyzed creatures at turn 50.

Taqwus

February 23rd, 2004, 08:11 PM

Auto-retreat can also mean auto-death depending on what happened in neighboring provinces and how the attackers got there.
It would make a certain degree of sense to have a more detailed pursuit model comparing mobility, ranged firepower et al -- for instance, cases where one or both sides have flight available -- but the presence of magic really, really complicates things e.g. does a unit with intrinsic flight such as an Elemental Queen of Air have an advantage over a unit that could fly just because a handy air mage can cast Flight on it?

February 23rd, 2004, 08:30 PM

I believe a poll would do nothing, as the debate has degenerated. Maybe you should put up a poll on what you'd rather have the Dev's work on and let them make the categories.

SurvivalistMerc

February 23rd, 2004, 09:24 PM

Zen,

That's a good idea. Because we only have two overworked devs, and they can't do everything at once.

I did start the poll anyway. My main reason for that was that only a few of the folks on the board have participated in the discussion. The participants obviously aren't going to come to an agreement, but if there is widespread agreement in the community that what presently happens is functionally acceptable in the case of paralyzed units...then it doesn't really matter what a few folks say...whether I am on the majority or minority side of the argument.

You are right that the debate has degenerated. There don't appear to be new ideas or justifications on either side.

Your what should the devs work on next poll is really something the devs would have to start in order for them to make the categories.

Gandalf Parker

February 24th, 2004, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
That's a good idea. Because we only have two overworked devs, and they can't do everything at once.Im not completely sure but in this case we might be talking about ONE overworked Dev. Johan K seems to be most of the programming. Kristoffer O seems to do most of the artwork and designing things like new nations and units. Johan O is a brother and helps out alot (such as playing goalee here blocking player shots at the devs). There is porbably some overlap but certain things we want look like they end up in one lap or the other.

Osium

February 26th, 2004, 06:03 AM

I would be in favor of an auto retreat, however I don't see why both sides have to retreat. The explaination given to satisfy those who want such an explaination so as not to ruin their immersion is simple. The attackers see they are not winning, or that victory is not possible, being far from friendly lands and supplies it makes sense they would retreat home to rethink/plan a new invasion. The defence being in its home land has no need to retreat, they stay put.

Gandalf Parker

February 26th, 2004, 03:50 PM

That would make sense to me, and I think matches most games also. If it looks like there will not be a win in X rounds then it is usually the attacker which pulls back.

There is also a scripting ability for "5 actions then retreat" which should remain a useful function. An automatic end of combat should always be a less desireable choice than a scripted retreat (which I usually think of as "if the battle goes this long then pull back" type of comand)

[ February 26, 2004, 13:53: Message edited by: Gandalf Parker ]

Peter Ebbesen

February 26th, 2004, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Osium:
I would be in favor of an auto retreat, however I don't see why both sides have to retreat. The explaination given to satisfy those who want such an explaination so as not to ruin their immersion is simple. The attackers see they are not winning, or that victory is not possible, being far from friendly lands and supplies it makes sense they would retreat home to rethink/plan a new invasion. The defence being in its home land has no need to retreat, they stay put. Of course, it also happens when the attackers are winning, but the defenders (or at least one defender) have happened to hold out for 50 turns. In that case only a stupid attacker would retreat home to plan a new invasion rather than forcing the attack, as that would give the defender time to regroup. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

johan osterman

February 26th, 2004, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Gandalf Parker:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by SurvivalistMerc:
That's a good idea. Because we only have two overworked devs, and they can't do everything at once.Im not completely sure but in this case we might be talking about ONE overworked Dev. Johan K seems to be most of the programming. Kristoffer O seems to do most of the artwork and designing things like new nations and units. Johan O is a brother and helps out alot (such as playing goalee here blocking player shots at the devs). There is porbably some overlap but certain things we want look like they end up in one lap or the other. <hr /></blockquote>Thats basically true, any major coding related changes have to be made by JK. The kinds of changes people most often ask for are the kind of changes that usually ends up at JK's desk, and that no one else of us is capable of doing anything about.