.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Approaching Infinity- Save $7.00
War Plan Pacific- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening > Scenarios, Maps and Mods

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 20th, 2009, 06:58 PM
Ballbarian's Avatar

Ballbarian Ballbarian is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Kansas, USA
Posts: 1,538
Thanks: 289
Thanked 194 Times in 94 Posts
Ballbarian will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Ulm dull?! Maybe, but I still love them.
Looks great Burnsaber!
__________________
RanDom v2 - Map gen & Semirandomizer.
Province Editor - Custom province creation made easier.
God Editor - Custom pretender creation made easier.
Map Forge - Map editor
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old October 20th, 2009, 08:17 PM

alansmithee alansmithee is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 41
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 4 Posts
alansmithee is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Really great looking mod, I enjoyed it a lot. Couple of things though, I noticed Rune of Water takes earth, is that intentional? And also, Oathstones and the Anvil say mapmove1, but can't move. I don't think you intended them to move, so it might be more clear if you could switch it to 0/2 instead of 1/7 (not sure if you can or not, I haven't tried modding yet).

About the gameplay, I'm just finishing my first try with them. Large random map, rainbow mother sleeping w/ 3 order and 3 drain, 11 other mighty AI nations, now down to just me and Oceania. I personally finished 7 or 8 of the other nations. From very early play, it just seems to me that the nation is full of stuff that's really really good (prospectors, xbows, smiths, possibly ironbreakers and basic dwarf warriors) and stuff that, at least to me, just isn't that good or would never be recruited (pretty much everything else). I actually never got any ironbreakers in this game, but I can see the use of a recruitable troop that has high mr and all the resistances they do in MP. Slayers might have some niche use against giants or some large sacreds, but they're still gonna die insanely fast and there's not much you can do about that.

Both summonable commanders seem much to difficult to bring out, especially for what you get. The only ways to get the anvil require some combination of artifacts, a prophet, expensive empowering, or elemental staffs (under CBM, which I don't use but I know is common here). And for that you get a pretty good combat mage only available at castles, and another forger. To my knowledge you can't use travel spells to attack with a regular army, so all the cool runes will only be used in combination with astral travel (a lvl 9 spell) or in castle defense. I really think mapmove 1 wouldn't be all that bad (and they lug the anvils around in the tabletop game from battle to battle, so it's not entirely unthematic). And the demon slayer doesn't seem worth the gems, especially compared to golems. They die too quick, and giving even one weapon replaces both of their slayer axes. Getting luck is really cool, but I found it mildly difficult filling all the misc slots they get (outside of stacking bracers which i've heard some people consider an exploit). And for people who use CBM, I think using smiths with hero blades would be better in every way (to do what slayers seem designed to to). They'd survive longer, and don't require your prophet to cast a 20 gem ritual. Otherwise I'd rather just get 10 more gems, and cast a golem. Also, that doesn't require going outside of cons (which is a nobrainer for dwarves). So you'd get golems earlier, as well as them being better.

On the whole I think the nation is very balanced vs. other Warhammer nations (maybe not Brettonia, which imo is a bit weak) and the other base nations. The smith battle spells are all really good, and it was mentioned before but the prospector/xbow combo is wonderful and makes expansion early a breeze (and even though it was against AI, I rushed Mictlan and had them defeated by middle of second year using just prospectors, xbows, and 1 smith). The PD is also great, and helps in making them a nation that's a ***** to invade. I would maybe look into the summons a bit, either make them a bit better or easier to summon. And as much as I would personally hate it, mapmove 1 for the xbows might help make it more of a choice.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alansmithee For This Useful Post:
  #23  
Old October 21st, 2009, 01:23 AM

kianduatha kianduatha is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 403
Thanks: 15
Thanked 28 Times in 21 Posts
kianduatha is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

2 mapmove on just the heavy clansdwarfs and arbalesters(well, and slayers and rangers) could be interesting. I can't help but think that I would only every use those units then.

It also seems weird that Dwarf Arbalests are noted for being hard to aim but have Precision 3, while Dwarven Rangers are noted for the precision on their axes but then have Precision -2.

I'd be way happier with Daemon slayers if they took fire gems to call out instead. And Alteration is fine for Distill Flame/Thunder, but it would make them used way more often if they were research level 3 instead of 4. That way you can almost justify going for it right after Earth Meld if you're going that route instead of Evo early.

As far as using up miscellaneous slots, let me make it even harder: Slayers of any type only need one item--the slave matrix. Dwarves are perfect for reverse communions. You get invulnerability, summon earthpower, quicken self, mirror image, body ethereal, and flight, plus 100% resistance of anything you would want. Oh, and your entire army gets berserk, haste, and strength since each communion member will cast Rune of Grimnir. This allows you to use your crazy magic paths without running into fatigue problems from your high casting encumbrance. Oh, and it's really thematic to have a few runelords just chanting over your slayer elites before launching them into battle. With a bit of setup, you have nearly invincible thugs for 4 gems apiece. You can even swap in some really mean surprises in there for the nasty fights, like Fire Shield, Astral Shield and my personal favorite, Breath of Winter. They'll never expect it. And even just prospectors would be terrifying like that. Sure, it takes some setup--but it allows you to leverage your low random magic paths and forging bonus to terrifying effect.

It seems kinda weird that Dragon Slayers and Daemon Slayers are so similar. I mean, Daemon slayers get, what, a few more hp and some slightly higher stats?
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to kianduatha For This Useful Post:
  #24  
Old October 21st, 2009, 02:43 PM
Burnsaber's Avatar

Burnsaber Burnsaber is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
Burnsaber is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
It also seems weird that Dwarf Arbalests are noted for being hard to aim but have Precision 3, while Dwarven Rangers are noted for the precision on their axes but then have Precision -2.
The Arbalest thing is my fault. What I meant to say was that they are hard to aim without special training, I'll change it to be clearer. And Dwarf Ranger throwing axes are pretty accurate when compared to basic throwing axes (prec -5). Remember that the distance is much shorter, so prec >0 would likely make hit all the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
As far as using up miscellaneous slots, let me make it even harder: Slayers of any type only need one item--the slave matrix. Dwarves are perfect for reverse communions. You get invulnerability, summon earthpower, quicken self, mirror image, body ethereal, and flight, plus 100% resistance of anything you would want. Oh, and your entire army gets berserk, haste, and strength since each communion member will cast Rune of Grimnir. This allows you to use your crazy magic paths without running into fatigue problems from your high casting encumbrance. Oh, and it's really thematic to have a few runelords just chanting over your slayer elites before launching them into battle. With a bit of setup, you have nearly invincible thugs for 4 gems apiece. You can even swap in some really mean surprises in there for the nasty fights, like Fire Shield, Astral Shield and my personal favorite, Breath of Winter. They'll never expect it. And even just prospectors would be terrifying like that. Sure, it takes some setup--but it allows you to leverage your low random magic paths and forging bonus to terrifying effect.
Sounds pretty awesome. But wouldn't casting Rune of Grimnir make your communion leaders berserk too?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
It seems kinda weird that Dragon Slayers and Daemon Slayers are so similar. I mean, Daemon slayers get, what, a few more hp and some slightly higher stats?
Working on it. I'll likely give them the "Slaying" weapon as a intristic bonus weapon.


On other news, the sudden appearance of the #castleprod command gave me a pretty good way to get more thematic feel for the nation. I was thinking of making dwarfs build "Mountain Citadel" (cost 1200, admin 20, build 5, def 800) everywhere and give the nation a hefty #castleprod bonus. This would be thematic. When dwarfs build forts they are meant to last, cost a lot and take time to build, but the results are good. Basically, you would have less forts, but the ones you have do more. This would likely make prospector spam less attractive (tighter commander slots) and reduce the "invicible forts" aspect. It's easier to go against 3 very well defended forts than 5 well defended ones. Yeah, it's a lot like Itza's Tel Cities, but not as extreme (no 800gp temples).
__________________
I have now officially moved to the Dom3mods forums and do not actively use this account any more. You can stll contact me by PM's, since my account gives e-mail notifications on such occasions.

If you need to ask something about modding, you can contact me here.

See this thread for the latest info concerning my mods.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old October 21st, 2009, 03:12 PM
Stavis_L's Avatar

Stavis_L Stavis_L is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 466
Thanks: 35
Thanked 95 Times in 60 Posts
Stavis_L is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burnsaber View Post
On other news, the sudden appearance of the #castleprod command gave me a pretty good way to get more thematic feel for the nation. I was thinking of making dwarfs build "Mountain Citadel" (cost 1200, admin 20, build 5, def 800) everywhere and give the nation a hefty #castleprod bonus. This would be thematic. When dwarfs build forts they are meant to last, cost a lot and take time to build, but the results are good. Basically, you would have less forts, but the ones you have do more. This would likely make prospector spam less attractive (tighter commander slots) and reduce the "invicible forts" aspect. It's easier to go against 3 very well defended forts than 5 well defended ones. Yeah, it's a lot like Itza's Tel Cities, but not as extreme (no 800gp temples).
Hrm...I'm not sure how I'd feel about *all* mountain citadels...don't they imply that you have a mountain to build on?? Maybe hills, but mountains?

Also - note that Mountain City is not much worse in defense (700 vs. 800 def) but has other characteristics that might make it a good alternate (6 vs. 5 turns, 1400 vs. 1200 gold, 30 vs. 20 admin) so may be be appropriate in the right circumstances, perhaps as capital....

Perhaps something like:

Fortresses
Capital: Mountain City
Swamp: Hill Fortress
Farm: Citadel
Forest: Hill Fortress
Mountain: Mountain Citadel
Default: Mountain Citadel
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old October 21st, 2009, 06:00 PM
Fantomen's Avatar

Fantomen Fantomen is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Me a viking
Posts: 1,012
Thanks: 78
Thanked 122 Times in 73 Posts
Fantomen is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

I like the idea of a big castle production bonus, but that means all forts need to be expensive or it might get overpowered. In the example above you could exploit the hill forts in swamp and forest for example. Better to have swamp fortress and forest citadel. Other than that I like stavis suggested list.

Too bad you can´t assign the prodbonus only to one fort type to encourage the player to build in mountains.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old October 21st, 2009, 07:37 PM

Trumanator Trumanator is offline
BANNED USER
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Tacoma WA, USA
Posts: 1,314
Thanks: 103
Thanked 72 Times in 50 Posts
Trumanator is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Would cave forts be conscionable? They seem very thematic for dwarves, and I just love auto darkness in forts
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old October 21st, 2009, 10:48 PM

kianduatha kianduatha is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 403
Thanks: 15
Thanked 28 Times in 21 Posts
kianduatha is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

I'm somewhat confused; I thought the thematic business *was* getting a fairly high percentage(30+) of non-caster national commanders. It seemed pretty intentional; The castles were amazingly good(not too expensive, high admin, high defense), while it took a lot of gold to recruit casters. In fact, it took as much gold to make a castle+lab+temple as it took to make 2 castles without them. To add to that, the ridiculous resource cost of your troops makes it so that each individual castle cannot produce many troops. So of course you would make as many castles as possible, but some of those would not even have labs in them.

This results in two things: A higher ratio of commanders to troops(and way fewer troops, total), and more national non-caster commanders. Both of those seem very 'dwarfish'.

What would increasing castle cost/time while increasing the resources you get from them do? It would 1. increase the proportion of mage commanders(bad). 2. It would increase the 'real cost' of lightly equipped thugs(bad). 3. It would encourage the use of indy commanders for troop ferrying/carrying crossbows(bad).

I'm just not seeing it.

On another note, the Clan King is worth it if you actually turn him Oathsworn(the extra magic resist and runic ward really help), but it's just so hard to justify using him like that when you know he's absolutely useless to you after that battle. Maybe if Oathsworn Kings could actually...do something. Summon allies, priest 2 and inquisitor, an 'increase order/prod in this province' special(I think there is one of those, right?). Something that would make him marginally useful even after laying down the stone.

Oh, and taking a look at Hammers again: I think the main reason I wouldn't purchase a Hammer is that Rangers do their job better. For 2/3 the gold, you get more or less the same damage(-1 attack, -1 damage), a bit lower defenses, but mapmove 2(!!), stealth, and a ranged weapon(!!). Hammers are still nice, I mean, they just need a comparatively lower cost. Maybe 25.

I was going to say something about the Engineer, but when I was testing him my game seemed to crash every time I took him into combat. I'm gonna restart my computer and try testing some more, but has anyone else seen this?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old October 21st, 2009, 11:07 PM
Stavis_L's Avatar

Stavis_L Stavis_L is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 466
Thanks: 35
Thanked 95 Times in 60 Posts
Stavis_L is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantomen View Post
I like the idea of a big castle production bonus, but that means all forts need to be expensive or it might get overpowered. In the example above you could exploit the hill forts in swamp and forest for example. Better to have swamp fortress and forest citadel. Other than that I like stavis suggested list.

Too bad you can´t assign the prodbonus only to one fort type to encourage the player to build in mountains.
Just to be clear, I was suggesting the Hill Fortress, which is 10 admin, 150 supply, 5 build turns, 1200 gold, and 600 defense. Not the Hillfort, which is 5 admin, 100 supply, 3 months, 800 gold, 200 defense.

There is no Swamp Fortress; there is a Swamp City (50 admin, 1000 supply, 5 months, 1200 gold, 400 defense) and a Swamp Fort (0 admin, 100 supply, 3 months, 800 gold, and 100 defense.) The latter are basically mage pumps, so I'd avoid them for dwarfs, and choosing the former would make it your highest admin fort.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old October 22nd, 2009, 03:31 AM
Burnsaber's Avatar

Burnsaber Burnsaber is offline
Colonel
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,617
Thanks: 179
Thanked 304 Times in 123 Posts
Burnsaber is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Warhammer Dwarfs, balancetest version 0.6

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trumanator View Post
Would cave forts be conscionable? They seem very thematic for dwarves, and I just love auto darkness in forts
I was under the impression that Cave Forts are bugged. Besides, auto darkness would just aggravate the "invicible forts" issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
I'm somewhat confused; I thought the thematic business *was* getting a fairly high percentage(30+) of non-caster national commanders. It seemed pretty intentional; The castles were amazingly good(not too expensive, high admin, high defense), while it took a lot of gold to recruit casters. In fact, it took as much gold to make a castle+lab+temple as it took to make 2 castles without them. To add to that, the ridiculous resource cost of your troops makes it so that each individual castle cannot produce many troops. So of course you would make as many castles as possible, but some of those would not even have labs in them.

This results in two things: A higher ratio of commanders to troops(and way fewer troops, total), and more national non-caster commanders. Both of those seem very 'dwarfish'.

What would increasing castle cost/time while increasing the resources you get from them do? It would 1. increase the proportion of mage commanders(bad). 2. It would increase the 'real cost' of lightly equipped thugs(bad). 3. It would encourage the use of indy commanders for troop ferrying/carrying crossbows(bad).
Well, my original vison was to have expensive forts, because looking at how the dwarfs do it in Warhammer, it's the way they do things. The current "Citadel" things was just a compromise, because I needed high admin forts. But the sudden appearance of the #castleprod command allows me to circumvent the importance of admin value. (damn I wish we had fort modding). Dwarfs in WH have like 6 major forts, in which most of the dwarf race live, they don't really have towns and castles spread out all over the place like humans. It's all about big communities, which is why massable forts are unthematic. Remember that dwarfs are supposed to be few in number and fewer forts reflect this.

The change will also help to differentiate the nation from Ulm, gameplay-wise.

It's a shame about the non-magic commanders seeing less use, but that's just how Dom3 works. I'll try to counteract this by giving minor researchbonus on Runesmiths (so that you'll need less of them) and boosting the non-magic commanders. I'll also give a new national spell "Restoration of Ancient Glory" which will pop up a fort to a mountain province.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
On another note, the Clan King is worth it if you actually turn him Oathsworn(the extra magic resist and runic ward really help), but it's just so hard to justify using him like that when you know he's absolutely useless to you after that battle. Maybe if Oathsworn Kings could actually...do something. Summon allies, priest 2 and inquisitor, an 'increase order/prod in this province' special(I think there is one of those, right?). Something that would make him marginally useful even after laying down the stone.
Good idea. It was my intetnion of giving the Oathstone forms patrolbonus and minor summon commands, but I kind of forgot it. I'll whip something up for the 0.7

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
Oh, and taking a look at Hammers again: I think the main reason I wouldn't purchase a Hammer is that Rangers do their job better. For 2/3 the gold, you get more or less the same damage(-1 attack, -1 damage), a bit lower defenses, but mapmove 2(!!), stealth, and a ranged weapon(!!). Hammers are still nice, I mean, they just need a comparatively lower cost. Maybe 25.
Good point, I'll try to keep them competitve when comapred to rangers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kianduatha View Post
I was going to say something about the Engineer, but when I was testing him my game seemed to crash every time I took him into combat. I'm gonna restart my computer and try testing some more, but has anyone else seen this?
The attacksprite might be bugged, I'll take a look at it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
dwarf, warhammer

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2018, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.