I dont understand Serpent Cataphracts

E. Albright · #1 April 29th, 2004, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pocus:
(how do you say 'mauvaise foi' en anglais, Jacques? ).

Assuming that this question was not rhetorical (which it probably was), the phrase is transparent: 'bad faith'.

Jasper · #2 April 29th, 2004, 05:35 PM

I agree with NGF that the Cataphracts aren't so bad. Compared to Man's Knights they have a bunch of minor drawbacks: 2 points less Armor and Morale, a point less defense, only a light lance, and reptillian. Their bite is much better than a Knights hoof, plus they'll fight riderless.

Still, they are weak enough that I have never used them, and I could see them improved a bit, e.g. +2 morale and less resource cost. I don't think they need to be among the better HC however, as pythium has plenty of strength elsewhere.

Note that with the addition of light lances in 2.11, they are better than they were in Dom 1.

Nagot Gick Fel · #3 April 29th, 2004, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by E. Albright:

quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
(how do you say 'mauvaise foi' en anglais, Jacques? ).

Assuming that this question was not rhetorical (which it probably was), the phrase is transparent: 'bad faith'.

'Mauvaise foi' is used in French to describe the behavior of someone who firmly supports a belief or point of view in a discussion, while thinking otherwise and not willing to admit it. I've seen an English translation some time ago, but I don't think it was 'bad faith'.

Daynarr · #4 April 29th, 2004, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
You do keep the lizard for the Serpent cult Version.

Last time I checked they would disappear after the battle. Maybe it has changed in Last few Versions?

Graeme Dice · #5 April 29th, 2004, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daynarr:
Last time I checked they would disappear after the battle. Maybe it has changed in Last few Versions?

I had a riderless serpent in my army in the low magic serpent cult game I'm playing, so it seems to be the case now.

magnate · #6 April 29th, 2004, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nagot Gick Fel:

quote:
Originally posted by E. Albright:

quote:
Originally posted by Pocus:
(how do you say 'mauvaise foi' en anglais, Jacques? ).

Assuming that this question was not rhetorical (which it probably was), the phrase is transparent: 'bad faith'.
'Mauvaise foi' is used in French to describe the behavior of someone who firmly supports a belief or point of view in a discussion, while thinking otherwise and not willing to admit it. I've seen an English translation some time ago, but I don't think it was 'bad faith'.

Devil's advocate?

Nagot Gick Fel · #7 April 29th, 2004, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by magnate:
Devil's advocate?

Not quite. You can play the Devil's advocate and still admit it - then 'avocat du diable' would be used in French, which is a litteral translation without any pejorative meaning. When you say about someone, he is 'de mauvaise foi', it's a rather negative judgement: you mean he acts insincerely, and is trying to misguide others (as well as himself, sometimes). Eg, usenet trolls are often 'de mauvaise foi'.

Or could it be that 'Devils' advocate' is used in both cases in English?

[Edit: it seems Babelfish translates 'de mauvaise foi' as 'insincerely']

[ April 29, 2004, 18:36: Message edited by: Nagot Gick Fel ]