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

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > Illwinter Game Design > Dominions 3: The Awakening

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old August 18th, 2007, 02:59 PM

PyroStock PyroStock is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 138
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
PyroStock is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Quote:
There is a definite need for more wraparound maps.
Quote:
Yes, please More wrap arounds.
Quote:
I'd love to see "wraparound" as a random map feature.
This.

//I haven't tried Caelum yet.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old August 18th, 2007, 03:03 PM

Kuritza Kuritza is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 651
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Kuritza is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Its weak.

Troops are just bad. Archers are ok, though not stellar (shortbows). Infantry is crap. Mammoths are good, but lategame they are quite counterable. No reliable meat shield.
Mages - not stellar. High seraphs are ok with thunderstrike, but regular seraphs are so-so, even when orb lighting is researched. Lightning doesnt even reliably kill 1 regular unit anymore, quickness doesnt allow to shoot them twice per turn, etc etc.
Raiding - who said raiding?.. Decent flying infantry troops have movement 2 (not 3), take hellish amount of time to amass and dont fight that well. In fact, they die rather easily and rout all the time. And due to the fact they arent stealthy they are also vulnerable to teleporting and cloud trapezing responses, as well as global spells.
Magic paths diversity - poor. Just 2 paths, both inefficient against SC's and thugs. Also, Caelum has difficulties equipping SCs and thugs itself. There are no AOE lightning weapons, and cold AOE doesnt hurt undead, constructs etc.

So, bad troops, average mages, little sound lategame strategies I can think of. I'd rate Caelum as one of the worst nations atm.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old August 18th, 2007, 03:41 PM
Aethyr's Avatar

Aethyr Aethyr is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 729
Thanks: 66
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Aethyr is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Although I don't agree with Kuritza, I think Caelum is not as powerful as it was in DOM2, and that making the High S. capitol only is not the way to go.

On the other hand, while I'd be concerned about making them too powerful, I've always wondered, thematicaly, why they don't have a blessable unit that flys...
__________________
Power is an illusion...
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old August 18th, 2007, 03:50 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

MA Caelum is not as weak as you make it out to be, it is true it doesn't have all that many possible angles in the early game, but what options it does have are very powerful. And it's true they can be screwed later on if they fail to diversify, but that's true of almost everyone.

The thing about raiding with Caelum is you really do have to just about ignore the flying infantry. Build your raid groups instead out of mages and archers, with decoy archers spread around. 20-30 archers and 1-2 mages properly deployed can deal with most reasonable PD.

They also have a lot of other little bonuses, virtual immunity to unrest from spies, extra points from cold 3, a mage with a forge bonus, flying scouts, ashema spentas for late game.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:37 PM

Sir_Dr_D Sir_Dr_D is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 566
Thanks: 8
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Sir_Dr_D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

It sounds to me like the infantry need to get fixed up. Giving them +4 defence might do it. You want them powerfull enough so that they don't get killed so easy, but still weaker then other infantry. The slight weakness would be made up for by flying.

I have never played caelum in multiplayer, but if I did I would want to use the flying infantry.That is what is supposed to make Caelum unique. If Instead of using flying units you are forced to use mammoths, then a lot of the appeal of that nation is gone.

Personally from a themantic percpective I think that the high seraph should be capital only, flying infantry made stronger, and mammoths made slower.Mammoths should not be feared as much as elephants. They should be a strategic option that is handy at times, such as Pythiums Hydra, and not the only viable strategy.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:42 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

+4 defense doesn't make a lot of sense by itself, you have to ask where it is coming from. If it's to represent the fact they fly, it would have to be added to every flying unit, most of which are already among the best in the game.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old August 18th, 2007, 06:56 PM

Sir_Dr_D Sir_Dr_D is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 566
Thanks: 8
Thanked 9 Times in 7 Posts
Sir_Dr_D is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

The +4 defense can be attributed to combination of being able to fly, of have extra brid like agility, and having gone through extensive training on how to make use of their agility and do hit and run tactics. Other flyers simpl;y woudn't have that same agility and training.

I see caelum ifantry as being very good at staying out of harms way until they see a momment to strike. I don't see units like draconians, angels or devils doing that.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:16 PM

quantum_mechani quantum_mechani is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 2,968
Thanks: 24
Thanked 221 Times in 46 Posts
quantum_mechani is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

Quote:
Sir_Dr_D said:
The +4 defense can be attributed to combination of being able to fly, of have extra brid like agility, and having gone through extensive training on how to make use of their agility and do hit and run tactics. Other flyers simpl;y woudn't have that same agility and training.

I see caelum ifantry as being very good at staying out of harms way until they see a momment to strike. I don't see units like draconians, angels or devils doing that.
Well, that's well and good, but I know from working with IW that they don't generally like just tweaking troop stats like that. It would pretty much have to fall into the catagory of a cross the board racial ability, extra training (which would mean higher gold cost) and a good reason why even the lowliest soldiers have it, or a some kind of equipment bonus.

And to be honest, I'm not sure 4 more defense would be enough to tempt me on most of the infantry anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:31 PM

Saint_Dude Saint_Dude is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 236
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Saint_Dude is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

The stats for the Caelum infantry are not great to begin with, but flight just makes them suck.

They rush into battle where they are exposed to concentrated fire. They fatigue out very rapidly, making their sup-par stats simply abysmal. And when they inevitably take the heavy losses that they have coming to them, they fly away. Which means if you are playing Caelum and win a battle with an army that included infantry in its ranks, you are likely to be without any infantry for a follow up assault. You are constantly having to go back and round the cowardly infantry from all surrounding friendly provs.

The elite Caelum infantry make descent bodyguards, but that is about it.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old August 18th, 2007, 07:40 PM

Kuritza Kuritza is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 651
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
Kuritza is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Opinions on Caelum (MA and other)

How about another land-based infantry unit for Caelum? Not as defenseless as Wingless, not as resource-heavy as sacreds. Paul Anderson described such unit in the War or the Wing Men, when that trader convinced the Wing Men that controlling the ground is just as important as controlling the skies.
Some bulky non-ice armor that prevents flying (and can be mass-produced), like standard chainmail or scale mail, and a tower shield. Such warriors can make big 'jumps' thus moving faster than average, but they wont fly. Read what Quantum says - 'ignore the flying infantry'; exactly, it can be ignored. A nation needs some infantry that can fullfil its purpose.
And in my opinion, cheaper Caelum mages (1W, 2A 1W) are baaaaaaaaaaad. As it is now, Caelum depends on mages heavily, so I think making their only real battlemage capitol-only will cripple an already average nation.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 04:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.