-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Rome can't really afford good support troops as they lack the 'excellent morale' requirement to not break from scary without a chevron.
13 morale = 'excellent morale' and they have 'disciplined' as well.
I think I made an error with the merc Peltastai that I ought to fix.
Also I will include a post with each update. But do note that the OP also contains a date + time of the latest update.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
14 is the threshold for 'will not mass rout with scaries' and 12 is pretty good because you can stick 1 chevron on it but it is a little more touch and go. Merc Thracians on the KH roster are still missing their skeleton.
Also ban armor upgrades until you fix upgrade costs.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
antisocialmunky
14 is the threshold for 'will not mass rout with scaries' and 12 is pretty good because you can stick 1 chevron on it but it is a little more touch and go. Merc Thracians on the KH roster are still missing their skeleton.
Also ban armor upgrades until you fix upgrade costs.
Right, OK. And yeah no armor upgrades for now.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gamegeek2
Right, OK. And yeah no armor upgrades for now.
Updated site to reflect this.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
How come chevrons so expensive, Consider lowering chevron cost.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
That's impossible Storm. It's a percentage of the overall cost.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
maybe lower the percentage? i dont think it cant be done
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
-Stormrage-
maybe lower the percentage? i dont think it cant be done
Actually I wish it could. I also wish morale-manipulating effects such as fear could be altered as well, scaled up or down. But RTW wasn't made in such an open fashion... =/
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
What happened to eb online network, when i want to join it, i first must to send request for membership ?! WTF! am i banned lol
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
I have the same problem. You are not banned tho. You just have to wait till admin accepts your request, it seems.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
It's working now it seems.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
I have updated the OP with the Ptolemaic, Baktrian, and Seleukid units. I'm sorry I didn't finish the Saka, but it's 2AM here in the USA and I want to get this thing out so that our European players can have a crack at it before I get home later today.
I didn't check it thoroughly because it's so late, and (as always) if you find problems, please inform me as soon as possible. Thanks!
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Just updated with a few quick corrections to the Taxilan Agema, Peltastai Indohellenikoi, and AS/Ptolly bodyguards.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gamegeek2
Just updated with a few quick corrections to the Taxilan Agema, Peltastai Indohellenikoi, and AS/Ptolly bodyguards.
._. for the first time we have build 0926 and then build 0926a...CORRECTED! hah...when do we expect Saka?
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Apparently I didn't upload the right EDU file last time...whoops! It's now up front.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
There has been recently some concern over the fact that the Reidonez (Germanic Light Cavalry), according to their current cost, can only be fielded up to a max of 2 due to duplication limits. We will not be reducing their unit size or restatting them. Instead they are an exception to the duplication limit. If you visit the site now at the Rules page you will notice that 4 of them are allowed instead of 2, so they act as if they were within the 2-2.5k cost range.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
What is the concern with Reidonez? That the Sweboz would be too cavalry light?
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brave Brave Sir Robin
What is the concern with Reidonez? That the Sweboz would be too cavalry light?
All other factions have a light cavalry they could bring 4 of. Germanic light cavalry was of good quality and was an important asset to any Germanic army, but with a limit of 2 units of it this is not able to be represented in game. Now it is.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Should Illyrian levies really cost as much as Germanic ones (well, very slightly more to be more precise) when they're in equal numbers but of clearly inferior skill? (2 less attack, 3 less defence, 3 less morale and less stamina.)
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Celtic Viking
Should Illyrian levies really cost as much as Germanic ones (well, very slightly more to be more precise) when they're in equal numbers but of clearly inferior skill? (2 less attack, 3 less defence, 3 less morale and less stamina.)
I think one of the advantages (there are not many) for the Sweboz is that you can bring levies to the battle for next to nothing and expect them to actually hold for some time.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
The problem with Sweboz is that they have many cheap troops but few expensive ones to fill out the roster...
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
The problem with Sweboz is that they have many cheap troops but few expensive ones to fill out the roster...
in that case, saba have many light troops but few armoured troops to fill the roster...
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Saba armored troops are really nothing more than glorified javelin fodder.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
they dont have armoured troops.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
...so does anyone know why lower-stat Illyrians cost more than higher-stat Germans?
EDIT: Some people have been wondering what happens when, say, a 2000-2500 cost unit is given experience and goes into the >2500 cost range. Does this mean I may only bring 2 instead of 4 of this unit now? No. I have added the necessary line in the Rules page on EBO website.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Thanks for asking the question again for me, Vartan (and for answering the one about chevrons before I even got around to ask it :p).
While we're at it, I can also give a reminder that I have two questions in the other "errors in 3.0" thread awaiting answers. And here's another one: is it intentional that KH doesn't have access to regular toxotai? Neither I nor Kival could find them on the roster when we played as the KH earlier today.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Celtic Viking
Thanks for asking the question again for me, Vartan (and for answering the one about chevrons before I even got around to ask it :p).
While we're at it, I can also give a reminder that I have two questions in the other "errors in 3.0" thread awaiting answers. And here's another one: is it intentional that KH doesn't have access to regular toxotai? Neither I nor Kival could find them on the roster when we played as the KH earlier today.
When I commissioned gg2 to begin work on 3.0, I was firm in insisting that he use "vanilla" EB 1.2 MP EDU as a base. In other words, to start "from scratch." If you know your EB Online history well enough, you'll remember that our very first patch (I believe EBO MP EDU 1.1) was to add toxotai and various other Greek units that were oddly enough missing from the KH multiplayer roster. So to put it simply, this is a remnant from EB 1.2's MP EDU which contains this subtle lack of units on KH roster. I'll try to resurrect the short documentation for EBO MP EDU 1.1 and post it here so that gg2 and others may see the mistake. If the error is not what I've just describe, I'm truly sorry.
EDIT: Here it is. Please visit for more info:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&p...MjUzZmEw&hl=en
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
You don't realize how overpowered you've made the KH.
-
Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates
Quote:
Originally Posted by
antisocialmunky
You don't realize how overpowered you've made the KH.
What is the basis of this statement? You are making a broad generalization without actually presenting us with any information to support claims.