Results 1 to 30 of 1362

Thread: [EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    EB:NOM Triumvir Member gamegeek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hanover, NH
    Posts
    3,569

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShakAttack
    I think the point Lazy was making (about unit eras, not C. circle), whilst more symbolic/ranting than literal, makes sense
    I hesitate to say this, but I am not at this moment prepared to take LazyO seriously, because I can hardly tell if he's trolling or not; he honestly is proposing to eliminate the Sweboz as a faction! Saba I can see an argument for, but the Sweboz?!?!? Certainly they need some sort of fix, but eliminate them?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShakAttack
    ...are there any historical sources which indicate that Saka did not have ANY HA (the light types) when they settled (what is proposed to be the "later era")?
    This is a straw man. None of us are arguing that the late Saka should not be able to recruit light HA. What we want to place is a limit to promote historical army-building, either by disabling some of the Saka light HA units during the later era or placing a categorical limit on light horse archers. They'd be less available, but if a player wanted to take a good 6 or so of them that would be an option.
    Europa Barbarorum: Novus Ordo Mundi - Mod Leader Europa Barbarorum - Team Member

    Quote Originally Posted by skullheadhq
    Run Hax! For slave master gamegeek has arrived
    "To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a desert and call it peace." -Calgacus

  2. #2

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Hmm, interesting points GG2. I think I can understand you a bit better now. I think the best thing for me to do is to wait until I see what you are proposing and then comment- for all I know what I fear u may do might be v diff from ur actual plans.

    I dont think Lazy seriously meant Sweboz and Saba should be eliminated (at least I hope not! lol!), I only meant his initial post has a grain of truth in it.

    @Robin, as I said, personally, I have no problem with Saka having to declare if they are bringing more than a certain amount of infantry units so that the opponent is not caught off guard facing 15 infantry units; at least to try it out as a compromise and see if it works.
    "Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."

  3. #3
    Unbowed Unbent Unbroken Member Lazy O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,046

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    You can only have so much historical accuracy, if we push it to the max, like you seem to be focused on, then there is no point of having Saba or Sweboz . It was an example. How nice of you to dismiss it as trolling.

    And Saka bringing 15 infantry units is highly unlikely. Even 10 is a gamble. If they do bring that many, you will have an instant advantage since Sakae infantry with the exception of the Indian Srenis are pathetic and only good at holding a line, not winning a battle.


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 





    [21:16:17] [Gaius - 5.115.253.115]
    i m not camping , its elegant strategy of waiting

  4. #4
    EB:NOM Triumvir Member gamegeek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hanover, NH
    Posts
    3,569

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Actually, the Saba WOULD be significantly better if I could conjure a few historically accurate units out of thin air but I can't do that.

    Are you honestly suggesting that we not maximize historical accuracy in the effectiveness of given units?

    I apologize for my inclination to dismiss gramatically incorrect, punctuation-lacking posts with otherwise ridiculous content as trolling. This isn't Hamachi chat.
    Last edited by gamegeek2; 10-12-2011 at 13:15.
    Europa Barbarorum: Novus Ordo Mundi - Mod Leader Europa Barbarorum - Team Member

    Quote Originally Posted by skullheadhq
    Run Hax! For slave master gamegeek has arrived
    "To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a desert and call it peace." -Calgacus

  5. #5

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    I think what he meant to say is that given the parameters we are working with in EB (not being able to add more units etc), let’s not be inconsistent and impose a limitation for saka under the guise of “historical accuracy” given that most other factions suffer under no such limitations. In other words, if “historical accuracy” is to be implemented in determining saka's army composition, it should be done uniformly and apply to all the factions equally. I do not think LazyO’s was aimed at any particular units.

    I am more interested in seeing the proposals before discussing the issue above personally. When do you think the proposed rules/composition will be ready (no pressure, just asking for approx)?
    Last edited by TheShakAttack; 10-04-2011 at 11:55.
    "Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."

  6. #6
    Unbowed Unbent Unbroken Member Lazy O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,046

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Yes, I much prefer hamachi chat. Why are you never on? And why are you still awake while posting that post? :D


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 





    [21:16:17] [Gaius - 5.115.253.115]
    i m not camping , its elegant strategy of waiting

  7. #7
    Involuntary Gaesatae Member The Celtic Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the heart of Hyperborea
    Posts
    2,962

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShakAttack
    I think what he meant to say is that given the parameters we are working with in EB (not being able to add more units etc), let’s not be inconsistent and impose a limitation for saka under the guise of “historical accuracy” given that most other factions suffer under no such limitations.
    Most others. The key word here is most, which means that some already do. In other words, it would not be inconsistent to impose such a limitation; in fact, it would be inconsistent not to.

    Also, Gamegeek2, when will you come around to answering my questions?
    Last edited by The Celtic Viking; 10-04-2011 at 12:16.

  8. #8

    Default Re: 3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

    Quote Originally Posted by Lazy O View Post
    And Saka bringing 15 infantry units is highly unlikely. Even 10 is a gamble. If they do bring that many, you will have an instant advantage since Sakae infantry with the exception of the Indian Srenis are pathetic and only good at holding a line, not winning a battle.
    True. And let's not forget that you can only bring 2 srenis under duplication rules.
    "Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam."

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO