Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

It's not easy creating an entire faction or era. Post your work and collaborate in this forum.

Moderator: Forum Moderators

Locked
User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1790
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Temuchin Khan »

Mars wrote:Wow, I had noticed that IE was still up in the add-ons but this IE-Fixed caused me to look at the forums for the first time in a long time. Thanks, guys, for taking this up. I love the fact that there are new developments with such an old era.
Pretty cool, isn't it?
For the mainline balance, if I can put in my 2 cents, I love that IE units hit harder / have less hitpoints / kill and die more easily. Makes the era less forgiving and more exciting. I don't think you can keep that overall and I don't think the Lavinians or the Issaelfr would have to chance all that much, the Arendians least of all. But if you could, keep the Marauders' sense of brutality and especially the Sidhe's need for guerrilla.
Those are some good points to consider before adjusting it to mainline. Unwise Owl, do you think these concerns could be addressed while powering them down? If not, maybe we should leave well enough alone and not adjust the Orbivm factions to mainline.
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

Those are some good points to consider before adjusting it to mainline. Unwise Owl, do you think these concerns could be addressed while powering them down? If not, maybe we should leave well enough alone and not adjust the Orbivm factions to mainline.
That I don't know, but if we can't I'll certainly be looking to revert any changes I make. The flavour of the IE is something that sets it apart and in any balacing changes keeping the deadliness of the era will be the paramount consideration. However, I think that it should be possible to keep the nature of the era while rounding everything down to me more in line with mainline values, and if I can that's what I'll plan to do.
I have some rough ideas to this end at the moment, but it'll take me a little while before I'm prepared to do a release. I just thought that I'd better ask and find out wht people thought about the idea before I considered making any substantive changes. Maintaining someone else's era and campaigns is a bit wierd, as you're never sure where the lines that you shouldn't cross are, but I definitely feel that the nature of the main factions is satrosanct.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1790
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Temuchin Khan »

UnwiseOwl wrote:
Those are some good points to consider before adjusting it to mainline. Unwise Owl, do you think these concerns could be addressed while powering them down? If not, maybe we should leave well enough alone and not adjust the Orbivm factions to mainline.
That I don't know, but if we can't I'll certainly be looking to revert any changes I make. The flavour of the IE is something that sets it apart and in any balacing changes keeping the deadliness of the era will be the paramount consideration. However, I think that it should be possible to keep the nature of the era while rounding everything down to me more in line with mainline values, and if I can that's what I'll plan to do.
I have some rough ideas to this end at the moment, but it'll take me a little while before I'm prepared to do a release. I just thought that I'd better ask and find out wht people thought about the idea before I considered making any substantive changes. Maintaining someone else's era and campaigns is a bit wierd, as you're never sure where the lines that you shouldn't cross are, but I definitely feel that the nature of the main factions is satrosanct.
A thought that occurred to me is that maybe we should follow the lead of the Nightmares of Meloen project, and have both a standard and an experimental version of the era included in the Imperial Era Fixed download. That way, we can both test out the proposed balancing changes and still have the original.
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

I can certainly look at doing that, it's one nice way to not mess with campaign balance while doing the testing. I'll have a look at how they're doing it tonight and see how much work it would be to implement another version in the same packet.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
Mars
Posts: 16
Joined: October 4th, 2008, 11:06 pm

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Mars »

Very good idea to keep both versions. I really like that the player retains the option of experiencing the deadliness.

If you're playing Default + Imperial you won't get the flavor of the era, but you'll have the flavor of the factions you're using. I think the balancing is mostly a downward adjustment to unit cost and damage. Hitpoints seem to be mostly in line anyway and survivability increases automatically when opponents hit less hard. For most factions, that's fine. But for Marauders and Sidhe I think it would be better to keep damage slightly higher than with most factions and find compensation elsewhere. The Sidhe are physically weak, so lower HP would be logical. The Marauders, I don't know, maybe a little adjustment to HP but I do tend to think of them as quite sturdy so I'd try to look for compensation elsewhere, maybe movement, maybe unit cost, something like that.

Have you looked at how Ageless Era balances IE factions?
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

The issue with just decreasing damage and cost is that the lethality of the era is compromised, the units would then be fine against mainline, perhaps, but intra-era play would be different, and that's exactly what I don't want to do. I think any changes I'd make would seek to be in-scale, decreases/increases in HP would be mirrored by changes in damage, XP, etc. In this way I'll seek to keep the character of the factions more. Perhaps it's too big a task, but if there's people that would like Default+Imperial then it'd be worth it.
AS to the AE, I've seen how they've gone about it, and I'll be drawing from them quite a bit, I'm sure, but a dedicated project focusing on a few factions will by its nature produce a better result that an era that includes so many factions, I think.

Also, Temuchin, after playing with the new orcei a bit, I have the following comments, take or leave as you will, I bring these as suggestions after playing a bit of campaign and multiplayer both with and against them. You have veto and the casting vote, as always:
1. The mobility of the river lizard is now too good, I think this should be scaled back, at least on the land. To give the Orces a land scout for multiplayer I suggest that we make the Essedarius a recruitable level 1 as well as an evolution of the piscator.
2. Interrupt is great, but I think it's a little too good with first-strike. I think it might work better as a normal attack, giving archers a chance to do at least a little damage, at least on the lower levels.
3. How would you feel about making the minuti chaotic? It would give them a little more hitting power at night and emphasise their inferiority in the day. I guess I'm thinking of the magni as Uruk-hai (immune to sunlight) and the minuti as regular orcs, I knows that's not correct as far as their nature in Orbivm, but I feel like it might help make playing orcei a little more tactical.
Regards, wOl.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
Kanzil
Posts: 288
Joined: June 14th, 2012, 4:09 pm

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Kanzil »

The other problem with making the Sidhe small HP, large attack is that that's the signature of the Aragwaithi.
High over valleys in the red levelling rays -
In din of crowded streets, going among the years, the faces,
May I still meet my memory in so lonely a place
Between the streams and the red clouds, hearing the curlews, Hearing the horizons endure.
Mars
Posts: 16
Joined: October 4th, 2008, 11:06 pm

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Mars »

I don't think small HP, large attack by itself is a signature. The Aragwaithi play very differently from the Sidhe, they're not competition.

@UnwiseOwl: Thanks for your replies. I think those are good ideas and I look forward to seeing the results.
User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1790
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Temuchin Khan »

UnwiseOwl wrote:Also, Temuchin, after playing with the new orcei a bit, I have the following comments, take or leave as you will, I bring these as suggestions after playing a bit of campaign and multiplayer both with and against them. You have veto and the casting vote, as always:
1. The mobility of the river lizard is now too good, I think this should be scaled back, at least on the land. To give the Orces a land scout for multiplayer I suggest that we make the Essedarius a recruitable level 1 as well as an evolution of the piscator.
2. Interrupt is great, but I think it's a little too good with first-strike. I think it might work better as a normal attack, giving archers a chance to do at least a little damage, at least on the lower levels.
I like these two ideas. In fact, the first actually brings the Orcei closer to what I originally intended.

EDIT: Actually, I've already implemented these first two changes. I'll pm you the files for the next version.
3. How would you feel about making the minuti chaotic? It would give them a little more hitting power at night and emphasise their inferiority in the day. I guess I'm thinking of the magni as Uruk-hai (immune to sunlight) and the minuti as regular orcs, I knows that's not correct as far as their nature in Orbivm, but I feel like it might help make playing orcei a little more tactical.
Regards, wOl.
I'm still undecided about this. It's an interesting idea, but I'm just not sure yet.
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

The other problem with making the Sidhe small HP, large attack is that that's the signature of the Aragwaithi.
The Sidhe are already like this, and have been for almost as long as the Arigwaithi, it just might become a little more pronounced. As Mars said, there's plenty more to distinguish them, but in the Orbivm world the Arigwaithi are descendants of the Arendians and Marauders that have had long contact and alliance with the elves, so their style mimicking that of the Sidhe (or vice-versa) to a certain extent is to be encouraged, as far as I'm concerned.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1790
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Temuchin Khan »

Temuchin Khan wrote:
UnwiseOwl wrote:3. How would you feel about making the minuti chaotic? It would give them a little more hitting power at night and emphasise their inferiority in the day. I guess I'm thinking of the magni as Uruk-hai (immune to sunlight) and the minuti as regular orcs, I knows that's not correct as far as their nature in Orbivm, but I feel like it might help make playing orcei a little more tactical.
Regards, wOl.
I'm still undecided about this. It's an interesting idea, but I'm just not sure yet.
I've given this some more thought, and I do not think that the Minuti should be chaotic.

In fact, making all the Orcei neutral was a deliberate design feature intended to reflect the fact that the Magni and the Minuti are not normal Orcs and Goblins, but escaped Lavinian slaves. During their years in Lavinian slavery, they would have been forced to adjust to the Lavinian lifestyle, which means they would have been forced to adjust to daylight. I doubt that any Orcs or Goblins could have adjusted well enough to become Lawful, but adjusting enough to become neutral seems reasonable.

On the other hand, there is now a fourth alignment: liminal. Would there be any reason to make any of the Orcei liminal? It would also be an intermediate position between lawful and chaotic, but I doubt that Orcs or Goblins would change so much as to be better at a different time of day than at night, so I still think leaving them neutral is best for the flavor of the faction.

So there's my conclusion: All the Orcei should remain neutral to reflect the fact that, as former Lavinian slaves, they would have been forced to adjust to the rhythms of life in Lavinia.
User avatar
Kanzil
Posts: 288
Joined: June 14th, 2012, 4:09 pm

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Kanzil »

The Sidhe are already like this, and have been for almost as long as the Arigwaithi, it just might become a little more pronounced. As Mars said, there's plenty more to distinguish them, but in the Orbivm world the Arigwaithi are descendants of the Arendians and Marauders that have had long contact and alliance with the elves, so their style mimicking that of the Sidhe (or vice-versa) to a certain extent is to be encouraged, as far as I'm concerned.
Oh. Ok, if that's how you see them that's fine, I never knew the aragwaithi were descendants of the arendians, neither did I know they were an Orbvium faction.
High over valleys in the red levelling rays -
In din of crowded streets, going among the years, the faces,
May I still meet my memory in so lonely a place
Between the streams and the red clouds, hearing the curlews, Hearing the horizons endure.
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

Well, the term "an orbivm faction" isn't exactly right.
They've been used in Orbivm since before there was an Orbivm, having their home in the IE from the early days before migrating to the FE (The IE started to make a home for the best umc factions). They're part of Orbivm, but they have a seperate existance too, so our Aragwaithi aren't neccesarily the same as the ones that you'll see elsewhere.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
User avatar
Temuchin Khan
Posts: 1790
Joined: September 3rd, 2004, 6:35 pm
Location: Player 6 on the original Agaia map

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by Temuchin Khan »

UnwiseOwl wrote:(The IE started to make a home for the best umc factions)
This is true. The Kedari too were once in the Imperial Era before being moved to the Feudal Era.

It has occurred to me, however, that a case could be made for including the Kedari in both eras. After all, Arabs fought on both sides in the Roman-Persian wars, and during the Crisis of the Third Century, there was a brief interlude in which the desert city of Palmyra conquered a large part of the Eastern Roman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_o ... 271_AD.svg). And their place in the Feudal Era should be obvious.

Whether we want to have even one faction that is in two of the Orbivm eras is, of course, another question, but since it occurred to me, I thought I'd raise the issue. What do people think?
User avatar
UnwiseOwl
Posts: 511
Joined: April 9th, 2010, 4:58 am

Re: Imperial Multiplayer Era - version 0.17 released

Post by UnwiseOwl »

I think that for multiplayer eras it's better to keep to the factions that we have now and leave the Kedari in the Feudal Era (which should be back soon...honest). As I understand it, the Kedari were around in the late Era, but weren't a major force until later, and I've always liked the IE policy of 'yeah, these other nations are still around, the era just isn't about them' ala the Dardans.
Nothing is to stop a campaign that mixes the two, Rise of the Kedari or something, but I think they're at home in the FE.
Maintainer of the Imperial Era and the campaigns Dreams of Urduk, Epic of Vaniyera, Up from Slavery, Fall of Silvium, Alfhelm the Wise and Gali's Contract.
But perhaps 'maintainer' is too strong a word.
Locked