the_rats

the_rats

Joined Member # 3243705
106 Posts 135 Replies 725 Reputation

City icons The city images in the empire tree are all the same (I think they change based on city level, or maybe faction, I can't really tell — most of the time they are the same). By the time there are >4 cities in play, those icons might as well not exist since I can't remember which one is which past the first few. Suggestion: replace city images in the empire tree with symbolic icons representing the type of city and its level. "My h

3 Replies 2,030 Views

[quote who="seanw3" reply="22" id="3218473"]One thing that is clear to me is that % bonuses scale too high.[/quote] I'd say this is only true when they multiply; the scaling becomes super-linear. Percent-based bonuses are not a problem in themselves, it is how you apply them. If they are additive on top of base, they scale much better; that crazy +100% trait will still only give you an extra +1 for each +1 increase to base, hardly game breaking. This is something I feel CiV h

23 Replies 7,099 Views

This has been around since at least beta3 , where it also applied to poisoned weapons (not sure if that's still the case). Another area that might be worth checking for the same bug, especially if you are modding: multiple damage-reflect / damage-on-hit items, or damage-reflect / damage-on-hit + counterattack.

1 Replies 996 Views

[quote who="seanw3" reply="19" id="3218424"]One simple fix for Growth + Giant Growth is to make them not stack on each other.[/quote] By the way, I totally agree with this. Ideally, casting giant after growth should upgrade it, since it is in all aspects better, while casting growth after giant should have no effect. However, I suspect this isn't the only problem here.

23 Replies 7,099 Views

[quote who="seanw3" reply="19" id="3218424"]You don't need to do the math in your head. When you click on a trait, it adds the predicted bonus to the stats on the left in green.[/quote] Respectfully disagree. With multiplicative bonuses, future choices affect your past choices in non-obvious ways. With additive bonuses, +50% on 20 base is always +10, regardless of what else you pick. It you raise your base, you total increases in an easily predictable way. With multiplicative bonu

23 Replies 7,099 Views

[quote who="Poko8" reply="17" id="3218377"]Do they multiply though? I think those 3 add.[/quote] If some bonuses multiply and some add, then this is even more confusing than I originally thought. As per reply #6, with purely additive bonuses you should have had 128 attack, give or take, rather than 340. I still suspect that growth and giant form bonuses are being applied twice (or maybe even more than twice). Or perhaps this is a similar bug to the old assassin pat

23 Replies 7,099 Views

[quote who="Poko8" reply="12" id="3218325"]That may be the case - then it would be 40 * 2 (giant) * 1.45 (swordsman) * 1.5 (growth) * 1.25 (armory) = 217[/quote] Just to nitpick, 1.1 * 1.15 * 1.2 != 1.45. This is exactly why I consider multiplicative bonuses confusing - you can't do the maths quickly in your head any more, which makes in-game decisions difficult. How much is that 10% swordman trait worth, exactly?

23 Replies 7,099 Views

[quote who="Blackmantle_" reply="7" id="3218288"]Before further confusion comes up: Multipliers in Elemental stacked from day one and the system never changed if I'm not utterly mistaken.[/quote] Even with stacking multipliers (which, in my humble opinion, aren't the right way to implement multipliers if you are to have any hope of balancing things), I can't seem to get the same result: 40 * 1.1 * 1.15 * 1.2 * 1.25 * 1.5 * 2.0 = 227.7</p

23 Replies 7,099 Views

Something doesn't add up, if those numbers are to be believed. I think all multipliers should apply to the base attack value; it makes more sense and simplifies the maths. That looks like a warrior with lethal4, so we should have: 13 + 3[warrior] + 2[lethal1] + 3[lethal2] + 4[lethal3] + 5[lethal4] + 10[howl] = 40 40 * (100%[base] + 10% + 15% + 20% + 25%[armory] + 50%[growth] + 100%[giant]) = 40 * 320% = 128 It

23 Replies 7,099 Views

Update: Crashes whenever I mouse over the group of scouts in tactical. Might have something to do with the fact that their attack value is zero due to being withered with a bunch of death shards. Now I just need to figure out how to kill this army without directly attacking the scouts ;)

4 Replies 1,270 Views

Captured a Kraxis city (not their last one), and Karavox somehow got trapped in that city rather than teleporting out like a boss. I couldn't attack him, but luckily for me, a nearby group of river skaths took care of that. I suspect he was still immobilised from his previous defeat, which may have something to do with it. [Off Topic] So far in this game I have captured two Kraxis cities that happily co-existed with <span style="color: #cc0000;"

0 Replies 642 Views

[quote quoting="post"] Multiple armies on the same square: Awkward. If I have multiple armies on the same square, I'd like to be able to reorganize them at will, moving units among armies, without having to physically move the units across the landscape. I'd also like to be able to get a list of armies on a square. At the moment, I don't know how to do either of these. [/quote] Stacked armies are one of the more awkward aspects of the strategic UI. Here's my

1 Replies 3,386 Views

Misunderstood. I interpreted your "forget graceful on high level assassins" to mean "one shouldn't take graceful for high level assassins". Very fair point about mounts, I don't remember the last time I saw a prone champion. I actually find it strange that all mounts provide immunity from knockdown; this severely handicaps air elementals and makes titan's breath somewhat underpowered by the time you can actually cast it. I'd be ok with this bonu

21 Replies 4,248 Views

[quote who="Derek Paxton" reply="10" id="3167936"]I agree that you shouldnt be able to dodge or counterattack when prone, ive put a bug in for it. I'm fine with counterattacking when casting, i think its less confusing than wondering why your unit didnt counterattack in some situations.[/quote] That's fair enough, I agree that would be confusing. Another idea, resurrected from discussion in 425343 : <

21 Replies 4,248 Views