wolflance Posted June 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) @AyakashiAs I said before I am more of a historical accuracy type of person than a RTS balance guy ---- That said the points you raised are all very valid, I did not think it thoroughly when I was drafting the roster in my pursue on historicity.The Song Chinese...well, in term of military capabilities, they are really the weakest among all the China's dynasties (relatively speaking). They had to rely on numerical superiority to win battle, although they did not use 'human wave tactic' per se, instead they opt for massive amount of crossbowmen. They really did get roflstomped a lot too, but I guess getting too accurate wouldn't made for a fun or balanced RTS. Edited June 25, 2015 by wolflance 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayakashi Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 (edited) The Song did suffer many humiliating losses but I wouldn't exactly say they got roflstomped. After all they did last longer against the Mongols than everyone else! Too bad they were so stupidly paranoid about military coups and kept executing their best generals.Btw, What would you think about maybe having specialized, non-garrisonable chuangzi nu crossbow and flamethrower towers to help with turtling gameplay? Edited June 25, 2015 by Ayakashi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolflance Posted June 27, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2015 The Song did suffer many humiliating losses but I wouldn't exactly say they got roflstomped. After all they did last longer against the Mongols than everyone else! Too bad they were so stupidly paranoid about military coups and kept executing their best generals.Btw, What would you think about maybe having specialized, non-garrisonable chuangzi nu crossbow and flamethrower towers to help with turtling gameplay?They lasted that long partly because of the Southern China's terrain, which isn't very suitable for cavalry-based army (Mongols were not very good infantry and sailors - not yet), and partly because the Mongol themselves were at (two separate) civil wars that lasted from 1241-1251 and 1260-1264, the second one essentially split the Mongol Empire into many smaller khanates (that are hostile to each other). Meng Gong did a respectable job beating the Mongol in the first phase of the war though. If only he lived longer...My current proposal put both the chuangzi nu and flamethrower as upgrade for tower (less building model to worry about), so a fully upgraded Chinese tower can shoot three different weapons at the same time (normal arrows, Chuangzi bolt, and fire), plus whatever the garrisoned guys can shoot.I am considering the 震天雷 iron-cased bomb as upgrade for tower as well, which I visualize as an close (almost melee) range, very large AOE one-hit-kill attack for the tower to deter melee assault. Maybe make it an manually activated ability.The Chuangzi nu has a separate, mobile siege weapon version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayakashi Posted June 29, 2015 Report Share Posted June 29, 2015 A tower with that many weapons might be too OP. I can imagine a player just spamming these around the base without too much thought and really give the opponent a needlessly hard time. Specialized towers with individual strengths and weaknesses will allow for more strategic depth from both sides and make turtling more fun! It will also give something unique and appealing for the faction (might even make up for the weak units). Plus, IMO taking shortcuts shouldn't sacrifice for making the mod fun and balanced.So I'd have it like this:- regular tower: we all knows how it works, but bomb upgrade can be applied to it (low-mid AOE damage)- chunagzi nu crossbow tower: one shot kills most units, strong vs siege units, slow reload, has a minimum rage radius so it's vulnerable to massed melee unit/ram rush- flamethrower tower: strong splash damage or in a line, short ranged, kills units almost instantly, good vs rush tactics, outranged by most siege unitsI'm not sure whether if it's better to have them as 3 separate buildings or as individually converted wall towers (with graphic change & will automatically eject garrisoned units if applied). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niektb Posted June 29, 2015 Report Share Posted June 29, 2015 Tower Defense!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolflance Posted June 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) I believe putting siege crossbow on tower is by no means a Chinese-only practice tho. So I put the upgrade under the assumption that everyone else will get similar upgrade(s)...There are discussion on other vanilla thread that want to nerf early tower but gives them more upgrade later on, so I was thinking along that line.I am OK on three separate tower too. Edited June 30, 2015 by wolflance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayakashi Posted June 30, 2015 Report Share Posted June 30, 2015 Not Chinese only. But they were unique in using triple bow crossbows 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.