I figured that people would eventually have something to say or ask regarding the competition, and I'll gladly be the to venture a question to the panel/jury/almight Kael:

Will it be possible to submit entries via PM, so that the ideas won't get stolen?

I figured that people would eventually have something to say or ask regarding the competition, and I'll gladly be the to venture a question to the panel/jury/almight Kael:

Will it be possible to submit entries via PM, so that the ideas won't get stolen?

I would rather not, just because my pm fills up every day as it is. I dont think idea stealing will be bad.

"Nothing is created, everything is copied"

Well in enlgish it isn´t as funny as in portuguese, but oh well =P

puck11b submitted the exact same unit I was planning to suggest. Even the name, Skirmisher is the same. High withdraw, low strength, first strikes...

Oh well, I'll have to come up with something new. Possibly something to do with Stones and Marble, making them something else than wonder-hoarding resources. I really want a unit that will retain its utility throughout the whole game. As is, Workers are really the only units which never obselete.

Sorry man. I think you came up with a great idea though.

ooops nvm.

Forgot to read Kael's thread.

"Nothing is created, everything is copied"

Well in enlgish it isn´t as funny as in portuguese, but oh well =P

"A good artist knows how to copy, a truely great artist knows how to cover his sources"- Albert Einstein (I think) :)

Sorry man. I think you came up with a great idea though.

Great minds think alike. I like my new idea better, though the simple&smashing of the Skirmishers is way cool.

"A good artist knows how to copy, a truely great artist knows how to cover his sources"- Albert Einstein (I think) :)

Hahahahaha :lol: :crazyeye:

People are coming up with some great ideas
For the hollow cloak unit, they would be vulnerable to marksmen when stacked, right?

Already thinking of counter-strategies against units which haven't even been made yet :crazyeye:

Nice touch I think, means they're not so overpowering.

Before you get iron working:

4 Str 2 movement (Is very strong to represent numbers!)

After you get liberalism:

8 Str 3 movement (Even stronger!)

I could use some clarification on this. Seems like there's a stage missing, between IW and Liberalism.

I could use some clarification on this. Seems like there's a stage missing, between IW and Liberalism.

Sorry i have to admit i have NEVER finished a FFH game (Even phase 1!).

You can shoot me now! :suicide:

So you have my permission to edit if you want.

I could use some clarification on this. Seems like there's a stage missing, between IW and Liberalism.

Oh now i get what you mean. I hope im not disqualified yet! Il change it.

And i stand by the high movement points. These are rebel armies and are trying to pillage the countryside and avoid engaging your units. So i would code them to try to outmanuever your units.

@Zherak_Khan:Yeah I was just reading it. That really is a neat idea, different mechanics than anything else, great doppleganger like flavour. I think maybe the -100% when sharing a tile may be a bit tricky, if for no other reason than what happens if something attacks it before it gets that +25 for the ether techs, and it is sharing a tile with something else? What will the computer do if it has to deal with a unit that has an effective str of -$value. That is for Kael and the Dev team to deal with, just giving feedback.
*grin*
I hope they don't feel like they have to take just one of the units, since I am also digging Abman's Giant Spider and would love to see that show up too. (for that matter perhaps the giant spider should have a bonus against flyers?)

Regarding the "rebel" unit by xanikk999, perhaps the chance to spawn based on how many unhappy people you have? like 2-5% per? *edit* removed same question Corlindale asked.



Regarding the Militia:
If I recall correctly there are only 5 or so defensive buildings, so the unit maxes out at 7ish? Maybe make it 2 per and have it max out at 12(ish) so that it can hold up well in the end game as well.

Anyone have thoughts on the Skirmisher?

Oh now i get what you mean. I hope im not disqualified yet! Il change it.

I don't think we disqualify anyone:) I was just a little confused. Don't worry, suggestions will only be judged by their form at deadline, I think.

Regarding the Hollowcloak, it is supposed to be rather niché, and not fit in a regular army. If it gets caught with its cloak down, so to speak, it will be mauled. The AI probably won't use it very well, which is a slight problem, but I still think we deserve some fun toys. I also think the game mechanics work so that no unit may ever end up with negative strength: 2 Str, -125% would give something around 0.7 Str - next to nothing, but still not actually negative.

Regarding the Skirmisher, I was going to do some research on its Withdrawal chance with innate ability and Flanking promotions. I feel it should wind up somewhere in the neighbourhood of 90% Withdrawal, maybe even 98%, but have only 1 movement. The Skirmishers' weakness should be retaliation and its inability to attack cities, in my opinion. I think the current design accomplishes that rather well, without having studied the details.

We have to wait all the way until the 29th to find out the winner? Aw man.. ;)
But on the other hand, that's my birthday, so maybe that will be good luck! :lol:

Regarding the Militia:
If I recall correctly there are only 5 or so defensive buildings, so the unit maxes out at 7ish? Maybe make it 2 per and have it max out at 12(ish) so that it can hold up well in the end game as well.

I disagree. The strongest buildable unit is around strength 7 I believe (although I haven't had time to play through a full FfH II game yet, so I'm not sure). I'm glad you agree he'll only reach about strength 7 though :D

Edit: Perhaps a future tech could enhance their strength for the late game, if they get included.

Anyone have thoughts on the Skirmisher?

I was thinking, why not make him have very low strength (say 1 perhaps) a couple of first strikes and 95-100% withdrawal chance?

The strongest regular units are somewhere in the neighbourhood of 12 or 15 (Spartoi, Immortal, War Chariot), not counting the special units, like Meshabber of Dis (38?).

I disagree. The strongest buildable unit is around strength 7 I believe (although I haven't had time to play through a full FfH II game yet, so I'm not sure). I'm glad you agree he'll only reach about strength 7 though :D

Edit: Perhaps a future tech could enhance their strength for the late game, if they get included.

Strength 7 seems about average for a tier 3 unit, tier 4 units seem to be around 13 ish, but restricted to 3 per. And now I am wracking my brain to come up with what the defensive buildings would be, pallisade (obsoletes), walls, castle, antisummon ring thing... are there any I missed?
~p

You have to promote regular units to the strength 12-15 units, right? I haven't played enough of phase two to be sure :/

You have to promote regular units to the strength 12-15 units, right? I haven't played enough of phase two to be sure

Only for the Immortal. Others can be built.

Well, the local militia aren't meant to be the cream of the army :p but I guess having a national unit called the palace guard which gains 2 str per specialist might be an idea... can be upgraded from a town guard after researching one of the later techs, requires palace, maximum of 1 allowed at any time. Called the palace guard...

I was thinking, why not make him have very low strength (say 1 perhaps) a couple of first strikes and 95-100% withdrawal chance?
I am not 100% positive, but I believe that with the way that combat works this would make it so they have almost no chance of injuring anything. The idea I was working off of was that they can injure things but are unlikely to actually kill them, so a lower str than average for their age mates, but high enough to do some damage.
Regarding the Skirmisher, I was going to do some research on its Withdrawal chance with innate ability and Flanking promotions. I feel it should wind up somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% Withdrawal, maybe even 98%, but have only 1 movement.
Wow, we really were thinking on the same wavelength. With flanking I-III they would be at 90% withdrawal rate, second only to Loki, I believe. My thought was to have them with a base move of 1, but without the penalty for moving through bad terrain so they have to get mobility promotions in order to get more moves.
Re: Militia
I just read it again, originally I thought that you could only have one per city, if you can build muiltiples in each city then yeah, maybe going up to 12 is a bit much.

~p

I hope they don't feel like they have to take just one of the units, since I am also digging Abman's Giant Spider and would love to see that show up too.

I assure you, there is no limit to our thievery.

Re: Militia
I just read it again, originally I thought that you could only have one per city, if you can build muiltiples in each city then yeah, maybe going up to 12 is a bit much.

~p

Yeah, one per city is the idea- it would become a little imbalancing in the mid-game to be able to build a series of decent-strenght defenders for practically nothing. Having only one per city makes it so that 'upgrading' it costs as much as it takes to make a defensive building.

*rubs hands*
Excellent. Maybe the winner of the unit contest should have their name immortalised as a hero instead.

*rubs hands*
Excellent. Maybe the winner of the unit contest should have their name immortalised as a hero instead.

:lol: That's a fantastic idea!

:lol: That's a fantastic idea!

Only if i win! :mischief:

Only if i win! :mischief:

Yeah. As brilliant as my name is, I guess Kevin is a bit too common a name for a hero :(

What, you've never heard of Kevjm? He descended from the northlands clad only in a bear-pelt and carrying an iron long sword. In battles his foes were so frightened of his terrible rage that they would often flee before him rather than face his wrath. When a dragon heard the stories of Kevjm it challenged him to a duel, which is how Kevjm got the dragon skin shield which makes him resistant to spell effects.

Piece of cake. *grin*
~p

But Xanikk is a dark knight!

You never heard of Xanikk?

Xanikk underwent a terrible experience early in his life and lost both his parents. He fled into the wilderness with nobody to care for him.

A strange man with mystical powers holding a scythe found him. He took him as his disciple and tought him the way of the dark knight. To this day Xanikk is a great and glorious dark knight who will not falter in his quest to kill the arcane abomidations that killed his parents.

Well a lot of us don't have very good names for game characters, but that doesn't mean that we couldn't come up with a name if given that privilege as an award (hint hint) :)

Just have to say that I am AMAZED by the quality of the units you guys have come up with so far. I can already tell that picking a winner will be difficult and I can promise that there will be more contests as long as you guys keep coming up with such innovative ideas.

What, you've never heard of Kevjm? He descended from the northlands clad only in a bear-pelt and carrying an iron long sword. In battles his foes were so frightened of his terrible rage that they would often flee before him rather than face his wrath. When a dragon heard the stories of Kevjm it challenged him to a duel, which is how Kevjm got the dragon skin shield which makes him resistant to spell effects.

Piece of cake. *grin*
~p

:lol: Kael should recruit you as a writer! :yup:

Can somebody tell my if my entry makes any sense regarding the new bobard system? When i'm allowed to i'll change it later if this is already planned...

Can somebody tell my if my entry makes any sense regarding the new bobard system? When i'm allowed to i'll change it later if this is already planned...

I think its a fair submission.

Can somebody tell my if my entry makes any sense regarding the new bobard system? When i'm allowed to i'll change it later if this is already planned...


Just to elaborate the new bombard system:

In Vanilla 20% Bombard means you reduce the Defense Value by 20% of its original Value. So If a city has a Defense of 200% You would need to bomabrd it 5 times to get the defence to 0. If the City has 40% Defense you would also have to Bombard it 5 times to get the defense to 0%

The New system works the following way. 20% Bombard means you actually reduce the defense by 20%. So if you bomabrd a city with 200% Defense you will reduce the defense to 180%. Thus you need to bombard a city with 200% Defence 10 times, but a city with defense 40% would only be needed to bombarded twice to get the defense modifier to 0%. This allows Cities with higer Defense to longer withstand an siege than cities with low defense. Also it than makes sense to bring catapults even for Cities with low defense as one hit with the catapult is as effective as it would be for an highly fortified city.

I hope no one takes offense at me critiquing their units. My thoughts are that as the dev team will be taking multiple units from the thread, critical discussion on the units will benefit us all when we get to play with them. *grin* Now then, on with the show.

Yeah, one per city is the idea- it would become a little imbalancing in the mid-game to be able to build a series of decent-strenght defenders for practically nothing. Having only one per city makes it so that 'upgrading' it costs as much as it takes to make a defensive building.

If it is only one per city, then I'd think they should max out at 11-12ish. The (imho great) dynamic you've got with them will give you a viable, but not overwhelming, defender at any point in the game. If they max out at 7ish then towards the end game they are little more than a speedbump since they don't get any of the defensive promotions that make lonbows such a pita.

I do not believe that they are overwhelming since you'd need to have all three defensive buildings for them to get to their max level, I know that I am seldom tempted to build walls and castles in most of my towns with the current non-stacking nature of culture and building defensive bonuses.

Again, these are just my thoughts, it's your unit.

~p

I hope no one takes offense at me critiquing their units. My thoughts are that as the dev team will be taking multiple units from the thread, critical discussion on the units will benefit us all when we get to play with them. *grin* Now then, on with the show.



If it is only one per city, then I'd think they should max out at 11-12ish. The (imho great) dynamic you've got with them will give you a viable, but not overwhelming, defender at any point in the game. If they max out at 7ish then towards the end game they are little more than a speedbump since they don't get any of the defensive promotions that make lonbows such a pita.

I do not believe that they are overwhelming since you'd need to have all three defensive buildings for them to get to their max level, I know that I am seldom tempted to build walls and castles in most of my towns with the current non-stacking nature of culture and building defensive bonuses.

Again, these are just my thoughts, it's your unit.

~p


I welcome your views!

Perhaps making a late game tech give them a boost or having certain buildings allow more specialists could also strengthen them. When do weaponsmiths and armourers become available, if they haven't been cut since FfH1?

Or perhaps just making them available later and increasing their base strength might be best.

Or perhaps they should just be given no maintanence cost, be given a heavy bonus against cavalry and only be there to keep the people happy / in case of emergencies. (I was thinking of adding this to the original post, but it's already getting a bit cluttered, so I decided against it.)

I guess you're right though, as they are now, they become a little redundant by the late game. I think raising their strength to 1.3 or 1.4 per specialist might be a good idea. Making more specialists available with buildings would start to become a problem, even having 7 specialists in a city under siege is probably not going to be easy.

I've edited my submission slightly

Unfortunately, I don't really have time to take a good look at the tech tree before the deadline. giving 2 per specialist would be good for the late game I think, but might make them overpowered in the mid-game

Just to elaborate the new bombard system:

In Vanilla 20% Bombard means you reduce the Defense Value by 20% of its original Value. So If a city has a Defense of 200% You would need to bomabrd it 5 times to get the defence to 0. If the City has 40% Defense you would also have to Bombard it 5 times to get the defense to 0%

The New system works the following way. 20% Bombard means you actually reduce the defense by 20%. So if you bomabrd a city with 200% Defense you will reduce the defense to 180%. Thus you need to bombard a city with 200% Defence 10 times, but a city with defense 40% would only be needed to bombarded twice to get the defense modifier to 0%. This allows Cities with higer Defense to longer withstand an siege than cities with low defense. Also it than makes sense to bring catapults even for Cities with low defense as one hit with the catapult is as effective as it would be for an highly fortified city.


I like! sounds a lot more intuitive. I wonder why they didn't do that approach in vanilla? This approach might actually make me invest in city defense, rather than neglecting it like I do in vanilla :)

I'm basing the following on the idea that palisades: early game (tier 1-2), walls and ring-thing (palisades obsoleted): mid game (tier 2-3), and castle: late game (tier 3-4).
So early game base str is 4.25 (pop 5 city), culture bonus of 25-50% gives us 5.31 - 6.38
Lets call axeman our early game attacker, str 4, lets call him lvl 2 (training yard, apprentice civic, and one of the myriad barbs running around) with combat I and City Assault, final str 5.6. Looks just about right to me there, 2-3 to take your capital city's militia, 1-2 for a satellite city.
If you focused on it you could probably get one of these out by the time that Orthos came calling, but you'd be way behind the other civs as far as turn advantage is concerned. Orthos has a min str of 6.25 (I've never seen orthos with no promotions, but it could happen I suppose) so one might help save your city, but would be unlikely to hold him up by itself.

Mid game we've got two defensive buildings in walls and the ring-thing, so we've got a base of 6.5 (pop 10 city) 40-80% culture, gives us a final str of 9.1 - 11.7.
Lets call our attacker a str 7 maceman (I think they are str 7, please correct me if wrong), combat I-II and City Raider I (you should have plenty of lvl 3's at this point) for a final str of 12.6, or 11.2 if lvl 2 (city raider I and combat I)... looks like one should do the trick to take out your garrison troopy. Granted this is against a unit designed to take cities, but that is what I'd use to take a city.
Compare this to a Lvl 2 Longbowman in the same city, base 6 garrison I-II brings us to 11.4, 40-80% culture brings us to 15.96 - 20.52. This seems about right to me, longbowmen are much more expensive and require a special building to be built.


Now in the late game we've got all three defense buildings and good sized cities ( unless you are playing the vamps...) so lets say pop 20 for a base str of 9, 80% culture bonus for a final str of 16.2... we've almost caught up to the longbow in the earlier city.

All in all it looks like you've designed a unit that is best in the early stages of the game but continues to be useful throughout the entire game. Although it gets eclipsed by more expensive units in the later stages of the game it is still nothing to sneeze at and can stand up to anything short of a hero or tier 4 unit, which I think fits thematically with the idea of a city militia as well. If you put the time and treasure into "training" them (developing the techs to be able to build the buildings) you have a staunch but not overwhelming defensive force.

Uh yeah, did I mention that I really like this idea?

~p

Well thanks for the glowing review! I hope I can count on your vote :D
Oh and, thanks for doing all the maths for me! It's appreciated!

So uh, Kael, I suppose we're honour bound not to vote for ourselves when it comes to the public pole... Are we allowed to vote at all?

Well thanks for the glowing review! I hope I can count on your vote :D
Oh and, thanks for doing all the maths for me! It's appreciated!

So uh, Kael, I suppose we're honour bound not to vote for ourselves when it comes to the public pole... Are we allowed to vote at all?

Good question. How many new accounts I need to create to vote for unit of my choice:mischief:?

Tsk tsk. You can go ahead and vote for yourself or someone else (your going to want to vote for someone so you can see the results). The voter details will be public, so if your going to create multiple accounts I wouldn't suggest making multiple versions of your own name to do it. I would recommend making multiple versions of the leading contributor's name and use them to vote for him. Then when he gets disqualified you will be 1 step closer to the lead! ;)

@Gladi it depends... As the design team selects units that will be available for the vote.... So the best way to get the unit of your choice would be to put some money into an envelope and send it to me.

Huh, never occured to me to not vote for me... I like mine the best :)

~p

I would recommend making multiple versions of the leading contributor's name and use them to vote for him. Then when he gets disqualified you will be 1 step closer to the lead! ;)

...And there goes my clever plan

@Gladi it depends... As the design team selects units that will be available for the vote.... So the best way to get the unit of your choice would be to put some money into an envelope and send it to me.

So the deal holds;)? Good to hear that.

The FfH team will also be taking part in the public vote, right?

Regarding militia:

At current, my suggestion is that it is always the last unit in a stack to defend, to prevent the exploit of being able to build a potentially powerful unit for practically nothing. But do you think this system would be better:

Penalising the player for losing the unit. If the unit is lost, the city will go into revolution for a set amount of time. This time will be one turn for every militia specialist you have working in the city, up to a maximum of two turns.

Having any harsher a penalty could make the unit a liability.

So what do you think is better? The latter system makes the unit a little more useful in an actual war, I feel.

If you're going to have loss of the militia unit cause a penalty, then they should provide a +:) for hanging around when the city is not under attack. After all, they would be the police force, which would cause happiness under normal situations.

The FfH team will also be taking part in the public vote, right?

Definitly, we have to vote so we can see the results. Each team member who decides to participate will pick an entry they like best so every entry will start with 1 vote from eachof us and you will be able to see which team member liked your idea.

I vote for anything Hian makes. :lol:

(Check the civ thread to know why!)

I vote for anything Hian makes. :lol:

(Check the civ thread to know why!)

Okay, that leaves me free to pick anything. I must say it seems a hard choice.

If you're going to have loss of the militia unit cause a penalty, then they should provide a +:) for hanging around when the city is not under attack. After all, they would be the police force, which would cause happiness under normal situations.

Problem with this is that it becomes a great disadvantage not to have one in the city, it'd force the unit on a player. They'd still prevent unhappy faces in a city though due to the 'we demand military protection'

The happiness penalty on death of the unit.... I just don't like it. I think making it the last line if defense just has more flavour.

Bright day
When does the contest end btw?

Bright day
When does the contest end btw?

From the original topic:

The contest starts right now and we will be accepting submissions until May 28th at 9pm EST (Eastern Standard Time).

From the original topic:

Weird, read it several times but only got the 9 pm EST...

Now that is some selective vision.

Weird, read it several times but only got the 9 pm EST...

Now that is some selective vision.
Experienced the same thing first time I read the thread, so you're excused. ;)

http://xs301.xs.to/xs301/06210/spider.jpg.xs.jpg (http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs301&d=06210&f=spider.jpg)
Vote for me or I will eat you!:satan: :lol:

http://xs301.xs.to/xs301/06210/spider.jpg.xs.jpg (http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs301&d=06210&f=spider.jpg)
Vote for me or I will eat you!:satan: :lol:

Bright day
Ahem, that is Giant Ant...
(we need klackon civ:p)

Meh, spider, ant, potatoe, potato.

Bright day
Ahem, that is Giant Ant...
(we need klackon civ:p)


Its a spider. There's 8 eyes. Just looks a bit antlike from the front, and because the model is unfinished and more rounded than it will be in its final form.

Its a spider. There's 8 eyes. Just looks a bit antlike from the front, and because the model is unfinished and more rounded than it will be in its final form.

And the middle legs blend together. Good work though :goodjob:

But we still need Klackons.;)

Regarding militia:

At current, my suggestion is that it is always the last unit in a stack to defend, to prevent the exploit of being able to build a potentially powerful unit for practically nothing. But do you think this system would be better:

Penalising the player for losing the unit. If the unit is lost, the city will go into revolution for a set amount of time. This time will be one turn for every militia specialist you have working in the city, up to a maximum of two turns.

Having any harsher a penalty could make the unit a liability.

So what do you think is better? The latter system makes the unit a little more useful in an actual war, I feel.

Well, no one's rushing to say it's a terrible idea, think I'll update my original post...

http://xs301.xs.to/xs301/06210/spider.jpg.xs.jpg (http://xs.to/xs.php?h=xs301&d=06210&f=spider.jpg)
Vote for me or I will eat you!:satan: :lol:

My vote is for your demise evil arachnid however you would make a wonderful barbarian addition my concerns being realized...........Underground spider trap upgrades with a trapdoor effect one square radiusof something

But we still need Klackons
No what we need are Harvesters ;)

Giant spider and ghost ship are my favorites

No what we need are Harvesters ;)

Giant spider and ghost ship are my favorites

You a voting for the AI aren't you!
No, seriosly mine are the Giant Spider and the Dark Hunter............But I may vote for the Kite Man just because things that fall from the sky are cool!!!