Brigit, Odio, and Alignments

[MagisterCultuum]

We're not too sure who Loki is really.

The Avatar of Wrath is Camulos's archangel though, and is one of the many who are trying to destroy and replace the god of strife.

 

[Lance of Llanwy]

It makes a lot of sense to me have Brigit and Odio only join Good and Evil civs respectively. There should also be some way for civs of the opposite alignment to "destroy" them. Perhaps for some bonus and +- on the Armagedeon Counter.

 

[Saytr]

I don't really think it is that hard to believe that either to join a neutral nation.

I always thought the most flavourful freedom for Brigit was being saved by a Grigori Adventurer. I think she would agree with Cassiel after she saw her own mistress, the greatest of gods, suddenly change sides and almost kill off humanity.

I think Odio would join anyone as long as he could fight. I'd like him to randomly switch sides and turn barbarian. I think he's a little like Ares, he just fights so he can fight, not caring who wins.

 

[KillerClowns]

Perhaps make it harder for them to be released by neutral civs than ones of their own alignment. Higher minimum level, gold cost, something like that...

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Well, in my version Odio does start Crazed, so he will turn on you unless you use loyalty. I'm thinking I may make Loyalty only effect living units so he is a bigger risk. I've also considered making him gain enraged after every battle, so his anger doesn't wear off.

I guess we could make it so that he could be captured if defeated pretty easily, although that might not work well with his Immortality. A PyPerTurn effect that randomly reassigns him occasionally could be cool too.

 

[Fenboy]

Perhaps make it harder for them to be released by neutral civs than ones of their own alignment. Higher minimum level, gold cost, something like that...

Perhaps civilisations could get an event trigger like Letum Frigus, with different options depending on alignment (fight it, release it, leave it alone, etc.)

 

[zup]

As long as I get to keep my Brigit. The unkillable tank and butcher. Armageddon won't touch her, she needs to be killed twice in a single turn (fat chance).

 

[Annex]

As long as I get to keep my Brigit. The unkillable tank and butcher. Armageddon won't touch her, she needs to be killed twice in a single turn (fat chance).

Does she still get immortal in .34?

 

[Keeper_GFA]

Even better, she simply is Immortal. No promotion required. When she dies, she reappears in your capitol. And when she dies again, she reappears in your capitol again. I dunno about killing her twice in one turn, never happened to me. But she was the true savior of my Illian tribe.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Killing her twice in one turn does kill her permanently, but that is hard to do.

 

[zup]

Well I had a wacky thing before with a barbarian immortal. But that was back when I did not know two kills in one turn means an end to them.

There was only one barbarian city remaining in the world, I had taken the rest (no other civs in that test game). I had cheated some promos for my Mardero (basically he had all beneficial). Then I find an immortal in that barbarian city. I think that what the hell. No capital, no resurrection for him. And I kill him but he pops back. I kill him again and he pops back. In the same city.

I was able to kill him 8 times every turn but he just kept popping back. Injured, but he was there. It was .32 I believe.

 

[cyther]

.32 had some glitchs with immortality, it was near impossible to kill immortal units.

 

[Fenboy]

bump!

Anything happening with Odio since we last talked about him?

 

[civ_king]

nope... nothing

 

[WarKirby]

I think neutrals should be able to have either, but not both at the same time.

Being neutral is already kind of annoying. You get diplomatic penalties with goods and evils, and not even a bonus with other neutrals.

 

[Imuratep]

They don't get any penalties from good leaders. But as evil leaders anyway are much more aggressive than evil leaders, you are still right of course. That's why those mali towards evil leaders should be removed, therewith neutral leaders aren't really liked by anyone but also aren't hated.

 

[ExMachina]

I think neutrals should be able to have either, but not both at the same time.

Being neutral is already kind of annoying. You get diplomatic penalties with goods and evils, and not even a bonus with other neutrals.

I agree with this. I hate playing as neutral, they seem to have no benefit besides druids.

 

[Fenboy]

No benefit besides druids...

 

[zup]

4 druids + Yvain + 10 nature mana = scary...

Neutral also lets you go either council and have CoE state religion to avoid getting dragged into the 'our faith is the one true faith' nonsense.

 

[Mesix]

Well, in my version Odio does start Crazed, so he will turn on you unless you use loyalty. I'm thinking I may make Loyalty only effect living units so he is a bigger risk. I've also considered making him gain enraged after every battle, so his anger doesn't wear off.

I guess we could make it so that he could be captured if defeated pretty easily, although that might not work well with his Immortality. A PyPerTurn effect that randomly reassigns him occasionally could be cool too.

Instead of making him Immortal, he could have a Loki-like effect that stops him from dying. Instead of running away like Liki, Odio could join the player that bests him in combat (with 1 hp requiring healing of course). To make it more interesting, perhaps he could start out with moderate strength (after all those years of inprisonment) around 7 and gain 1 (max after healing) strength each time he loses combat and changes teams.