Chaos

[DutchJunkie]

- When on Chaos territory (or partially Chaos tiles) friendly units and enemy units have a chance on mutation. For Chaos this is good, so they get a promotion (mutation I,II,III etc). For enemy units this is bad. They have a chance to become a Chaos Spawn that's unfriendly to all units (Chaos and others). Chaos units (the human ones that is) also should have a small chance on becoming a Spawn. That's the risk of worshipping Chaos ..
- Warpstone should increase the mutation chance. Bad for others, good for Chaos ..
- If we use pollution, this should give a mutation chance too. Bad for others, good for Chaos ..

This way mutation is coincedence, but there should be a normal way to get the promotion too; The Gods grant the best warriors with mutations! So, it can be a victory promotion too.

I don't think it's realistic to mutate champions (visibly), but if it's possible that would be awesome ..

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

Oh, i think i should also point out that Khorne armies do NOT have ANY magic units. i just had a table top battle with my brother, and found that he could not use any magic as he had no sorcerers. my magic was awsome however as woodelves rock.

anywho, i think Khorne should not get ANY magic units, (other than MAYBE an undivided shaman of sorts)

 

[Ploeperpengel]

I would prefer handling chaos without the need to to code choosing of factions(maybe much later in the future) on short term lets handle the chaos civ like this:
every city can build undivided units
the player can build a temple of a chaos god and afterwards the city can only produce the units of that god and undivided. if the player builds a temple of another chaosgod in that city it obsoletes the previous temple.
AND chaos gets a wonder that enables one city to build any unit like DJ mentioned.
However this will still be sort of dangerous since chaostroops of different factions suffer animosity

 

[Ploeperpengel]

@DJ
I agree mostly with your suggestions

Chaos won't fit into the stanard schema. First thing I do now is remove the militias from their production list and add seZ new units along with Fleshhounds and Demonprinces. Need some ideas what their stats should be like.
I know this will be unbalanced for now but I will leave the gaps so we can find out what exactly chaos also will need.

Chaoswarriors will replace militiaswordsmen
the berserks I put in temporarily as Royal Guard
Iwill keep the monsters as they are but additionnally give Fleshhounds in age of magic and Demonprinces in Age of Discovery

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

i agree with everything. but im unsure about what you mean when you say:
"every city can build undivided units
the player can build a temple of a chaos god and afterwards the city can only produce the units of that god and undivided. if the player builds a temple of another chaosgod in that city it obsoletes the previous temple."

does that mean the civ can only build that gods units in all cities (like with Dukes idea) or the civ has potential to build ALL chaos units, (ie have differecnt cities building different god's units. if its the second one wont that be harder to do? also, it will make Chaos Far too powerful IMO.

it would be easyer to just do the wonder/tech thing as Duke and DJ said first off then having a half-step in between, less work for everyone.

just my 2 cents

 

[Ploeperpengel]

It does mean the civ can build all units. If anything is too powerful really can't be judged until it's ALL in the game imo.
Chaos gets some disadvantages too after all. They lack many coreunit i.e. and the Daemon unitclasses I just added have restrictions:
Lesser daemon 25 (could be altered after playtesting)
Daemon restricted to 10 units(could be altered after playtesting)
Greater Daemon - worldunit
So indeed Chaos gets powerful units but can't build as many of them as it likes and therfore still could have a hard times actually winning wars because they don't have strong coreunits specialized in citydefense just those tier 1 archers currently. If we include units for defense in higher tiers later I'd say lets just make em considerable weaker to balance the strong attack force of chaos.

And don't forget animosity- chaos will NOT get discipline!!!

-the player can produce all units but the first time a Bloodthirster destroys all of his nurglings he might decide against a mix.

 

[neener]

Just to say one thing, I really don't like the idea of Chaos having animosity. I understand why you're putting it in, but I don't think it fits well. The Chaos Gods hate each other but their troops don't, as far as I know, squabble amongst themselves when they're at war. I think there's a reason that Chaos didn't have animosity in the Warhammer game, you know? To me, animosity is a fairly uniquely Orcish thing, because of their staggering lack of discipline. Even in the middle of an intense battle, they'll stop to fight amongst themselves or to teach those Goblins a lesson. It just seems really weird to me for Chaos to be doing that. They're supposed to be evil, bloodthirsty demons hellbent on destruction, and they're going to be bickering like Goblins? Only worse, because they won't even get the Discipline promotion?

 

[Ploeperpengel]

Animosity is not for all Chaostroops just for the Daemons and they HAVE animosity in WH tabletop! At least the old rules.

 

[Ploeperpengel]

But daemon animosity is different indeed. In WH on a roll of 1-2
Daemons start fighting each other until the player rolls 5-6 in a subsequent turn dice check- they are moved immediatly to fight if within range of 12 inch no matter the movement, on 3-4 they sqabble(like orcs) on 5-6 nothing- all is normal
But since the effects aren't that much different I think we can just use the script ELM made for the greenskins.

 

[Ploeperpengel]

I agree, no animosity for chaos. However, for every different chaos god that is in your civ, you should get -1 happiness. That way, if you want to have all four different temples in different cities then every city will get -3 happiness. That should encourage players to concentrate on one god.

Players maybe but what about the AI?

 

[Ploeperpengel]

Hm, I think I still will stick to daemonanimosity cause it just fits perfectly for Daemons. Daemonunits are stronger than mundanes so they really need something bad to get a balance. Animosity which can't be disciplined is that kinda stuff.
How exactly can we teach the AI concerning temples? If we can teach the AI nothing speaks against happiness modifiers you mentioned. And no need for hardcoding the temples then.

 

[El Loco Mono]

The other disadvantage for Chaos is they are Melee heavy so the Support fire bonus won't be there for them.

Wicked mutations usually end up being a gift for champions of chaos, so I was thinking the higher mutation promotions should only occur on units of a certian level.

 

[Ploeperpengel]

The other disadvantage for Chaos is they are Melee heavy so the Support fire bonus won't be there for them.

Wicked mutations usually end up being a gift for champions of chaos, so I was thinking the higher mutation promotions should only occur on units of a certian level.

Yep, I agree to the latter. I just changed the regenration promotion so it won't be available to units like pegasi. I think a script for a "chaosgift" promotion would be interesting. It could give a random advantage like regeneration, extra firststrike etc. that means in more detail:
a script that allows for a list of promotions we can define one of which will be granted.

 

[El Loco Mono]

Also, what about a warbanding period in the early game to make Chaos a different flavour? Something like, random chance/forced chance/optional chance (with an improvement) of friendly fight between units, once you reach a certian unit:city ratio, until a tech is founded which organises units. This will give you less overall units, but stronger ones with the experienced gained. And gives you something to concentrate on early.

The idea is not too sound, but what I'm getting at is implementing some "survival of the fittest" in either the early rounds or low level troops. I like the idea of chaos with a few expensive powerful units (upgrades or champions of early weak units), and loads of weaker infighting units

 

[Ploeperpengel]

Also, what about a warbanding period in the early game to make Chaos a different flavour? Something like, random chance/forced chance/optional chance (with an improvement) of friendly fight between units, once you reach a certian unit:city ratio, until a tech is founded which organises units. This will give you less overall units, but stronger ones with the experienced gained. And gives you something to concentrate on early.

The idea is not too sound, but what I'm getting at is implementing some "survival of the fittest" in either the early rounds or low level troops. I like the idea of chaos with a few expensive powerful units (upgrades or champions of early weak units), and loads of weaker infighting units

Like the idea. But I think it wouldn't be chaos specific but for all. The ancient era is barbarian state of civilization after all.

 

[El Loco Mono]

Couldn't we just let barbarians spawn inside culture borders to represent this, and have a small chance of these units converting to your civ if you beat them?

Fair enough, the only reason I suggested friendly fighting is that it will prevent mass pillaging of your lands. If we go for the Barbs, i think it would be better to spawn barb's that cannot pillage. Or else the early game would just get too frustrating

 

[Ploeperpengel]

We should discuss anything concerning Barbs in the new thread I opened for them. I like the idea above guys. But lets keep this thread for chaos only

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

well i also disagree with the Deamon animosity. but purely because i dont see deamons arguing like gobbos (as was said before) so if you can make it an original concept for Chaos only (ie not just a remake of animosity) then i think i might agree. but for now i think Animosity should stay purely for greenskins. we dont want to overdo something cool.

one other thing: i dont personally see Chaos as a small tough civ. i see them as endless hordes of small deamons lead by very few Hugely powerful deamons. so i think the limit on the numbers is odd, but if it works i dont mind. i would prefer (but i really dont mind) it if Chaos had a very very small number of Uber tough units and the rest uber weak nd uber cheap, so they can build massive hordes (like gobbos) but thats probably just me

thats my 2 cents

 

[Ploeperpengel]

Daemons don't sqabble like Greenskins but they fight each other, "shout and scream at each other in a threatining manner" or ignore each other.(WH-Rulebook 1992, page 87)
That means we can use the same gamemechanics-it shouldn't be too hard to just have another textdisplay and sounds for that later

 

[Psychic_Llamas]

yeh, well i really dont mind, so if your so hell-bent on it go for it. (no pun intended )

just keep in mind though, i dont think we should mix rules from the past and present. even thogh that rule is from the WH rule book from '19-diggity-2' dosnt mean we should use it, perhaps the tabletop WH teams scrapped it because it was bad / unbalancing, irritating etc.

but as i say, go ahead and do it if you must, it dosnt bother me