Feedback: Dunland

[MasterOfNone]

Please post feedback on this faction in this thread. Report things you like as well as things you feel could be improved. Don't be shy. We want to know about everything: visuals, audio, text, lore, models, game play, features, mechanics, unit balance, campaign balance, look and feel, atmosphere, stability, quality, etc.

We are chiefly attending to battlemap settlement models in the run up to the full release, but we can tweak other elements in that period according to feedback we receive in the open-beta stage.

Bugs/CTDs should be reported in the bugs thread, not here.

[Kamos]

So far in my run as Dunland I've only encountered one irksome feature. That darn river cuts my lands in half without any fords. I can't shift units North and South as I need to because lord knows I can't take any forces away from the Rohan front. I can see how that could help the AI but it's really problematic with the slow movement speeds.

[MasterOfNone]

Ah, I believe that river had no fords in lore, I'm afraid...

[Kamos]

Any chance for some mercenary cogs off the coast then? Or can BI do that, I can't remember?.. Really just anything to help me fight Tharbad, Rohan and Gondor all at once.

[MasterOfNone]

you've been playing M2 too much; no merc cogs in Rome engine.

[Kamos]

I figured as much but wasn't sure, I'm rusty. I came out of RTW retirement to play this after all.

[Wambat]

You can use the Old Pukel-land port and the port of the independent province just north of the river to ferry troop back and forth, though I doubt that help all that much. You might just leave Old Pukel-land as a buffer between you and the Reunited Kingdom until you have secured one of your other borders.

[webba84]

Or you can take Helms Deep from the stinking strawheads and thereby secure safe travel for troops into Isenmarch.

Sorry, I know thats not very helpful. The River works both ways though, even if you lose the South defending your heartlands at Dol Baran should be easy enough.

[caspoi]

Are the wolfhunters supposed to be able to go berserk because their current description indicate that they would but they lack the ability.

[Thangaror]

You must have misunderstood something or you're confusing them with another unit. There's nothing said about going berserk in their description, only that they're quite unreliable and ill-disciplined.

[caspoi]

Well, it does talk about how the battle fervor goes to their heads and how they are not commanded as much as unleashed, things like that. It does sound like they would be some berserker-kind of unit which makes me suprised that they are not.

[CountMRVHS]

Do they have Warcry ability and the 'May Charge Without Orders' ability line? That would account for such description text.

[caspoi]

They have and I suppose it is the reason behind this but I found the unit description confusing.

[CountMRVHS]

Well, in doubt always check the Abilities lines. I've tried to keep the descriptions evocative of the units' actual abilities, but in an immersive way - which means there is sometimes the possibility of interpreting the text in a couple of different ways.

[athanaric]

Well, in doubt always check the Abilities lines. I've tried to keep the descriptions evocative of the units' actual abilities, but in an immersive way - which means there is sometimes the possibility of interpreting the text in a couple of different ways.

Or the EDU. It does help that that file is much more legible in FATW than it is in other versions of RTW, despite being rather large.

[caspoi]

Checking the description of the beorning guard i know that they at least are expressidly stated to go berserk, which they once again can't.

[webba84]

I suspect that your definition of expressly and Counts differ (and mine for that matter). I dont see anything in the Beorning Guard definition that states they go berserk.

[caspoi]

It is something in the lines of "it takes a very brave man to stand against a berserk beorning guard". And by the way the easterling warband lacks the warcry ability, which they seem to be meant to have (in a similar manner to the khandian horse-archers).

[CountMRVHS]

In the words of Bilbo (or was it Frodo?), "Oh, that was poetry." I refuse to budge on the alliteration in that particular line. It's not in the abilities line, and it's just for flavor.

Easterling Warband indeed lacks warcry, intentionally so - does the description mention that?

You'll have to be more specific regarding the khandian horse-archers.

[webba84]

...few men can boast of having beaten back a berserk Beorning - that line. I suppose it could be misconstrued, yes. Will have a look at that and the Easterling description too.