The Dominion of Men - Your Assessment

**Aradan** · April 22, 2012, 02:14 PM

I'm afraid this is a no-go, not because it's a bad idea, but because the AI will not know the script is there and even if it knew, it wouldn't be able to handle it. No matter how awesome the script is, the AI is not be aware of its existence. Imagine a player trying to plan his recruitment without being aware of the levies script/feature, then subtract 100 IQ points and you get the idea. Not to mention that the AI does not ever disband soldiers and would be left with the high-upkeep levies... There are other issues as well, but I think the aforementioned ones are enough.

Originally Posted by Jagmodo

Hmm, did I get this straight? In The New Shadow if I play Adûnabâr, and completely annihilate Reunited Kingdom (, or it somehow annihilate itself – lose all faction members ...) I will lost?

Not in 2.6. But in 2.0-2.2 Adunabar was a shadow of RK, and when RK was eliminated, Adunabar turned into RK and the Adunabar player lost the campaign. Same deal in vanilla BI with the Romans.

**Blatta Optima Maxima** · April 22, 2012, 02:30 PM

Not to mention that the AI does not ever disband soldiers and would be left with the high-upkeep levies...

Hmm... Well you could do something that makes the levies only cost much to the player.

**Aradan** · April 22, 2012, 02:41 PM

Impossible, without using different units. But if we go down that way, why bother create this system for anyone other than the player and let the AI recruit as usual...
Did I mention it also needs a background script, which is not my favourite thing in the world?

**Blatta Optima Maxima** · April 23, 2012, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Aradan

Impossible, without using different units. But if we go down that way, why bother create this system for anyone other than the player and let the AI recruit as usual...

That's kinda what I had in mind when I finished writing the second post, yeah.

Did I mention it also needs a background script, which is not my favourite thing in the world?

I knew that, lol.

**Aradan** · April 23, 2012, 05:58 AM

Yes, it is possible then. I think it could also work without scripts, if you make levies 0-turn recruitment and give the player enough incentive to destroy the building after a while... Anyhow, that's not going to be in fatw though, I don't want to turn everything upside down at this stage in development!

**Blatta Optima Maxima** · April 23, 2012, 06:07 AM

Well in that case I might get around to making a submod.

**Abul-Khair** · April 23, 2012, 06:12 AM

I think Harad needs decent horse archers. Also there needs to be many more factions. So few factions makes the campaign problematic since everyone ends up at war with everyone.

**Casual Tactician** · April 23, 2012, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by Aradan

Actually, it would be useful for us if anyone not voting for excellent posted some comments on what would make the mod so.

I had some ideas for DOM some time ago, but then you released the WIP features thread and that had everything I wanted to see in DOM, plus features I never even thought about. But if I stumble over an intersting idea for DOM, I'll surely post that...

Originally Posted by Abul-Khair

I think Harad needs decent horse archers.

Considering that they have an Oriental/Arabian/Persian touch, that doesn't sound like a bad idea.
Anyhow, it depends on what develpoments took place during the Fourth Age (as imagined/planned by the team), as I can't recall horse archers being mentioned (much) for the Haradrim by Tolkien.

Originally Posted by Jagmodo

I was thinking as you could also add some major battles landmarks, (...)

Ok, landmarks aren't possible, but the idea as such (mentioning major battles) isn't bad. Right now I'm not quite sure if DOM will have an unique 'building' for each province (be it a 'province's details scroll' or whatnot), but if so, then including a brief mentioning of historic battles (and perhaps other important historic events) would be a nice extra.

PS: If there's no unique province building planned for DOM something like the 'province building' planned for EBII (perhaps not as detaild though) would be a neat bonus. References:http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=247033 // http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/145...leprovince.jpg

**Thangaror** · April 23, 2012, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Abul-Khair

I think Harad needs decent horse archers.

Why?

Harad as a very strong and versatile unit roster. They really don't need horse archers.

**Casual Tactician** · April 23, 2012, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Aradan

There will be a region building (that's already a feature in TNS, though in DoM is more detailed), but not a province one - there isn't enough space in EDB and not enough info for every province on the map.

That's more than fine with me. And I don't want to seem as if I'm criticizing DoM. The idea of mentioning famous battles was brought up, and I just wanted to put in some ideas how that could be implemented. Having historic battles mentioned somewhere would simply be like having a nicely folded napkin (= historic battles statment) for a grand 7-course meal made by a 3-star cook (= DoM).
I must say, that I really love and appreciate all the mods you (and your team) have put out for us to enjoy. FATW, VI2 and NI (which I've only had a quick glance at) are truly superb mods (and I mean superb), and one of the reasons I still enjoy playing RTW! Thanks, Aradan (and team)!

Originally Posted by Thangaror

Why?

Harad as a very strong and versatile unit roster. They really don't need horse archers.

I know you're not responding to me, and I also don't think they 'need' (common) horse-archers. But as Tolkien probably had Oriental/Arab/Persian culures in mind, when formulating the Haradrim, some low-tier horse-archers aren't a bad idea, as Abul-Khair stated. After all, Iranian (eg. Skyths, Sarmatians, Medians, Persians, Yuezhi) and Arabs are known for their horse-archers.
As said, an interesting idea (also gameplay-wise) and not at all absurd, if you ask me... but not necessarily necessary.

**athanaric** · April 23, 2012, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Casual Tactician

After all, Iranian (eg. Skyths, Sarmatians, Medians, Persians, Yuezhi) and Arabs are known for their horse-archers.

Yuezhi weren't Iranian, although they mixed with the latter.

But it does make sense to have low- or mid-tier HAs as well when you have elite ones. Not saying you should add them, just that I can understand the argument.

**Casual Tactician** · April 23, 2012, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by athanaric

Yuezhi weren't Iranian, although they mixed with the latter.

Interesting to hear (and, once verified: to know). I was under the impression that they were (at least mainly) Iranian (and thus Indo-European). Could you give me some links? Were they influenced by Altaic (perhaps Mongolic or Turkic) peoples?

**Blatta Optima Maxima** · April 23, 2012, 06:14 AM

DoM will have 20-ish factions, close to the max. And Harad has HA's, the general.

**Abul-Khair** · April 23, 2012, 06:16 AM

Yes but the general unit is useless since there are so few numbers.

**Aradan** · April 23, 2012, 01:24 PM

There will be a region building (that's already a feature in TNS, though in DoM is more detailed), but not a province one - there isn't enough space in EDB and not enough info for every province on the map.

There are no plans for horse-archers for Harad atm.

**Blatta Optima Maxima** · April 23, 2012, 11:17 PM

Also, the Haradrim are more like medieval ME empires. Which only had HA's as mercs. Persians and Arabs themselves fought as lancers primarily. Which had been the same since the Sassanid times. The thing is, Harad has no particular reason to develop HA's, since it has no proximity to the steppes, unlike Rohan.