Warhammer Dark Omen Forum

Today I will publish a ruleset that provides (nearly) Totally Freedom in Army Creation

The money is fixed to 9000gc and it applies No modifications to Dark Omen.

There is Only one Rule (and some guidelines): DONT PLAY LAME (or use Lame army builds).

After some discussions we decided that an army should fit into the following guidelines:
- Some Units are reduced to 2 Units max: Black Grail, Archers (2 per Type), Artillery (2 per Type)
- Mages are reduced to 1 max in whole army
- No Horn

Before the battle you can discuss with the player about things like e.g.:
Horn allowed, No Magic Items, No Teleport

Attention: These guidelines don't define the rules. Non-written down rules like e.g. "Don't spam mummies" still apply because of "Don't use lame army builds"!



More information can be found in this thread (http://forum.dark-omen.org/rules-and-standards/how-to-act-in-a-multiplayer-fight-t335.0.html).

Most of the players should have enough knowledge to define by themselves what is considered lame (conserning army builds and gameplay). All newer players (players with no huge experience in multiplayer) can ask here in this thread about army builds to find out if they are lame or not.

Exchange your knowledge and Discuss!

I like the simplicity and freedom but to prevent lameness, I would add 1 more Rule - >

Only 2 of same character allowed, except Super Units, then only 1 of each - 1Mortor, 1 cannon, 1 BGK , 1 Elven Archer etc..


Many of you may already be familar with this, since I have used this quick ruleset on many new players and it does prevent alot of problems, as it is simple to follow and allows freedom, until they have time to read and learn our other rulesets.

:)

- without modding hate saying it but the horn has to be banned, its so powerful all games will revolve around it otherwise.

-super wizards! maybe a simple rule such as:
no teleporting
or
teleport only allowed for use to enter combat no escape
or
ward of jet must be ejected before teleport is used ( although you can pick it up again later).

and don't be a douche bag with pistoliers :)

@Ghabry: ;)

Mortar is lame XD

Well there is ONE situation where the Horn is really useful: To defeat the stupid zombies that are casted by the "Raise the Dead"-Spell. But against other regiments then Undead (Zombies) it's really unfair. I have to agree with this.
Oh and don't forget Hawks of Miska spell. I played many games against Jeronimo and he had nearly always the Miska spell which caused huge problems with retraating regiments...

And everybody knows in what situations Horn is Lame ;). E.g. Undeads with Horn: Really Lame.

Well the only really problem causing Wizard is the Vampire because of the high healthpoints and the unfair speed (and undeads have overpowered spells like Dancing Swords on LV1!, ok Bright Wizard has screaming skull but you need direct line of sight)
Others can be destroyed by archers and cannons (or other wizards).


How about no magic items? ;)

You should Gabriel take a look at "Different Style" in Multiplayer Topic (thread created by WHF)

I suggested there No Items and No Artillery.

Means that Shields and Expert Reg yes are allowed.

- magic = + tactic?

I have to disagree Ghabry, I have in the past detroyed entire armies with the bright wizard & teleport.  It's possible to warp in fire a spell and warp out before the other player can react, mainly down to the lag between the time you warp in and the time before your wizards banner appears on the enemeies screen.

As long as your quick, even direct fire weapons aint quick enough with the time taken to reform before firing, archers are pathetic.

I know your trying to be as open and simple as possible, but 1 point teleport needs curtailing.

Wizard Game Play: Teleport destinations must be always near a friendly/enemy regiment.
Every Wizard can use each Spell level 2 & 3 only once per Magic Cycle (like if Spells were Items).

When I told my brohter about this "new way" he agreed after 5 seconds. Of course we had a longer talk afterwards, where we analized different situations, and everything ended that is good resolution.

Its in fact a Gameplay that increases tactical level: what and when to cast Spells through Magic Cycles.
Magic Cycles last 25 sec. Do you agree (general consensus) to play this way with Wizards? (for all Rulesets)

I think, you all didn't understand the main sentence of this rule:


I personal see no reason to limit items/spells/regiments, as long as everyone plays within this rule...

agreed

lets try to focus less on rules and restrictions and focus on fun gameplay

As far i know, its impossible to edit magic spells: I would be glad to make Teleport cost 3 points and this way no rules for it. Or even reduce the Max range of Miska Hawks/Dark Blades.

But its true: Think in Arzunibapal Black Horror, Frozen Nova/Armor, etc. Who will cast them?

I managed to remove Armybuilds limits because they could be "changed" (gold/size) making also the Greenskins Race stronger. Also removed the Items issue, giving some crazy prices like 4k Horn of Urgok.

But concerning to Wizards (and just Wizards), is not possbile to re-edit those stuff (like 1-2-3 points or Ranges).
With things like this we still cant manage, only 1 Rule is enough (or 2 with "teleport destinations").

 My opinion: Game should be free of Rules, with only except my Idea towards Wizards.
Battles are funnier, when you reduce their participation.

As Darkmancer say, Ranged/Artillery most times are "slow" to react (preparing to shoot the target). Annoy us.
Pistoliers or Artillery dont bother me as we talk of LamePlay, they are nothing comparing to Wizards.
1 effective spell=1 less enemy regiment. Artilleries have enough price and Wizards what they deserve.

You will notice that already Ice Mage L1 starts with 2 spells Lvl2 +dispel +ice shield.
I say this for Experience. Against Gabriel, I had Miska in 6 continued battles. Lets say is not funny to cast them twice in a turn (you dispel it and he recast Miska again in same Magic Cycle). Sure, fun gameplay...

The main reason is simpley whats lame to one person isn't to another, whinging on the forums is infinitely preferable to arguments kicking off in game.  Not to mention what about new people trying the game, how are they supposed to know whats lame?  How off putting will it be to them to keep being told "you can't do that" ingame?

I dislike rules as much as the next person, especially the verbose if x do y while z is in effect whilst you have less than 4 units and a ichy left testicle (labia if otherwise endowed), but people do need general guidelines.

To me ideally a person whose never played the game before should be able to read them once, understand them, and get on with building his army in under 5 seconds.

Quick n dirty something like..

No horn,
no more than 2 of every unit (unless really basic like zombies or goblins)
no more than 4 balistic (archer+arty)
no camping
don't endlessly hit and run (pistoliers, teleports, elven archers, calvary + banner of wrath)

Are these too restrictive?

no they arent too bad and more what ghabry had in mind i think

hey i would say, maximum 2 grial , 2 elven archer and 2 of every artillery,  and 1 mage of course

then the other, limit of 3 for each one

then we can speak about magic items, to decide if play or not with them
 or play with them but ban the horn.

Ok maybe only "Don't play lame" is not exact enough. ;)

Thanks for your posts.
After reading them I will now sum up:

- Some Units are reduced to 2 Units max: Black Grail, Archers, Artillery
- Mages are reduced to 1 max in whole army
- No hit and run or permanent camping
- No Horn

Before the battle you can of course discuss with the player about other things like e.g.:
Horn allowed, No Magic Items, No Teleport


Would you agree with this guidelines for "Don't play Lame"?

looks fine to me.

Me too :)

Me too :D

Me too ;)

Me too ;D

Me too :P

Me too 8)

Well... here you have +6 supporters.
Emoticons have posted in your favor Ghabry!

Looks good but

- Some Units are reduced to 2 Units max: Black Grail, Archers, Artillery

Your rule allows 2 units of BGK, 2 elven archers, 2 mortors/lobbers, so no one would ever use cannon or other lesser arty/archers and all other units can be spammed (many of same unit).

However I have found,

- Only 2 of same character allowed, except Super Units, then only 1 of each - 1Mortor, 1 cannon/lobber, 1 BGK , 1 Elven Archer etc.. -"can now include Mages".

Prevents this and is a tried and tested method.

:)

Well. As I have written it's only a guideline.
The rule "Don't play lame" still applies. What would you think about army builds like e.g. 8 Flagellants ;).

Sorry,
I see that in your initial post that "all new players can ask here about if their army is Lame or not", is also intended to prevent Lameness and my redefinition of your rule was more usefull for when they first join our community, to quickly get them up and running to play their first games before having to read or post/debate about various allowed army combinations. My redefinition was trying to avoid debate over what is and what isn't a Lame Army build.

;)

im glad we got this sorted!  :-\

i dont like it cause i dont have faith in humans :)

and every1 feels diffirient what is lame and what is not. for example there is a game we played with flak when i had 1 canon and 1 lvl3 mage and he had crossbowmen, x2 regiments of flagelants (1-3 units) and some other regiment (hvnt remembered which one, maybe elven archers or ogres)

i felt completely in rules to teleport out with mage and meteor him a little. (or i did false charges or something wierd liek that instead teleport i hvnt remembered). at these times tourney rules was: when you have 1 mage u have to go cc, otherwise u free to do anything. so i had cannon and it was in rules

finally i won but i know Flak was very pissed off, and from my view i hvnt played ungently much, even though at first time i thought i 70% lost and tried to survive "for fun" but atfer i killed 2 regiments game became "even" and it would be stupid to surrender.

but from his point of view he maybe thought he has big advantage and maybe by his gentle rules i had to go in cc and die :)




and there was another toruney (maybe FO or 7k point system or something) where osiris and elven archers were too low in cost and i felt "ungentle" to use either osiris or mass archers (and its not fun) but Flak used such army and compeltely crushed me. So i also felt pissed of, but he was in rules, and more importanly he could think that his army is fine and gently.

so even experienced players can have troubles, what about newbies?

DO original Multiplayer is really nasty.

My first FO release was a bit to play lame (remember all those BGK), but then got sharp.
Imo the last FO version uploaded (without Halberdiers Spam), is the closest version to a "finally correct game".

Concerning to Original game, I also thought in a way of resolving armybuilds: is a combination of Points + SEC.

There are no limits in amount of regiments, because was resolved with Single·Elite<=Core (very simple)

And also these "Points" are given considering the Gold Limit played: 3k (12) 5k (20) 7k (28) 9k (36)

Well, for the points of each regiment I should upload a large table :) , but I thought in everything already.
Examples (points): Flaggelants 5, Wraiths 4, BGK 12, K of Realm 2, Spider/Scorpions 1, Necromancer 3, Vampire 5.

The clasification in S, E or C, its already thought. Even Items have their own Point value (Horn at 18 points).
I hope this helps to create something cool. My NEVER POSTED Ruleset is named "Goldpoint".

Just "Dont play lame" rule". But concerning to Armybuilds, there is no need of it (everything well balanced ;))

You can even buy shields and experienced regiments. It would be the most free Ruleset for original game.

Sorry Jeronimo your missing the point.

Yes I know. Its a big suggestion to convert BTTR in Goldpoint (after reading Alavet post).

If we limit Flaggelants to max 1, all armies (no exception) will have 1 flagellants.
If we limit Flaggelants to max 2, all armies (no exception) will have 2 flagellants.

Its the truth.

Working hard on BTTR would end in a sort of 9k/DOTv5 (because follows the same structure of limiting Nº of Regs).
I dont want to break down expectations about BTTR, but so far feels like spinning around.

I think some points should be made:

1) We should NOT stipulate a lot of rules about what constitutes "lame play", because
1a) We will always recognise lameness
1b) People will try to circumvent or exploit rules
2) We do not HAVE to stipulate explicit rules because we will generally recognise when people are trying to ride the rules. This is in English called "gaming the system". Thus, the only things we really need are:

A. Do not play lame. See to the intent rather than the letter of the recommendations.
B. Do not attempt to game the system.
C. A good game is when both players have fun.

There is a general tendency to consider that a "good game" is that one which ends with Close Combat.

As Mika says "both have fun", but when we have this at last minutes: 21/24 Dwarves vs 7/9 Pistoliers.
Pistoliers would win from far, and Dwarves only if Pistoliers go close combat.
From what point of view is a "good game"?

I consider lame doing hit N run with little damage (like cavalry with grudbringer sword, or a pack of goblin archers)
But a hit N run with considerable damage, is not lame. If regiment survived almost entirely...

However, Wizards always should have a different behaviour (as I posted), because each Magic Book has very powerful Spells and something to desmoralize.
The problem with Magic Books, besides those uber-spells, is the combination with the crappy spells at same Level.
Thats why I suggested to Limit each Spell L2 and L3 to max 1 per Magic Cycle, making Wizards less important AND giving a chance to the crappy spells to be used in emergency cases.

Example: Necromancer has Zombies Spells & Black Horror Arzubanipal: He summons the Zombies (beggining of cycle), but they die by a rear attack after 10 seconds, now you cant re-summon them; Do you wait 15 seconds more or do you cast Black Horror Arzubanipal to harm that free Regiment now?!
Same happens with Meteor + Dancing Swords: Everyone would cast 2 Meteors, but now depends on situation...

hrhr and I always though Germans are fanatic for rules and restricted games, but it seems other countries are worse ;D

I try to explain a little bit what the BTTR rule is for:

Point 1:


Dark Omen is a game, it's not a challenge. If you look at the last 10 tournaments you'll see, that there are (regardless which ruleset was used) always similar armybuilds. Strong and most time the same units. Did you ever used a goblin based armybuild in a tournament army? do you know how many fun it it? I tried and it was one of the most fun game, hell I lost miserable, but who cares? It was totally fun.

Dark Omen - April Tournament (5000/15) - Fight 1-3 - vs. bembelimen - The Empire (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BspHJfutvvE#normal)

The main goal of this ruleset is to have fun. Do you really care if you win a battle? Do you really care if you win a tournament? I don't(*).

So this is the next point of the ruleset. You asked:


I ask: is the last fight really important for you, if you have a good battle or not? I always(!!) knew when my opponent was better than me and I never had a problem to go in CC with my archers when my opponent deserves the victory. I think I had this "problem" with Flak. We had a very long battle on the griessburg town map. I had the better army I think but Flak killed everything. At least I had 8/9 pistoliers with b.o.w. he ~15 infantry left. I wouldn't had a problem to kill him by shooting/banner but I threw the banner away and go in CC. Why? Because the game was very fun and he was better than me. You shouldn't judge a game with the last battle, you should see the game in all.

Same thing happened, when I played Ghabry years ago. We had really cool battles but at the end, we took the last 1-2 regiments and made a CC, cause we knew who was better and who is the winner.

It makes no sense to pitch on single game situations to decide if they are lame or not, it's more important to play in that way, that it feels good. I also used firemage with teleport and meteor or vampire with teleport and zombie spell, but there is a different, if you use it to kill one regiment after another from you opponent with it or if you destroy his catapult and then attack with your other regiments.

So my request is: come away from playing for winning, enjoy the game, it's great!! (believe me)

PS: At least I want to point olly out. I think he plays since years with this disposition and if you try to play same against him I promise you, you will have much more fun...
PPS: If this ruleset is really good for a tournament depends on the player and is hard to decide, but I think everyone should see it more as something who can open your mind and perhaps one or two think about it and don't play lame even if there is another ruleset played and they will lose, when they don't use 2 grails and a lot of archers....

(*)most time

Yeah, I think that summaries the gist of it: anyone with a focus on "rules" and "winning" will not enjoy the game, especially in a small community as we are. I think we're sort of a gentlemen's club, where sportsmanship and "good one, sir!" are more important than to tally another one on the scoreboard. Especially since one will not win any larger fame and glory here--again, we're a small community--but everyone knows everyone and one will be so much more appreciated and admired for playing a fair, good and enjoyable game :)

I'm sorry Jeroimo I dislike your method of balancing, I find it too overblown.

@ Mika your spending way too much time on Wikipedia, Seriously :)

I'm posting a ruleset with a slightly different take to bttb here: http://forum.dark-omen.org/index.php/topic,690.msg6864.html (http://forum.dark-omen.org/index.php/topic,690.msg6864.html)

Im' posting it on another thread too avoid derailing this one too much :)

You mean the "see the intent not the letter" and "gaming the system" (WP:GAME)? Well, those ARE two very good principles, and I have recetnly been involved in conflict with an exhausting editor with autism or Asperger Syndrome, which made me study up on WP principles. So yeah, you're right... :(

Perhaps yes. I admit centring attention for every single detail (it drives to obsession).
Its because Im very analyst about Systems and Structures, all that stuff makes me think hard.


Concerning to Bembelimen POST, I also dont think during battle (gaah Pistoliers should had been at 5 points instead of 4...). When you are in battle, nothing more matters than playing focus in action.

However, its the "behind scenes" what matters to me. I will "enjoy" the moment of Armybuild if my conscience approves the System as "OK", and this feeling is more important that you imagine.

You have to look for the "reliable feeling", although it feeling comes in different ways.
Example: Pistoliers in relation with orc boyz are OK (and Darkmancer approves the system).
But Me, then I relation Pistoliers with all regiments, also orc boyz in relation with Skeletons, mercenary infantry, etc.

Its the deep analysis in which every Regiment is in relation with every other Regiment (and Fair Omen borned from that obsession because I needed to satisfy my conscience).
PD: My Rule for Wizard is of that kind (since there is not well balanced Magic Books).

Dont want to harm anyone with this Post, but I did it to show my stance concerning to balance = +fun

i .. well i will tell what i think ok?

i have to admint that no matter what ruleset, i had funny games, maybe not GG but yes funny games, or funny moments during a battle, but if we speak about playing tournament, we are speaking about challenge, not enemisties, but yes challenge , and defeat-enemie dessires.. hmm what i am trying to say, but it cost me a lot is that in tournament i want to have a good game, and to do a good game , you want or not, you need a balanced game system, units/magic prices and sizes.

like bembelimen said, about games with gharby or  olly, i have no problem in play any moment of the day a game, despite of  use what ever rule or moddified prices or just original game and have funny games and  not compite just play and have funn, but if i will play a tournament and think it has no sense , the tt would hve nothing special or different in playing daily games on hamachi, the name "tournament" would be just wrong, i can say i play the tournament and confirm and the day of tt play 1 or 2 battles and leave and say i dont care if the bann me 2 month for leaving tt, anyway i can play the same kind of games on hamachi with an online user.

i won the last tt , and well i was happy yes i had funn but no GGs e.g i had to fight against 270 haldbeiders but oh yes i had a funny moment when my cannon it one regiment of haldbeiders and the retreat from battle, and then 4 more haldbeiders regiments masacred the cannon, that is not GG, in TT i wanna play fair games, balanced prices sizes of unit and magic nad 2 or 3 restrinctions, not like my brothers ones :P but well things like BGK or elven archer or mortar units... and magic.
orcs will never be ok with original system and there a several erros with zombies, wraith, ogres etc.. that we know there are.

so , i hope you understand what i said. in commom matches ok no problem to play anything but TT i want to play really GG , and win or not, i know that i will have funn in that way..

oh now i remeber thing like "i had 9 pistoliers and he 20 orcs inf, but like we both knows who was winning we made CC" yeah but talking about TT you wont just give him the victory, there is where the really meaning of play a tt appears, what we really want when we talk about rules ruleset and mod is to make one for the multiplayer TT, and what bembelimen exampleded was for normal matches, friendship matches, whatever you call them, am i right?  ;)

totally agreed with lordbraprus and in fact i little amazed with lenght of his post.

what is work with friend matches aint work with tourneys. and sadly, i rarely play friendly ones :)

gj lord! :)

I realized the thread was going to the "friendly match" side (Mika, Bembe)
The things I posted were more concerning Tournament Days.

1) My point of view starts from the Pre-Armybuild. That is the first thing that calls my attention (friendly or TT).
Can I trust in this System, or it is very obvious this Regiment is underpriced/overpriced? and ruin the 45 Reg equality, which means that my opponent might be considering to spam them. ???

2) IN battle, you can have "funny records" no matters the Rulesets. Thats is NOT new info (this come from virtual dice, of course, that LUCK itself can give us good or bad moments... because we talk of DO back engine, not human rules).

3) I do believe that what works in friendly matches can work on Tournaments. No need to divide gameplay because is not "official TT". Just talk to your friend, ask him which TT Ruleset to pick or "without rules".
Its something of general consensus. Example: Lets play with 5k/15..., lets play 7k NB..., lets play "Restrict"...

"They both will decide which or what to play. No Rules or Mix of Rulesets is allowed." :)

sure I did.


Nope, both examples were tournament matches, but I think, I should stop here, the priority of each player in tournament it too different...

well, i expresed what i think thats all.. i play everything but in diferrent way depending if it is a normal match or a TT. bembelimen way of play is peculiar, individual .. mine is general as me, my brother or alavet does, and more players from  here. 

i understand bembelimen point but for him, signing in a TT is the same as play a normal match and the thing is no like that.there should no be 1st 2nd or 3th places in that way...

what i have thinked now is that the bembelimen way of play can work for a players meeting :O somehting like the TT that all players go to chat some day of the month and play battles to have fun :D friendly matches. that is good idea i believe :S 1 day for TT and one day for funny friendly nice games.

After reading most of the rule-sets in these forums, I realised that it's trying to combat symptoms instead of the ailment.

The fact that you can play lame means there is an imbalance. Instead of creating rules that rely on both players abiding to them, if they even know about them, it would be better to solve the roots of the problem.

The Horn is an incredible item as it can send units fleeing, turning them into cannon fodder for anyone walking through, and taking the rest out of the fight as long as they flee. Not to mention the fear-resistant Undead benefiting more of it's effects then Orcs/humans.
Instead of banning it or making it expensive, you can curb it's effects. If possible allow it to rally troops at it's current radius. For it's effect on enemy regiments you can make the effect so small you need to be in combat with them to have it work.

Teleport is obviously overpowered. You can easily teleport in, blast an enemy and be back before they react. Even against the AI they have barely any time to react when done properly, let alone a human player that is managing armies outside of the view of the attacked regiment. Increasing it's mana consumption to 3, or creating a maximum distance it can be used it are great ways to limit it's effectiveness, especially the hit&run tactics that evolve near the end of a match that I encountered against my brother.

Some regiments are obviously overpowered, otherwise there wouldn't be any rules to limit how many you can have. You could limit their power by increasing their costs or building in vulnerabilities. Having a fearless, heavily armored, maximum-fear inducing, heavily hitting and fast horse-regiment is all great and all but shouldn't there be trade-offs?
Example:
-Light infantry functioning as cheap ass skirmishers or cannon fodder, small-medium squads, good manouvering, pretty fast when it can walk around. (just examples, you don't need to agree with these units, Grudgebringer infantry, Countess guard, outlaw infantry, night goblins, zombies)
-Medium infantry functioning as Shocktroopers to take the brunt of any assault, medium-large squads, medium manouvering, slow units.(Skeletons, ghouls, Orc Boys, imperial greatswords, dwarf warriors)
-Heavy infantry (cheaper then Heavy Horse and also for heavy combat), small-large squads, varied manouvering depending on size, very slow. (Flagellants, Orc Big un's, Mummies, Wights)
-Light horse, small-medium squads, very good manouvering, extremely fast units to run down stuff or tear into archer/artillery units. Light armor but have a good punch. (Carlson's cavalary, Ragnars wolves, Skeleton horsemen)
-Heavy horse, small-large squads, tough manouvering, heavy armor means slow movement slightly faster then Light Infantry (Orc boar boys, Knights of the Realm, Grail knights, Black Grail knights, Grudgebringer cavalry)
-Special units, usually small squads with a lot of varying abilities. (wraiths, wizards, Treemen, chariot, spiders, scorpions, trolls, etc).
Note that this is just a quick mockup, the actual abilities etc should still vary from faction to faction, but a more clear line between units could help create a better balance. Attacking archers would be more profitable with light horse then Heavy horse as light horse can close the distance faster. Cheaper units can still be fielded without being nothing more then a temporary barrier that deals practically no damage to the ultra-heavy units like Black Grail.

Whilst enjoying playing all the rule sets and admiring the thought that goes into them all, I had always envisioned that one day we would be able to add in all the Warhammer races and achieve something as close to the Warhammer Rulebooks as possible. This would probably provide further debate on whether they are even balanced themselves but thankfully we are now at that stage of Dark Omen modding that we can add in new sprites and maps.

:)


Horn - As far as I can remember, the Horn sadly doesn't rally troops, although haven't tested in many years and with recent modding advancements, there maybe a slim chance to alter factors such as these.


Teleport - It would be great to mod mana and teleport distances but we probably require the source code that the original developers unfortunately were unable to release to us. Only a remake project could provide this but what a game it would be. We live in hope!

Your trade off concept sounds good and I look forward to playing it, so let us know if you require any Beta testers or info. 

:p
this type of thing is very easy to track down using Cheat Engine

the table of magic items/spells is at file offset 0x000E2A18 in the english executable
each entry is 40 bytes in length
see http://wiki.dark-omen.org/do/DO/Magic_Items (http://wiki.dark-omen.org/do/DO/Magic_Items) for id's

DWORD id; // 0x00
BYTE unknown[8]
DWORD cost_mana; // 0x0C
BYTE unknown[12]
DWORD max_range; // 0x1C
BYTE unknown[8]

Perfect!

:)

Is there a good introduction in modding Dark Omen somewhere here? I assume there is but I'm short on time atm to look for it.

I would also like a more expanded group of units available. My ideal vision would have only a few options where one unit-type can easily wipe out an army with only a small variation, such as Wraiths going up against a no-magic army.
The best thing that could happen is that there are enough options for every army to build just about any army-type you want. I'm still thinking what the best trade-offs would be for each group. If I am going to mod it, I would probably end up making my own regiment types rather then using the current one's.

Now I'm not well-versed in Warhammer lore, so if these idea's aren't in line with it tell me and I'll try to change it.

Greenskins seem to be a mix of low-power to Heavy hitters. Goblins are a bunch of easy-to-scare and lacking a punch groups more meant as cannon fodder than anything else, while their Archers are already a full melee group with the added power of arrows. I would try to enforce this rift by giving the greenskin armies either ultra-light units or Heavy, tough creatures. Their 'abilities' seem to be centered on sly cunning (fanatics) and physical abilities (regeneration, 360 view) mixed with mystical abilities that boost the unit itself (magic resistance). These would be the unique factors I would try to put into the army.

Empire is a middle ground. I would give them lower damage potentials per-turn than Orcs. The empire mostly seems to rely on ingenuity to win: Steam tanks, cannons, crossbows, pistols and a lot of well-build armors to protect their men. I would give them the ability to wear the most armor in the game and give them the most tactical advantages given to them by their ingenuity, such as larger arrow range, slightly faster troops and good manouvering.

The Undead are in my eyes large groups of meatbags in worn armor. They would get a lot more hitpoints (An arrow in dead flesh doesn't do much) but low armor ratings compared to the other two factions. They would rely mostly on fearless warriors as well as mystical and psychological abilities that are projected on their enemies rather then themselves (Fear, ignore armor) and a few on themselves (incorporeal).

Nice ideas and if you haven't already, try Wh32Edit as a good starting point and there's lots of information on our wiki page, that I'm in the process of combining into a complete modder's guide.

http://wiki.dark-omen.org/do/Special:AllPages (http://wiki.dark-omen.org/do/Special:AllPages)

You'll have to start your own thread soon, when you have a name for your project.

:)

I have the following problem in a singleplayer campaign: To make enemy mages more dangerous I give them wands of jet. But after I collect more than 1 such wand, my wizard is able to carry several and this reduces costs of most powerful spells to 1 for him.
I tried to solve this by using WHMTG function 'removemagic' but using it crashes the game. so far I have not figured out what I do wrong.
This Aqrit's find was another possible solution to my problem: I wanted to reduce all spellcosts in game the way Wand of Jet does it: 3->2, 2->1, 1->1 and remove all wands of jet from the game alltogether. This would make my wizard slightly stronger in the early missions - till he finds the wand in a natural way. But this would solve my main problem.

However this other way did not work either :(. The problem is: When my wizard is high in level, he has to have a 3-mana spell in his book or the game crashes. :( If I set only 1 spell that costs 3, he will always have that spell. And besides, the spell becomes too expensive as there are no wands of jet. I am not yet sure what to do.

The argument type for the RemoveMagic WHMTG function is listed "unknown". (here (https://github.com/aqrit/Dark-Omen-Mod-Selector/blob/master/src/whmtg.cpp#L106))
To get it to work, one would need change the argument type to "integer" then recompile.

the whmtg compiler code is merged with the mod selector code in a way that doesn't want to compile with vs2008, which is why I don't have time right now to make the change and re-upload it for you.

I've started a rewrite of the whmtg compiler a half-dozen times and never finished it.

I wonder if Ghabry can do it instead of you :)

Just a note to myself:

in my EngRel offest of first magic item - Grudgebringer sword - is 0x0E2FB8

Items/Spells in EngRel:

5th byte - after Spell Id - seems to be responsible for item type and problably unit class that can wear it.

Spells have 5th byte = 01
Spellbooks have = 10 (hex)
Grudge Sword = 02 - as do other swords' 5th byte.
Staff of Osiris has A0. When I changed A0 to 02, My Cavalry was able to pick it up and blast with it. At the same time units who already had sword, could not pick up this staff.

6th byte - seems to be responsible for race - and probably class too - that can wear artifact. Most of items have this byte =0 but for example Runefang and Mork's Warbanner have certain values in it.

20th byte - (offset 0x14) - is related to spell icon. All artifacts seem to have 01. Fireball has 02, Brain Bursta has 04. If I set 04 for Grudgebringer Sword AND give Waagh Book to any regiment, Grudgebringer Sword is displayed as Brain Bursta but shoots fireballs none the less.

Also, unfortunately there does not seem to be spell firepower anywhere in these bytes.
Brain Bursta and Fireball have identical data (apart from a few ids that I have already mentioned). However Brain Bursta never kills more than 1 enemy while Fireball may kill up to 6 - maybe even more if lucky.