Oh, and another of the AoW1 music files which I've redone is "In the Company of Elves", from the demo, which is one of the best AoW1 songs...

Anyway, I've just made some space on my HDD, hopefully I can install AoW:SM tommorrow and get to work on the music shortly after!

Quoted from swolte:

Do you really like "Crusader + Willpower" on human Racial Building ?..
And there's mere text variables: e.g. we can use separate set of MLDs. In 1.4 UPatch all these "Recruitment Sites" in AoWSMEd causes a little confusion, don't they ?
Let alone my latter discoveries (e.g. real immunities list including Static Shield or Abilities vs. Terrains accessibility).

C (and therefore, by the way, D): Oh, no. I did not assumed we have to supply entire new "AoWSM.exe" (bulky and poorly compressed). Just some diff/patch tool (or mere link to one, depends of size and license) and diff file (something like {Offset:AAAA, Length: LL NewData: DDddDDdd}). And batch file that will copy "AoWSM.exe" and launch diff/patch program.
Maybe then there would be less copyright problems if we provide only our changes (hence in order to apply patch user must already have primary executable) ?..

If someone here knows good free binary diff/patch tool for Win32 - please tell.

Quoted from swolte:

(With bastardly grin): well, as a registered Hiew user i could change commands in those big files as easy as mere data constants (and perhaps PawelS can do the same)...
(sigh):...but i'm quite unsure that i could find all proper procedures (e.g. for "endless Catalyst" exploit it's not necessary includes only methods of TMagicCatalystPO class), not to say analyze code good enough to understand how those bugs happens - and, moreover, twist code within the same size (even if this code is far from being optimal).
Though i can find some interesting things, i'm not a real hacker.

Quoted from swolte:

Do you mean that silly bug with "mis-creation" i analyzed ? It's easily recoverable manually, but since STL-pack (that allows to fix it in even more advanced way) is not released yet - i'll try to locate and fix the address in AoWSMEd where wrong constructor is called. To avoid this problem automatically and forever.

[This message has been edited by Turbo Beholder (edited 01-06-2006 @ 01:15 AM).]

assuming AOW:SM is mostly C code: does anybody know what compiler was used or at least what object-code format it was linked against?

better - has anybody tried remote-debugging the exe? with what debugger / success?

it has been some years since I did low-level disassembling on the Windows platform, but I would try to implement the following spells that would _fix all balance problems_ once and for all:

==============================

DARK BRANDING / HOLY BRANDING:
level 2 death / life magic

- 16 mana cost
- 16 mana / turn
gives:
- alignment change to pure evil / pure good
- +1 dam, +1 att vs. good / evil units
- holy weakness (dark branding) / death weakness (holy branding)

the low mana costs are so that it can easily be dispelled to counter overpowering, still 16 mp make sure a spellcasting II hero can't recast it during a fight if dispelled.

the high per turn cost is suggested because this would be the most powerfull unit enchantment in the game.

==============================

3 reasons, why this has to be implemented in the .exe:
- alignment cannot be changed by a spell effect otherwise.
- the holy weakness on units that originally have 'holy immunity' has to be overriden in much the same way that 'drain will' cancels 'willpower'. the default for a creature with both weakness/immunity would per default wrongly (in this case) be 'immunity'.
- it has to be hardcoded that you cannot cast both spells on the same unit.

the reason why I suggest a new spell as opposed to modifying 'dark / holy champion' is that 'd/h champion' exists as both spell and regular unit ability and there are several artifacts that grant one or the other, meaning the check againts both abilities on the same unit would have to occure at 3 places instead of one. apart from that it has a distincively different use.

one thing to look closely at would by the alignment change (hardcoded if I see it right) a possesed unit / a changling undertakes. it is possible, but not, AFAIK with the editor tools. to hinder casting on units with the other spell already we have to look at casting 'stone skin' on flying units.

I think having this spell would silence the unhealthy balance discussion from the online gamers once and for all and lets us finally [re-]create more interesting changes to the races to make them more different instead of more all-the-same in the name of balance.

any suggestion, especially to the technical questions, would be very welcome.

kind regards,
Carsten

Hi Poldi,
I do think it is a good idea to change Holy Champion, but your enchentment has only penalties, except one. I would never cast it on a unit because:
1) I can't have neutral units in the party anymore, because that would decrease morale.
2) The unit has death/holy weakness, and it is overriding death/holy immunity.
3) It costs 16 mana/turn. That is a huge amount, compared to Enchented Weapon (only 2-5, not sure)

The only bonus it gives is the +1 attack & +1 damage vs evil units.
So, the bonus is far less than the penalty's. To make it balanced i think you should make it +2 attack & +2 damage vs evil units. In addition, i think the unit should have death weakness AND holy protection/immunity or holy weakness AND death protection/immunity.

Now about the technical questions:
I can't make clear from your comment if you want you want to do with the old Holy champion spell/ability. I think h/d champion should be the ability and h/d branding should be the spell. Also, there should be something that prevents units from having h champion (inherent) and d champion (item) and d branding (spell) and h branding (spell), but i think that is hardcoded.

In your last paragraph you talked about an unhealthy balance discussion from online gamers. Could you explain that a bit more, i really don't know what the discussion is about, because i never play online games (but i really should).

the +1 att/ +1 dam is rather irrelevant. just a small bonus.

neutral player don't need this spell, nor the advantage it grants.

the reason to cast this is the alignment change.

This is a very interesting topic, as it seems to me that most of the online gamers of this community wish to see some changes that will improve balance. I personally dont think that a 1.5 version is needed in a short time period though, at least until the current version has been upgraded to a fully balanced and playable one, because any new unit or building would create situations and features which are hardly predictable without a serious testing in online gaming.
I'm aware of the fact that there are many different ways of playing this game (online, pbem, single player) and, since im a straight online gamer, im much more interested in a balanced game than in some funny new features or cool units (like in bnw for example) which on the other hand reduce gaming variability. This is ok for a mod, but not for a socalled "patch".
I get now to the point: it seems to me that 1.4 has decreased possibilities to use different races and different skill/sphere combinations instead of increasing them.
Lets start with the races. If u check ladder reports u will see that high-ranked players (good players) only use 6-7 races out of 15; some races have totally disappeared (humans, dark elves, tigrans), elves are banned, syrons suck more than ever, dwarves are still hard to use (runies are too slow), nomads and shadow demons have gotten worse, draconians, archons, undeads, frostlings and orcs now rock the Casbah.
Why is that so?
Apart from changes in units the big factor is the changes in the skill-research value which were meant to improve variability and different strategies.
What's the result?
The result is that everybody just takes constructor + research race, since u cant combine pacifist with constructor anymore. Apart from the early experiments i've seen nobody lately using technophobe or decadence and some "pioneers of the impossible" do try to combine bureaucrat with constructor + a second skill, which is normally expander or scholar (but the results are not that impressive). The possibility of using anarchist hasn't changed much from 1.3. Fact is that i saw many more combinations in 1.3 than i see now in 1.4 and that rushing races are now very weak because of the absence of explorer. Moreover nobody takes scholar + summoner anymore because summons are too easy to counter with banish/bind summoned costing 20/40cps, so that this strategy is now simply not worth the effort.
Considering this and the fact that most level 4 units have been improved, it wont be hard to realise that the game has gotten slower and that therefore most players just use pure spheres (spec), so that an average online game turns out to be a level 4 slaughter.
I think a great job has been done on heroes, items, rewards and some minor changes (night vision and cave crawling for draconians for example), but i also think that there is still much to be done to restore or even improve gaming balance in comparison to 1.3.
I won't speak here about specifical changes, i would just like to see the active members of the ONLINE community realise that these changes are necessary, and discuss and implement them as soon as possible, before this game turns out to be an archons vs undeads warfare with some red dragons flying around. I emphasize and underline online gamers because i know we are all playing a patch which has been thought of and developped mainly by PBEM players, who have different needs and wishes. So it might even be the case of having two different patches for the two different game modalities, since autocombat is VERY VERY different from tactical.
Roger is doing a good job with his thread: let's support him.

PS: last ladder game i've played: 3 archons, 1 draconian, 1 newbie taking dwarves and being killed within turn 20; 3 fire specs, 1 air spec...doesn't this sound kinda boring?

I really like racial boats concept... What do you think about racial siege machines?

Of course I don't expect 45 unique units, but bigger diversity would be interesting... We already have some nice machines in the editor, it'd be great to see them more often.

[This message has been edited by hatifnat (edited 01-06-2006 @ 05:05 PM).]

racial boats: cool and fun, but I don't think it will add much to gameplay.

there are so many ways to cross water: map features (bridges, teleporters, shadow world, underground - depending on the map), flying, floating, swimming, water walking as both regular unit abilities and spell/item granted abilities...

I only build boats when I have already won in sp and want to roleplay the situation but never in competitive games.

usually you only need a strong and mobile army to cross the water to another continent, conquere a town to get a foothold and build groundbased troops in your new town(s).

even in the regular game (1.3) you have 6 types of dragon in all alignment, gargoyles, wyver rider, eagle ride, pegasus rider, ice dragon rider, succubi, draconian flyer, hydra, swashbuckler, phenix, druids, abnominations, rogues, nymphes, syron rider, brains, the shadow demons lvl2 flyer, a giant orc slime-king, vampires, frogs, roc, air gelley, forceship, doom bats, ...

no matter what alignment - you will always be able to build a diverse, strong task force that can cross the water without help and secure a foothold in the new land.

still, it would be nice to see, say, a ghost ship...

Boat-Types should get stronger attacks and defenses... this would increase the chances of them getting used during games.

I remember reading within another topic how a spell was removed because it didn't work. Perhaps in Patch_1.5 the busted spell can be changed into a Cosmos or Special spell which does work.
Any chance of this happening swolte ?

Quote:

I like the idea, although I never felt this to be very 'wrong'. In a way, this is already introduced! This in contrast to the generic priest that was obviously a matter of resources, and had TS had more time and pay, no doubt we would have had those racial priests before!

Nice to see new names posting, Nonno!
Welcome!
We'll certainly keep those issues in mind and I am sure a future version can fix these concerns! There are two things I would like to say that do strike me as wrong:

1. Online gaming was taken very seriously, and most criticism before was actually towards the opposite (this becoming an online mod). The online community was aware of all the changes 6 months before release, and that also is the time it was in testing. The balancing team, and influential forces had a good distribution of people experienced in all fields that were in tight connection with the 'field'.
If people tell you this was not the case, I would be surprised and be doubtful of their knowledge or motivations.
Darkmystery, Air, Frall, Gandalf, Kolusar and most top players will tell you this and HAVE played several testgames themselves and invited to do so with the files and information available.

2. Just because you see people using strategies, doesn't necessarily mean they are always the best and that they will always be so. There were times where you were considered 'doomed' if you didn't take death sphere with Darkelves. Give it some more time, and the 'trend effects' will wear off and new ones might appear. Certainly issues will remain and races being more popular then others but this has always been that way.
And if it indeed appears to be the case that even less races are competetive then v1.3, then we have done a bad job! I personally dread this lvl4 frenzy, and I doubt that it had become worse then it was (prices increase of lvl4, decrease of lvl2/3's, prerequisite buildings more expensive, etc) but it hasn't gotten better for sure because of known reasons.

Quote:

Yes, these will probably be cosmetic.
There can be some minor variation in that, for example, the Turtle will be the Draconian one (so a transport with a 'strike') and the Elves have a faster ship with slightly less capacity. Variations in cost, capacity, movement, abilities and stats can make them more unique and give each their strength and weaknesses. This way it can even add something to gameplay.

Quote:

Yes, I believe it was Spell-Ward that one should never have wasted research on!
Will look into that!

If mass level 4 battles are a problem, here's a possible solution:

Give all level 4s (except Air Galley, Forceship, and Steam Tank obviously) the ability Transport I. Boom. Transports can't be grouped together, which means a max of one level 4 per stack. This would make gameplay more enjoyable, IMHO, and it would also make things a bit more realistic (not the transport bit, the limitation itself. What would be more likely: An army of Orcs with a Glutton with each major group, or an army of Gluttons with a few Orcs along for the ride? Obviously the first one, but the second one is seen more often). If this makes level 4s a bit underpowered, give them a bit of a boost. I may be the only one to think this way, but I feel level 4s should be much rarer and much more difficult to bring down than they are right now. Right now the level 4 is the backbone of a lot of armies, and that's just not right. I don't think it would have a huge effect on movement, as IIRC I was still able to group a fully loaded balloon with a Wyvern Rider for protection. The transport won't provide an advantage either: Theoretically you COULD use your Leprachaun to individually ferry Sherrifs across a river, but that's hardly very efficient or cost-effective.

And you know what? While I'm on the topic, this brings me to a major gripe. I don't know if this would be doable with 1.5, or if anyone would even want this, but I think the worst thing that ever happened to the AoW series was the idea of city growth. I loved the original hex system: 1 hex could build level 1s, 2 hex could build level 1s and 2s, and so on. This meant that no matter how many level 4s you were cranking out, you'd always have plenty of level 1s being produced in your 1 hex city. The Swordsmen never went out of style no matter how many Warlords or Red Dragons you made. Now that's gone. Level 1s are now mostly useless except for cheap defence. Why would I spend time and money on Axemen when I could build a War Hall and get Calvalry? Sure, you can disable city growth, but that's not that great since there's so few cities now. And on RMGs almost all of them are outposts. This is probably more of an idea for an AoW 3 than for a patch, or even a mod, but I'd like to see a return to the days of tons of cities with no growth. That gave the original AoW a more epic feel as it had massive armies composed mainly of level 1s and 2s, with a sprinkling of level 3s for good measure and level 4s as almost "ultimate weapons," as opposed to the two later games, which have almost a "Clash of the Titans" feel to them.

Whoops, sorry about that, didn't mean to go on such a long rant. I should probably start my own thread instead of clogging up this one. Hell, I just might do that. Tell me what you think of the level 4 transports ideas though.

Oh, one other thing I wanted to add. Earlier in this thread, someone said that single-damage type attacks should be removed. I think the opposite. I think that if anything, attacks the deal only one kind of damage (only fire, only ice, etc) should be more frequent. It would help convince players to diversify their armies even more (Did your stack of Black Bolt shooting monsters run into a unit with Death Immunity? Whoops, maybe you should have actually branched out instead of massing one type of unit). I think that to this end we should also bring back Physical Immunity. Nothing fancy, just put it on a couple of units, maybe put it on the Incarnate and nerf the Spectre a bit and give it to her. It's not even all that useful anymore given the sheer amount of non-magical strikes, but it'll make players think twice before pounding out tons of Knights or Warlords.

I wanted to reply on the message of Poldi about the h/d Branding spell.
You said the h/d spell is just for the alignment change and you said it is not to be used by neutral races.
It is true that it is not used by Neutral races, but good/evil units DO use neutral units. If you cast this spell then the party morale will decrease if it has a unit with this spell and a neutral unit.
Don't get me wrong, but I really like the idea of something else than h/d champion, but I don't think anyone would cast this spell in its current form.

Edit: I just read the message posted by unknown 2577 (or so) and about the transport 1 for level 4 units. I agree that there are two many stacks of nothing but level 4 units. If you give a level 4 unit Transport 1 it can ONLY be in a party of 2 units. I have tested it, Shadowfax has in Blackrose's Middle Earth mod Transport 1 and he can only have one unit with him. I don't think you wanted to do this.

[This message has been edited by Ecthelion_21 (edited 01-07-2006 @ 03:25 AM).]

Quoted from Unknown250:

For a moment I thought that should have been Transport VII, but that would let L4 units with flying/mountaineering/cave crawling take entire parties with them. Hrm, same with Transport 1 but to a lesser extent...

As for the size of the executable... has it been processed with "strip" (should be in MinGW or MSYS) or UPX?

Is Transport 0 doable/codeable?

That might just do the trick of keeping the game from being a level 4 fest. You can still group your lev IV's in adjacent hexes. This might overpower the races with weak level 4's...

Transport I I can see the level IV's carrying their own siege engines to back them up- esp Glutton and Kharagh...

I think Transport 0 should be doable. If it's not, Transport I shouldn't be too huge a deal. In response to Alphax's point, a level 4 that could only carry one unit isn't that effective a transport. If you really want to have your Red Dragons fly individual troops over mountain ranges instead of have them out in the field fighting, that's fine, although it's a questionable strategy.

I think arstal's point is more valid (No offence intended, Alphax). I never thought of a Kharagh with Transport I enabling a cannon to whiz around a 40 movement a turn. Although I suppose that if he were to do this, it would be just the two of them, and a lone Kharagh and a lone Cannon shouldn't be TOO difficult to defeat. I think the issue would come more when the Kharagh transporting the Cannon was grouped with several other fast units, say Wolf Riders and a couple Big Beetles.

So I think Transport 0 would be our best bet. If that's not doable Transport I would work but would need some testing.

@Ecthelion_21:

I will add a new topic for the suggested spells.

just that much: I am a sp (and LAN) player myself. but I hear constant critic from online player that with one change or another you cannot winn 'with this race'.

one example can be read in the thread about silver medalled fairy dragons.

the core of their complaints is: pure races are strongly disadvantaged because relations to most other races are bad / unmanageble and the cities you find early on are random on RMG maps. this might leave you with no choice but migrate them and thus have no units to your avail but those of your starting race/spell sphere. now some people tend to say you cannot win in such a situation because the pure races (Archon, Undead) have no counter to all situations they get in. thus certain races or race/spell combinations are not winnable or at least not desirable when playing competitive. this is simplified and actually not only the pure races are involved, but DarkMystery could explain this better.

the dark- / holy branding spells could be a solution, _if_ it was technically feasable to implement them.

again: I am not an online games and I disagree with the evaluation of 'undead are impossible to play competitive'. I like to get a solution that fits sp and mp players.

(and my personal win would be that I no longer have to bite into my table when I finally manage to grow my own dragn from a hatchling and it is of my opposite alignment... this was even more frustrating with 1.4 because is is yet even harder to bring them up to gold)

Quoted from poldi:

I'm glad to report that it's known procedure and constants are located.
After checking for presence of Dragon Growth ability there was used Complicated Algorithm ^TM (maybe patented - anyway, please never use it in your own programs ):
N:=Random (100);
N:=N-25; If N<0 then
SomeFunction(38);/* =Red Dragon UnitRes ID */
else...
- and so on, repeated 3x times + 1 call without check (last "else", for remainder 25/100). I was really shocked by this "100" for 4 equiprobable results.
Well, even while leaving 100 "total chances", we can just set 10..15 (instead of 25) for aligned (and more powerful) Black Dragon and Golden Dragon units and distribute freed chances between Red Dragon and Ice Dragon.
Draconian Growth does the same (50/100 and remainder) for Charger and Flamer.
But Metamorphosis does something else.

[This message has been edited by Turbo Beholder (edited 01-07-2006 @ 10:12 PM).]

I mostly play vs. the computer. So I do not wish for better balanced units, but for more variety among units and races.

Let us look back to AoW 2. Each race had its own advantages and disadvantages, making it unique. Halflings were slow (maybe a bit too slow), humans were fast (maybe a bit too fast), and halflings had the only unit with leadership for compensation.
I liked most changes that came with AoW:SM and V 1.4, but now I notice that diversity has gone. Humans are slow now (even slower than halflings!), leadership and bards' skills are not unique any longer.

Count the number of races that have at least three units with 36 or more mp! There are archons, elves, syrons and nomads. These are four races. And now count the number of races that cannot move around most of their high-level-creatures with at least 32 mp. Halflings, humans, dwarves and goblins have balloons, only orcs, tigrans, undead and shadow demons are often limited to 28 mp (warlord, harvester, bone horror) or 24 mp (beholder). Now note that there is at least one race of each alignment that can create transport units. So if you are lucky, you can speed up every army to at least 32 mp, wizard skills not even taken into account.

In AoW 2, humans were able to move around with 40 mp (cavalry, knight, air galley), but halflings were often restricted to 28 mp (save for eagle riders). While this difference has proven to be too much, giving the same speed to both races takes away quite a lot of variation.
I think, it would be good to give 36 mp to the human knight and air galley, and 40 to the cavalry, so that they get back their speed advantage. The air galley has already been weakened by limiting the number of shots.

Today in HOMM IV I realized how challenging fighting a faster, but weaker opponent can be. My army was superior to my enemy's forces, but his barbarians were much faster than my mages and nagas. I had much fun taking his cities and losing them some turns later, when my army had left it in order to attack the next one. I would like to have this in AoW again, too.

Quoted from swolte:

It's not wrong, but it still can be improved.. For example baloons don't fit goblins well, but goblin tanks would be perfect imho!

Quoted from swolte:

I can imagine a race that suit turtle ship much better.

Nonno said absolutely right. Research races are overpowered. That races that he said are weak. It is well known fact.

Unknown250- Brilliant idea! Transport I on Lvl4s would also make hero/phantastic mount combinations possible. I second the view that the game lacks an epic feel. Especially with those insane pop-growth rates and turns that represent a mere day.

Quoted from TurboBeholder:

Hey Turbo! Do not forget you are looking at the EXE (disassembled) not at the real source. I bet the original code is something like:

case RollD100 of:
1..25: spawn(ucRedDragon);
26..50: spawn(ucIceDragon);
51..75: spawn(ucBlackDragon);
76..100: spawn(ucGoldDragon);
end;

which is much more readable than using random(4). The (beloved) Delphi Compiler translates the above code into the abomination you examined in the EXE, when you tell it to optimize code (the RollD100 procedure is inlined and a direct call to random() is inserted, and the case statement is translated into an if else chain).

Anyway, your discovery can lead to interesting results. I.E. we can change the outcome of the ability!

Hi, played allot AOW:SM 1.4 and some thing should be changed.

Sometimes u star with temple and other times with stone wall.
Temple is a huge advantage and all should start with it, it is not balanced.

Also I think that the fire sphere is to strong, blindling flash or fireball should be +1 mana.

And AI should move ranged units closer to target before shooting (but staying at green), but I think that is too much to ask

Hope u address that in 1.5
Thanx.

And my hopes for 1.5.:
1. Wizard Tower I - cost 40, available in outposts.
WTII - cost 80, WTIII - cost 160.
This is really good for ai in rmg empire building scenarios starting with one settler.
2. Balance Settlers so that AI should build them.
3. Make all buildings except Barracks, Builders Guild, Temple available in outposts. So that if any city is downgraded to outpost by any famine, it may still build buildings if those three basic buildings already exist. So leave demand for "village" type only for Barracks, Temples, Builders Guilds.
4. There are three interesting summoning spells "Magic servant", "Chaos Spawn" and "Chaos Lord" which may be used for random creature summoning. So, any if not all new creatures may be available randomly by these spells.
5. It would be nice if human witch finds a nicer body and voice for her.
6. It would be nice if patch incorporates colored spell-icons.
7. BTW why we still call this "patch"? 1.4. seems to look more like an addon. And 1.5. may be a true addon if composed seriously.
8. Some people made lot's of smart new units. May be it's time to combine efforts?
9. May the 1.5. include several most popular mods? May it have a switch between them? It will have common graphic database and unique parameter databases for each mod included. So it's overall size will not be too big.
10. How about 8 and 9? Then isn't it time to call this an addon?

how about some scrolling images made in flashMX and converted to avi extension and then to .bik extension using the convertor from radgametools.com. that would be a good idea for the ones who are not familar wit h 3d softwares. the scrolling effect is easy to make in flash. you can log on to www.flashkit.comfor any help regarding flash software.

Humans( I think they are the race that needs more bonuses...)

Give a bonus to all Human Race. Almost every race have a bonus ability( When I think in a good one, I will suggest ). Increase Mp of Kingth and maybe more +2 Res. Increase Defense and Resistance of the Air Galley.It's just too easy to take a Galley down with Archers or Balistas. It's one of the weakest level 4 unit. Of course it's a Transport, but Steam Tanks are too, and still are very fearsome. Give the Herbalist Physical Protection. In a ability comparation to the Witch, they've lost Death Strike to receive Poison Strike, Magic Bolts to Poison Darts, Life Stealing to Healing, but the Physical Protection is still missing. Or something else.Chaplains need a small boost too. Magic Protection or Magic Immunity and some other bonus.

As I pointed out before, I would like the humans to become a fast race with strong cavalry again. Remember, in AoW 2 both knight and air galley had 40 mp! The witch or the chaplain could be given a horse, so that they can travel at the speed of the cavalry. If that was done, the speed of the humans would compensate that they generally lack special abilities.

This is all stuff that's come up in my thread on 4s, just wanted to add it here (so it's not forgotten )

1) Change the unit upkeep to remove the bias towards high-level units (according to swolte, this might be possible)

2) Change unit enchantment cost/upkeep as well - not sure if that's possible ...

3) 'Grouped' units - single 'unit' representing a group of troops. (For example, a 'Archer Squad' might represent 8 Archers - at 8 times the cost.). Don't know exactly how this works, but RosenMcStern has apparently done it. (Personally, I'd like to see 'level 4 equivalents' - say 8 1s, 4 2s or 2 3s - that would also largely eliminate the need for points 1&2).

4) Seperate map-movement from combat-movement (so we can have things like mounted infantry - fast on the map, slow in combat, or heavy calvary - slow on the map, fast in combat). (Probably not possible, but thought I'd add it anyway )