Page 2 of 3
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 10:38 am
by silentz27
OK let's see who will agree too
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 2:13 pm
by Darkknight
silentz27 wrote:Raft are can carry only flesh unit because when you carry in this a catapult or ram this will be sink because its to much heavy
Yes it should not carry catapulys or rams. Only 2 flesh and blood units
Re: Raft
Posted: Sat May 16, 2015 6:28 pm
by RiverRaider 1097
Agree totally just flesh units, boats should carry the rest

Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 17, 2015 5:34 pm
by Alexander82
it would be pretty useful in maps where you start the game in a little island of a few squares (but with the 1hp life is something like a way to go for all or nothing)
Re: Raft
Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 12:08 pm
by Darkknight
1/2 hp could be too weak. 4 health would be good
Re: Raft
Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 6:25 pm
by cakidtraptinid
Make raft move only "x" spaces then fixed in place like a bridge. Used more like a mobile bridge than a transport.
Re: Raft
Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 12:32 am
by silentz27
I have a idea the special skills of these unit is he can put and carry by the ships transport and wagons he he what do you think guise in the history the ships carry a small boat and raft because the ship cannot go nearby in the land so they should pull out their raft and mini boat to in the land
Re: Raft
Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 1:02 pm
by Darkknight
silentz27 wrote:I have a idea the special skills of these unit is he can put and carry by the ships transport and wagons he he what do you think guise in the history the ships carry a small boat and raft because the ship cannot go nearby in the land so they should pull out their raft and mini boat to in the land
No. I think it should be used as a fast building transport which breaks easily
Re: Raft
Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 2:22 pm
by COOLguy
I second Darkknight.
Re: Raft
Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 3:08 pm
by silentz27
That's right but this unit is light so the ships and transport can carry these
Re: Raft
Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 9:02 am
by Darkknight
silentz27 wrote:That's right but this unit is light so the ships and transport can carry these
No one will cary rafts in transport because 1) transport have more movement so it will be faster takeing thier units to land by just using the transport than using a raft inside a transport. 2) It takes time to move raft out of transport and moving units in transport and moving it. 3) Raft has lower health than transportships.
Re: Raft
Posted: Wed May 20, 2015 6:35 pm
by cakidtraptinid
How about to keep transports relevant, ranged units attack from transport but not raft
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 22, 2015 7:52 am
by silentz27
Ahm OK so whats the better way for this
Re: Raft
Posted: Sat May 23, 2015 9:17 pm
by cakidtraptinid
Make raft cheap and only carry flesh units. And tech upgrade to transport for same cheap price. Like how crossbow archer is basically the same as longbow archer
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 12:57 am
by silentz27
He he that's good
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 1:56 am
by Darkknight
cakidtraptinid wrote:Make raft cheap and only carry flesh units. And tech upgrade to transport for same cheap price. Like how crossbow archer is basically the same as longbow archer
Raft shouldnt be upgraded to transport. It should be a different unit.
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 24, 2015 10:16 pm
by Alexander82
At least, if you want to think of an upgrade, you may make a "raft to barge" tech
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 29, 2015 12:32 pm
by silentz27
OK let's see what suggestion next
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 29, 2015 1:53 pm
by Darkknight
Alexander82 wrote:At least, if you want to think of an upgrade, you may make a "raft to barge" tech
I dont think there should be an upgrade for raft becuase it is just a simple transport built quickly by workers for fast way to transport units in water
Re: Raft
Posted: Fri May 29, 2015 2:18 pm
by RiverRaider 1097
I agree just a quicker way to cross rivers for one or two foot units to secure tc's compared to bridge build time. Kinda like the scout vs knight race across land?
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 10:28 am
by Alexander82
yes, that was my starting idea, cheap and risky
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 12:11 pm
by Ness
I think at raft should be cheap and risky
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun May 31, 2015 2:05 pm
by RiverRaider 1097
agree, cheap and risky
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:37 am
by Darkknight
Maybe raft could have spell resistance 10% so that it will make it more risky
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 6:52 am
by Ness
0% spell resistance and unit inside is converted too
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:15 pm
by RiverRaider 1097
Now that would be good and risky

Re: Raft
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 4:28 pm
by Alexander82
what if you place inside a unit that is not convertible?
let the raft only being converted
Re: Raft
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 4:48 pm
by Ness
Unit inside is still converted
Re: Raft
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:15 am
by Darkknight
Or the units inside can die but i think the unit inside should also be converted even if it has 100% spell resistance
Re: Raft
Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2015 7:48 am
by silentz27
again 1 of the forgetten topic
