Eye of the aiming bug?

[Captain Butthurt]

When I gave this item to one of my commanders (along with an magical crossbow, he's a commander of ranged unit squad) he got "Lost an eye" affliction. While I understand that he had some kind of surgery to replace his eye with an artificial one, it still makes little sense as that forged eye is supposed to be better than natural one.

Eye of aiming : prec + 8
"Lost an eye" affliction : att-2 def-2 prec -3

so I end up with prec + 5 and - in both att and def, which almost renders that artifact almost useless. I play as EA Ulm which is known for its weak priests and healing ability.

Your thoughts?

[edirr]

It's working as it should. It is an item best used on certain kinds of mages, or commanders who are given a magical bow or crossbow. It does have the drawbacks you mentioned, so it is not something to give to a thug. The Eye of Aiming can be useful, but it is a tradeoff between different things.

[amuys]

Generally human hp spellcasters would better do with high precision rather than high atk/def.

[Captain Butthurt]

Even if this artifact works as it should, it still makes no sense. Affliction says that character lost an eye (thus has only 1 eye remaining), while in fact we have character with 2 eyes, one of which is BETTER than natural in every aspect (according to in-game description)

While it's obviously isn't a major thing, it still hurts my eyes to see failed logic in such a polished game ( biggest feature of which is huge attention to details and in-game universe ).

IMO one of the following should be done:
1) Remove those penalties to atk and def (I belive + 3 extra precision won't break balance horribly for a single unit)
2) Keep everything as it is, but add smth illustrating its drawbacks in description (like wearer suffers from unbearable headache or smth)

[Occam's Mustache]

The eye of aiming is not better than a normal eye, it's different. Think of it as a lens used for zooming in far targets. It improves precision at a distance, but having worse FoV and depth perception makes the user worse in meelee.

Don't try to heal the affliction either, if it works as it should, that affliction cannot be healed. (and be careful sending too many people with it in one battle. If you lose some, a random commander on your side might pick up a "dropped" eye, gouge out his own eyeball and replace it with the eye of aiming. Those guys are hardcore)

[Captain Butthurt]

Originally posted by McKitten:

If you lose some, a random commander on your side might pick up a "dropped" eye, gouge out his own eyeball and replace it with the eye of aiming. Those guys are hardcore)

Loool, that made my day.
Moreover, that's a pretty good point you made there. It's the description that's annoyingly misleading. I tells that you will get +8 Prec, while in fact you only get +5 AND other penalties. Why don't just tell us right away? Most weapons/armor don't hide their penalties to DEF, why this item should?

[Lichlord9333]

Theirs a damn load of stuff that causes surten penalties/buffs you never even know Ive been playing DOM3 so long that I know what the penaleties of a magic hearth and eye is while I agree its funny that they pick up these things after a battle lol

same can be said about the scales on Dominions 3 do you know the magic/drain scale affects your magic resistances? doesn't get told either till you click on the MR stats of a unit it applies to DOM4 aswell..

[Occam's Mustache]

Originally posted by ВОЕН УПА:

Moreover, that's a pretty good point you made there. It's the description that's annoyingly misleading. I tells that you will get +8 Prec, while in fact you only get +5 AND other penalties. Why don't just tell us right away? Most weapons/armor don't hide their penalties to DEF, why this item should?

Because it's not that straightforward. They don't get the penalties from the item, the get the penalties from the battlewound that gets inflicted by using the item. And that can have different effects. For example, someone who has an eye of aiming, and loses the other eye, goes blind. That wouldn't happen if the eye simply gave penalties. Likewise, zyklopes shouldn't try using magic eyes, while a creature with more than two eyes gets a version of the lost an eye affliction that has lesser penalties than someone with only two eyes losing one.

[Dorok]

What complainer means is it's basic misguiding, a newbie will screw up a commander once and not anymore after.

But the question is what is the interest in such basic misguiding? Pointless in my opinion as it's not a battle wound that can heal as other could. If it was a standard battle wounds, ok perhaps but it's not.

[DasaKamov]

Originally posted by Dorok:

But the question is what is the interest in such basic misguiding?

To allow the player to discover the intricacies of the game itself and give a sense of exploration. It causes the player to think on several different levels -- if the Eye of Aiming ONLY gave +5 Precision, why WOULDN'T every player of every game make one for every single one of their commanders? Instead, the player must weigh the benefits and penalties against each other, and make a calculated risk based on the result.

[Dorok]

You arguing is totally wrong because there's TON of items that only bring something positive.

And if your answer is there's very few items that can be put in eye I'd counter by pinpointing the newbie will hardly have any chance to know it.

The point is all newbies will waste a commander when they'll first try it if they choose a wrong commander for that. I don't see anything other than pointless misguiding.

But I agree that it's a matter of point of view, I see it as OP, some other see it differently.

In fact the newbie will also not know that this item could be removed by an enemy unlike other standard items and I wonder what other hidden points a newbie will have to discover it in the rude way by facing the unknown consequences.

[KimmoKM]

I don't think there's anything strange going on here. The description mentions that you have to have your eye gouged out (Dominions tracks such injuries, it's entirely reasonable to think it'd cause one).

I guess text similar to The Heart of Life ("The crude surgery required to replace the heart will most likely permanently damage its owner") would be a beneficial addition, but I think it consistently follows the established in-game logic as it is.

[Captain Butthurt]

Originally posted by Jaybug:

Originally posted by Dorok:

But the question is what is the interest in such basic misguiding?

It causes the player to think on several different levels -- if the Eye of Aiming ONLY gave +5 Precision, why WOULDN'T every player of every game make one for every single one of their commanders?

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=208219520

Is it really +5? No.
Is there a way to get it up to +8, how it is stated? No.

That's the definition of misguiding.

[Dorok]

Boeh I totally understand you point of view and share it. It's totally a bug or even two bugs:
- The text should mentions the wound
- The wound shouldn't be named Battle Wound as it doesn't work as other Battle Wound, could be Item Wound for example.

But it's a minor point, there's one or two bugs and that's it, not much to discuss on.

The other point of view I don't share is it's a thing to discover by yourself, a consequence of something else, unpredictable but you have to discover or never suspect it ever by not noticing it or not read it in some forum. It's a case like there's many other in the game, in this case the consequence is very immediate.

To make you understand (even if not agree) on the other point view let list some other possible consequences of using the eye:
- Unlike any other items a spell can remove it from your commander.
- Your commander can die and drop it and one of your other commander can pick it even if it's a crap for him.
- Get a Battle Wound is another consequence, just immediate and certain. Yeah for me it makes the difference, for other point of view it's a simple sample to learn you the way of the game, ie many unpredictable consequences you'll learn by practice or reading forums.

[Captain Butthurt]

Dorok,

Thank you for taking time to describe both sides of this discussion. I sure do understand the other point of view ( moreover, I knew about it when I was typing my original post. That's internet, after all. All posssible points of views on all possible topics should be expected here ).

Don't get me wrong - I'm not too upset with this design decision. I even got healthy lulz from it (which were multiplied by the fact that other ppl will gladly pick that eye up and mutilate themselves).
It's just the game is so close to perfection in it's key features (ability to track down your problem to it's roots, provide players with info, needed to plan turns ahead, e.t.c, combined with importance of micromanagement) that a smallest thing like this stand out dramatically.

I probably am overreacting, but I had (and having) ZERO issues with this game. Thats probably my inner need to complain about stuff, nursed by modern AAA industry with its, khm, "gems" (ROME2LMAORAGE)

All I want is this game becoming as perfect as it can be. Even if it's something such small as this issue.

[Sombre]

I'm not sure eye of aiming can be picked up after battle by another commander. It's quite possible it's one of the items flagged to never be picked up. Of course if you've actually seen it happen that's one thing, but I would want to test it rather than assume.