I haven't had any difficulty with the undermountain, save for a single time where an elemental chained a stun into two crits. However, while the imp fight isnt hard, its super tedious; with a healer and up to three units that force damage to spread out while chaining disarming attacks on my only dps. The imps wont win, or even get close, but they will take 5 minutes of my time as my team slowly chips them all down.
Would be nice if there was a cooldown on being disarmed, like there is with stun or knockdowns, being forced to resort to switching a useful skill for a tail wack or something feels really bad.
That'd be why you're being counted as a Centaur, then; if you're (mostly) human or elfin from the waist up, but have specific traits from the waist down, then you're a non-tauric centaur. Which is a bit of mind bend, for sure, but I'm not sure what you call a being that's similar to a faun or satyr but has cow traits rather than goat/sheep traits, or even horse traits.
But a Centaur is supposed to be a full, entire horse from the waist down. Not only am I missing two of the four legs, but most of my traits aren't even equine, they are bovine. A centaur without either a horse bottom or four legs just isn't a centaur.
I was going to say based on the classic definition of Minotaur, "Half human, half bull", that's what I should be, but that classic Greek example was also the TOP half of a bull and the lower half of a man, which is the inverse of what I have right now.
There are Wyld Elves in-game that have close to what I do, that is, a furry lower half or an equine penis.
So, a fun thing about this game's lore is that there are two different minotaur types, along with their partners. The minotaurs we see in game are such that males are classic minotaurs, with muzzled faces and fur, except also they have bovine legs (but hey, the cowgirls do too). The cowgirls, however, are their female partners, and while they have bovine legs, tails, ears, and horns, they have a humanoid face rather than an anthro face. This is because of some interesting lore fuckery, where there are actually also female classical minotaurs, but they live south with cowboy-esque males, who have humanoid faces while the females have muzzles. Their ancestors basically just liked to fuck people with human faces rather than muzzles, so they split along the sexes, formed different nations, and their humanoid partners evolved/mixed with them to also have some bovine traits over time while still lacking muzzles.
But anyways, what we see in game, without looking at lore, are muzzled mino males and flat faced female cowgirls. In terms of the race parser, they're entirely different. As I mentioned, since the game ties what you can upgrade on level-up to race, and this changes if you change races, being a cowgirl (having mostly bovine traits, but lacking a muzzle, fur, and I guess also a horsecock) means different things can be upgraded than if you do have fur and a horsecock (one or two traits probably optional for determining what the game sees you as).
I looked into the difference between cows and horses just to try and better understand my own conundrum.
What I found out is that bull penises look NOTHING like equine ones, to a significant degree. So apparently those minotaur ancestors also much preferred horsecock to the traditional "inject and get it done" bullcock. In fact, if I read the material right, bulls just stick it in, instantly nut, and then move on. When you give a female sapience and not just sentience I guess they don't find their boyfriend being a one-pump-chump to be very enjoyable.
I'd post the medical diagrams of the genitals but people can look it up on their own if they are interested in cow dicks.
Animu examples of animal races where its just a regular girl but with animal ears (that might as well be on a novelty headband) and maybe a tail are kind of boring, if you are going to include bestial humanoid races/civs in your fantasy setting then go in hard and unusual.
Now this specific game is pornographic which influences things (and personally I'm probably more vanilla than most here in my preferences for simply attractive ladies with generous tits 'n ass to have sex with rather than looking for say corrupt beings packing giant horse dicks with which to degrade PCs) but even then its more intellectually stimulating to encounter less-human looking intelligent races than the likes of boring old kitsune.
Animu examples of animal races where its just a regular girl but with animal ears (that might as well be on a novelty headband) and maybe a tail are kind of boring, if you are going to include bestial humanoid races/civs in your fantasy setting then go in hard and unusual.
I mean, the whole point of all these options is variety for the masses because being stuck to the same few things would get real boring - I find myself going no further than ears & tail, occasionally with the fun limbs and most often using their respective bits because a normal hooman dicc is the real boring more than half the time; only when the peen in question is most shaped like a human's do I use it.
On a related note, someone (in actuality, whoever wants to be civilised about it) tell me:
What makes a furry? I get answers from here to there, between "the second you get a single animal trait = furry" to "once you go full-body fur, you're a full-on furry."
S'confusing when you know there's a chart (albeit a meme most of the time) on what's what concerning body fur and animal parts, such as "furred limbs but still keeping the body skin clean? 'Half-furry'," and etc etc.
Any clarifications?
(I'll call this my gripe with the game, since it relates to it.)
On a related note, someone (in actuality, whoever wants to be civilised about it) tell me:
What makes a furry? I get answers from here to there, between "the second you get a single animal trait = furry" to "once you go full-body fur, you're a full-on furry."
S'confusing when you know there's a chart (albeit a meme most of the time) on what's what concerning body fur and animal parts, such as "furred limbs but still keeping the body skin clean? 'Half-furry'," and etc etc.
I don't think there is, or ever could be, a 100% clean-cut line between "furry" and "not furry" that everyone agrees on. That said, I'm pretty sure what Savin said is the majority opinion. Here's my take on the matter:
I consider furriness to be a scale from "completely human" to "completely animal"; a character closer to the latter end is more furry than one closer to the former. From least to most furry:
Human: self-explanatory.
Near-human: creatures that aren't 100% human, but also lack animal traits e.g. typical fantasy elves, dwarves and orcs.
Kemonomimi: one or more (usually 2+) animal-like non-limb extremities (ears, tails, eyes, horns, etc.) but otherwise human e.g. half-human half-ausar, catfolk. This is pretty much the lower bound on what someone could possibly consider 'furry', though I and most others classify this as 'non-furry'.
Half-furry/lesser morph: kemonomimi, but with animal-like limbs (even if it's just fur/scales/etc.) e.g. ausar, gryvain, taeleer, taurs with a human-to-kemonomimi upper half. I don't know how common it is to call this 'furry'; I'd imagine it's more common than for kemonomimi, but significantly less common than for anthropomorphs.
Anthropomorph: humanoid body shape but everything else is animal-like, including full-body fur/scales/etc. and/or a muzzle/snout/beak/whatever e.g. kui-tan, lupines. When most people (including myself) say 'furry', they mean this, and anything less furry is 'non-furry'.
Cartoon animal: sapient and bipedal, usually with hands, but otherwise animal e.g. most characters from Looney Tunes or Sonic the Hedgehog. I consider this to be straddling the line between 'furry' and 'bestiality', but I think most others think it falls squarely into 'furry'.
Talking animal: human-like intelligence and personality, but physically completely animal e.g. Scooby-Doo. I personally include frostwyrms here, but not everyone does.
Animu examples of animal races where its just a regular girl but with animal ears (that might as well be on a novelty headband) and maybe a tail are kind of boring, if you are going to include bestial humanoid races/civs in your fantasy setting then go in hard and unusual.
Now this specific game is pornographic which influences things (and personally I'm probably more vanilla than most here in my preferences for simply attractive ladies with generous tits 'n ass to have sex with rather than looking for say corrupt beings packing giant horse dicks with which to degrade PCs) but even then its more intellectually stimulating to encounter less-human looking intelligent races than the likes of boring old kitsune.
I don't know about intellectually stimulating if they look like bipedal animals. But those extreme cases are massive turn offs to me. My brain can't divorce the muzzled faces from being animalistic. I'll take kitsune and Sariel over feeling like I'm screwing an animal. Centaurs are fine though. Though that may seem weird for me to say.
I'd say the muzzle is the biggest factor. I haven't seen anybody accuse newish Catra of being a furry despite being literally covered in fur. To me, additions and substitutes don't automatically make something furry. It's when the majority of the body is very animal or the face becomes muzzled. For example, the manticore girl and Eubicha aren't furry to me because they have enough human features that I can differentiate. Brint and Gwyn are furry. Their muzzles overwrite the mostly human shapes and makes my mind automatically go "that's an animal, don't fuck it."
I think the muzzles are the main thing because humans instinctively pay a lot of attention to other people's faces to get a read on body language. As such, having a non-human face makes us instinctively go "not human, therefore animal", which a major turn-off for most people.
I like how Lupines are problematic for some people even though its basically just a human-like muzzled face attached to a furry human body.
But then Centaurs are perfectly fine despite the bottom half, and the part you are thereby fucking half the time, is 100% horse. If you have standard, penetrative sex with a Centaur, you are either sticking it in a horse vagina, or getting dicked down by horse cock. And that's still more acceptable to some than Marefolk.
I like how Lupines are problematic for some people even though its basically just a human-like muzzled face attached to a furry human body.
But then Centaurs are perfectly fine despite the bottom half, and the part you are thereby fucking half the time, is 100% horse. If you have standard, penetrative sex with a Centaur, you are either sticking it in a horse vagina, or getting dicked down by horse cock. And that's still more acceptable to some than Marefolk.
Ah, but you see, instead of horse head, centaur have human as head. Therefore no muzzle, therefore centaur is fine. Except Behemoth. He has horse head replaced with human body, but human head replaced with horse head. In that case it loops back around to being uncool and unsexy. Elementary my friends.
Okay, so, I'm unsure how exactly the Nursery upgrades occur behind the scenes (as the logic behind them is not explicitly mentioned in Gwyn's doc, nor other docs that I've seen), but the way it seems to function in-game is as such: Regardless of how much you donated, it won't "rollover" to the next upgrade donation.
Meaning that if you donated 10k EC at the first upgrade, you would seemingly have lost 9750 EC due to the way it functions. This means that if the prior assumption is true, with regards to every upgrade, if you donate more than the specific amount you're just technically losing EC (to the void no-less, because the end result is still the same - upgrades being done, but seemingly at more cost).
If anyone wants to know how much one would potentially have lost over all the upgrades, here I'll do the maths:
Grand total = 12 upgrades done; should cost 1023750 EC, but seemingly costs the PC 1100000 EC, for a potential cumulative loss of 76250 EC.
Sure, that potential loss in EC may not seem like a lot in the grand scheme of things, but seemingly overpaying because of how the upgrades are currently done is a bit weird. Seeing as one would seemingly have to actually sit and work out how much they're donating each time to avoid overpaying, instead of it just being a system where you can donate (Donate X) any amount up until the maximum (1023750 EC) and have the renovations done overtime.
Donating X or an upfront payment for all the upgrades also improves QoL, as the player doesn't have to micromanage donating every day (and they can save EC; although for some players that's not an issue).
I'm sorry to re-hash this, especially if the above assumption is incorrect - although from multiple first hand experiences, that doesn't seem to be the case (hence why I'm raising this here).
In any event, I did mention a possible solution to the above (if it's actually occurring), as well as just a general QoL fix for how it currently is, mentioned here.
EDIT:
Okay, so, upon testing: The donations / upgrades do "rollover", the only one being left over would be the final donation of 520k - meaning that the PC would only lose 8k EC if donating 10k each time. Not as bad as the prior 76250 EC loss I'd thought was possible.
However, I'd still state that the inclusion of a "Donate X" / "Donate All" (for remaining upgrades) button would allow for an increase in QoL, as it wouldn't take 12 in-game days to donate for the fully upgraded Nursery.
Ah, but you see, instead of horse head, centaur have human as head. Therefore no muzzle, therefore centaur is fine. Except Behemoth. He has horse head replaced with human body, but human head replaced with horse head. In that case it loops back around to being uncool and unsexy. Elementary my friends.
Except not really? If you're fighting a boss with the potential to one-shot you if you have bad RNG (say, like Whisper in the recent quest) then being able to guarantee you don't go down for a few turns can be invaluable without much special setup, and you can still do it with an active healer because you being safe frees Cait up to revive someone else if you need to.
Revive is also like Unbreakable in the sense that they're both reactive powers you only use when you're losing. Only comparable Ult is Cait's Devotion except Devotion can be used as a free action if the PC goes down which makes it miles better than Revive.
Devotion is more useful if you've fallen to Resolve damage rather than Health, with it and Revive having opposite healing effects. Also, White Mage is meant to play a supporting role so having an Ultimate that's based around helping an ally makes sense. If you're in a situation where an ally's down, getting them back at full health can really turn a battle since it's much less likely they'll get whacked before they have time to act again.
Banishment is our disabler ult. It's either a 2 round timeout or an "I win" button against constructs/ghosts/summons. In this damage race of a game, not being able to hurt your opponent is completely counterproductive.
<snip>
Kitsunetsuki
Banishment is also an amazing way of getting breathing room in a chaotic fight. For example, right after Komari uses Kitsunetsuki on you and you're dealing with every flavor of sadness under the sun. Having a turn to pop curative items on the party and reestablish buffs can be really helpful. If your party can't do anything during Banishment's effect, you're probably just a bit too focused on DPS.
But yeah, hopefully when the level cap goes up, the classes can have another Ult available, unless that'll be a level 10 thing for endgame.
I dunno about anyone else, but I feel more like I could use some mildly overpowered healing Ult would work better with me than something that can one-shot a Dark mode boss, but only if you're a Thief and min-max everything.
No just no. I was laughing the whole time and I don't know why.
I have no gripes because to me the game is just fine to me.
Edit: Like said it's perfect for me because having gripes with the game isn't going to change anything but if posting here helps you go ahead. (Made edit to not double post.)
This is a personal gripe not exclusive to CoC2, but certainly more glaring within. It's the usage of terms like "Trap" to refer to feminine, male characters.
(I'm not certain of a way to change it, if there is one, nor am I certain if another already stated as much. If it overlaps, I apologize for the redundancy.)
This is a personal gripe not exclusive to CoC2, but certainly more glaring within. It's the usage of terms like "Trap" to refer to feminine, male characters.
(I'm not certain of a way to change it, if there is one, nor am I certain if another already stated as much. If it overlaps, I apologize for the redundancy.)
It is basically only used when your character is really androgynous male champion that is just really, really feminine. The game uses that label only for description reasons since it is something the general playerbase probably knows the meaning off. While yes, some characters will comment on how feminine your champion is, they will always refer to you as a man or some other similar phrase . Same with other troublesome term such as "shemale" used to describe girls that only posses dick. That one is only used short handed way to make it clear what you are in your save file or character apperance screen. It is never used in game.
While that’s all fair and good, I think it’s also more than reasonable to be extremely uncomfortable with usage of those terms. (I’m coming at this as a non-binary trans person for full disclosure.)
Femmeboy is a decent alternative to describe a very feminine man, and dickgirl is already an optional replacement in TiTS. I think being able to add that change using a cheat code like in TiTS ought to be a possibility, given there’s already precedence for it, though replacing both terms in CoC2.
It is basically only used when your character is really androgynous male champion that is just really, really feminine. The game uses that label only for description reasons since it is something the general playerbase probably knows the meaning off. While yes, some characters will comment on how feminine your champion is, they will always refer to you as a man or some other similar phrase . Same with other troublesome term such as "shemale" used to describe girls that only posses dick. That one is only used short handed way to make it clear what you are in your save file or character apperance screen. It is never used in game.
I was actually referring to how often it is used to describe NPCs. It's tossed around casually, and often times, disrespectfully in CoC2, so I find it distasteful. As someone else mentioned, I personally believe Femboy would be more apt (the term used where I'm from usually amounting to "girly boy").
One example I've noticed is with Sugo. It uses that word to describe him a few times, but almost always in the same sentence as calling him a whore. Nimian has a quip along the same lines, as well.
Ultimately, it is a Transphobic word, but I understand that no amounts of discussion could change most people's minds about it. So I leave it as a personal gripe.
I was actually referring to how often it is used to describe NPCs. It's tossed around casually, and often times, disrespectfully in CoC2, so I find it distasteful. As someone else mentioned, I personally believe Femboy would be more apt (the term used where I'm from usually amounting to "girly boy").
One example I've noticed is with Sugo. It uses that word to describe him a few times, but almost always in the same sentence as calling him a whore. Nimian has a quip along the same lines, as well.
Ultimately, it is a Transphobic word, but I understand that no amounts of discussion could change most people's minds about it. So I leave it as a personal gripe.
I both believe that femboy is a better term (much more descriptive of the actual identity of who it is spoken of, clearer than trap, and puts it on the person themselves rather than how other people view them) and that trap is not inherently transphobic. It's more about when it's used: I personally feel that it should only be used when someone is a femboy, being masculine in both sex and gender but outwardly appearing feminine, and pretty much every circle which I actively stay in that used trap has also used it do describe that. The only times I have ever seen trap be used to refer to a trans person is when a trans person uses it to describe themselves. Even despite the implications it has when used to refer to trans people, which is why I only use it to refer to femboys, some trans people seem to view it as a more empowering term, since it also inherently applies perfect, or near-perfect, passing. Context matters whenever talking about the meaning of a word, and its use can be derogatory and bigoted or not at all, depending on how its used, how the user defines it, and what the intent behind it is.
