Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

And in practice it turns out to be totally insufficient. There is a reason why there is a mad dash for the powerful SC's and it is not becuase people like to use 4 or 5 of them in a battle to cover each other's backs.

I was playing a newbie game with Cohen where he was mopping up the floor with everyone by using an army which was backed by mages. It was really fun to watch those battles and it was far more interesting than watching SC's take on whole armies.

But to each their own. It's a matter of taste. If people prefer rushing to the special summons and equipping them and using them as their main attacking force who am I to judge.

Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

As far as I can see the mad dash for SC's is done by the same people thinking the same way. Or some more experienced people who know they are playing with people who will try to fight fire with fire). The fix for SC's is often in the units that those people consider "worthless"

If a persons idea of a super combatant is based on damage it can do, and the only acceptable "fix" in their minds is something else based on damage, then you are looking at a spiral which is self defeating and game destroying.

Re: Continued OT discussion of tanks ...
 

I have this game already, but have not played it in several years. BTW, I cite historical behavior of arms, not game behavior. Even the best of games sometimes fail to get things right. Games use theoretical (ideal), or proving-ground data, not real-world (statistical) data. Even SPWAW. Real-world performance is never as good.

The panzerfaust predates the bazooka. They were developed independently by the two nations, with the Germans starting development several months ahead of the US. The Germans did, however, copy the bazooka to create the panzerschreck.

The issue with the brit 17pdr wasn't so much a case of not being able to build a tank around this good gun (which was, indeed, a problem due to its recoil), but more a question of the allies failing to see the need for a high-velocity cannon to counter the latest German tanks. Pretty much a case of the allies repeating the mistakes the Germans made a couple of years earlier in underestimating the Soviets.

Re: Continued OT discussion of tanks ...
 

To all who have contributed to the WWII discussion here:

tank you very much!

Re: Continued OT discussion of tanks ...
 

<groan>

Re: Continued OT discussion of tanks ...
 

Actually, he's quite ingenious. The best way to end an undesired topic is to throw a monster pun into the gears. He's scored a mobility kill as we're too busy coughing, wheezing, and/or clutching our sides to drive on (continue posting). http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/skull.gif

Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

sorry arryn i didn't want to attack you personally .
i play as many games as i can .
i am in in 8 games on mosehansen + on sheaps server http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif


i never said i am an expert but i just wanted to share what i thought i discovered . cohen though is an expert and he comes to my mind he always claimed about similiar things than i did .

these nations you have to admit though have all gotten rather good national troops .



i am just trying to share my viewpoint that the dominion experience would become even stronger with my suggested small modifications .

it is just unfair as it is that you have to pay no upkeep for your summons .

since especially starcraft is such a good example how attractive (almost) perfect balance is and i don't see any point which would make scs useless when they cost upkeep i wonder why my ideas meet so much dislike .


my theory is though since it takes you some time to realize how overpowered scs currently are and this is an unique feature of dominions so i think most ppl just complain because they have developed perfect strats to rush at e.g. air queens + equip them .

with my proposed upkeep this would still be true but they would have to pay something for this too .

but so the variety of dominions would greatly increase and it would be more fair .




name me 2 players who have about the same experience .
then let 1 of them play atlantis and one of them any other nation .


if anyone thinks he could win playing atlantis against any other nation against a player with about the same skill level in a standard 50% magic sites / normal research game then i will be (perhaps) quiet .


but since scs are overpowered and mainly the air queens and the ice devils are particular attractive caelum , abysia and jotunheim and vanheim are taken all very quickly in a new game always .
these nations have furthermore in common that they have lots of free extra points by scales since they have cold/heat and most of them can take sloth scale + watchtower easy too .


in starcraft i can play either zerg or toss or terra just the nation i like but i know that i have the same chance to win with every of them .

if i would like e.g. atlantis or tien chi ( base + barbarian kings ) i am forced to play them in sp only .
if i want to play them in mp it is like i voluntary handicap myself .

Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

i have made so many arguments now why there should be upkeep cost for summons .

can anyone of you give me 1 conclusive argument why summons + national troops should be treated different upkeep wise or why the current upkeep system of dominions is fair ?

Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

its boring and makes no sense to charge summons upkeep.

neither is it necessary, nor would it solve any fundamental problems, as conventionaly troops would still be as underpowered (when they are, which is usually).

quoted for emphasis, or perhaps hilarity ;-)

I do generally agree that conventional troops lose their potency too quickly and too easily. Making SC's somewhat less efficient would be the route I would take - for instance, lowering the lifestealing effect for items/spells.

Re: Poll: morale and routing
 

Most assuredly NOT! There's about a half-dozen names that come to my mind, and he's not only not on that short list, but not even in the top 20. My advice is to find better role-models than you've been quoting for the past few days.

Unfair? How?

If ever there's a case for a meaningless comparison between vastly dissimilar things, this is one of them. You cannot draw any sort of valid comparison between Dom 2 and Starcraft, other than that they are both computer games, and that they both involve some element of strategy in playing. The similarities end there.

Several people have tried, repeatedly, to explain this to you -- including one of the game developers -- to no avail. You just are not listening to what they are saying. You are too busy arguing your own point.


Not true. And this has been hashed out and beaten to death in quite a few threads. But you (and others) refuse to be swayed from your firm beliefs, in spite of the detailed explanations you've been given by various people as to why you're mistaken. Yet you continue to harp on this, and then some folks take offense when I use the term "whine" to describe such irrational behavior.


Would you please, please quit comparing Dom 2 to SC? It's not only a bogus comparison, it's also getting quite annoying. Dom 2 isn't SC. Get over it. Or go play SC.

That's your own lack of experience showing. Zen had no such problems. I know this firsthand. Please don't cite your own shortcomings as any sort of reason to change the game.