![]() |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
I'm amused that all the suggestions for removing MM in endgame all involve neutering anyone's ability to achieve game-ending dominance in the endgame, thus insuring the game goes on longer and there is more MM required.
Globals and gem-producing items and forging and SCs are all ways that players achieve asymmetric power, and removing them guarantees that games will be bogged down in stalemates and endless diplomacy as people decide who to gang up on. |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
Quote:
|
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
Quote:
If you remove some pathways as valid choices, you vastly increase the odds that two players make identical or sufficiently similar investment choices and thus their power does not really diverge in any category. (Of course, there is the distinction between possession of power and application of power, but such contests can go on a long time if neither side can actually attack the other's real power base.) Part of the problem is that an existential threat for a large nation is much different than an existential threat for a small nation. To make a nation of 50+ provinces even *blink* you have to take ~5-10 more provinces/trn than they can take from you. (or do an equivalent amount of damage to their production structure - gem gen holders, summoners, etc...). |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
The biggest asymmetry gem-gens provide is when you've got someone pulling in 60% of their former gem income with 10% of their former provinces when you're slogging through a war with them. It makes finishing people off in the late game incredibly difficult when they can concentrate their income so heavily and just worry about defending a single province with all of their forces, first turn defender advantage, layers of domes and a huge gem income.
|
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
Quote:
Edit: from a balance perspective, just removing domes with spell blocking effects from the game would have a lesser effect than removing gem gens on game balance, and severely discourage the turtling everyone whines about. |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
I don't see how it would severely discourage turtling. I doubt it would have much effect on turtling at all, since turtling is primarily a gem gen based strat and gem gens aren't really be hurt by the removal of domes. Scouts carry them after all.
Besides the guy with the clam farm can out remote the guy without one. |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
No way. Remote spells are already extremely effective, suggesting that the only line of defense against them be removed is foolishness. The damage domes are also useless, it's trivial to slap a couple of resistance items on the casting mage.
Turtling isn't a problem without non-province-based income, whereas gem gens introduce a host of problems into the game. |
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
Quote:
|
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
There is nothing wrong with playing defensively. The problem is that if you have loads of gem gens losing territory means nothing to you. One fort is all you need. Raiding means nothing to you. It is very hard to defeat such an opponent. Eventually, the one with most gem gens wins, because as we all know, gem income is the most important thing. You are forced to forge them if you want to win. Thus they reduce versatility.
|
Re: Template for reducing late game MM hell
Quote:
-Max |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.