Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

EA Arco 2 4 4 2 2
Ea Ermor 3 3 3 4 3
EA Ulm 2 2 4 3 2
EA Marverni 1 3 3 2 2
EA Sauromatia 3 3 3 3 2
EA TC 2 3 4 2 2
EA Mictlan 5 4 5 3 2
EA Aby 3 2 2 4 4
EA Caelum 4 3 2 2 3
EA C'tis 2 2 3 3 3
EA Pangaea 3 2 3 4 3
EA Agartha 2 3 4 2 3
EA Tir na Og 3 3 2 4 3
EA Fomoria 3 4 4 3 2
EA Helhiem 5 5 4 4 3
EA Vanhiem 4 4 3 4 3
EA Niefelhiem 5 4 5 5 4
EA Kailasa 2 3 4 2 3
EA Yomi 3 3 3 3 2
EA Hinnom 3 4 5 4 3
EA Atlantis 3 4 3 2 3
EA R'lyeh 2 3 4 2 2
EA Oceania 5 3 2 4 3

MA Arco 3 5 4 3 3
MA Ermor 5 5 5 4 3
MA Pythium 3 5 4 3 2
MA Man 3 2 2 4 3
MA Ulm 2 2 2 4 3
MA Marignon 3 3 2 3 4
MA Mictlan 4 3 3 2 3
MA TC 2 2 4 2 3
MA Mackaka 3 3 3 3 2
MA Agartha 1 2 2 3 2
MA Abysia 3 3 2 4 3
MA Caelum 3 4 2 2 3
MA C'tis 2 3 3 2 2
MA Pangaea 4 2 3 3 3
MA Vanhiem 5 5 3 3 4
MA Jotunhiem 4 4 4 4 3
MA Bandar Log 3 4 3 3 2
MA Shinuyama 3 4 4 3 2
MA Ashod 3 4 3 3 3
MA Atlantis 2 3 3 2 3
MA R'yeh 3 4 5 2 3
MA Oceania 5 3 2 4 4
MA Eriu 3 3 2 3 4

LA Arco 4 3 3 4 3
LA Ermor 5 5 4 5 5
LA Man 3 4 3 3 2
LA Ulm 2 3 2 3 1
LA Marignon 3 4 4 3 3
LA Mictlan 5 3 4 2 3
LA TC 4 3 4 3 3
LA Jomon 1 2 3 2 2
LA Agartha 3 5 4 3 3
LA Abysia 2 3 3 3 2
LA Caelum 4 4 3 2 3
LA C'tis 2 3 3 3 3
LA Pangaea 4 3 3 4 4
LA Midgard 5 4 4 3 3
LA Utgard 4 5 4 4 3
LA Patala 2 3 3 2 2
LA Gath 3 3 4 4 3
LA Atlantis 2 3 3 2 2
LA R'lyeh 4 5 5 5 3
LA Pythium 3 4 4 2 1
LA Bogarus 1 3 4 3 2

A few notes:

*As Micah says, late era strength is rather arbitrary, it almost always comes down to how well the nations have done in the earlier stags, not theoretical late game nation power.

*Ease of learning is also a bit arbitrary, some nations are cakewalk if you know basic bless tacics, but extremely challenging otherwise.

*I assumed nation power relative to other nations in their era.

*I was extremely tempted to put 6 in for some categories with LA Ermor/Ryleh, because as it is, it implies some otherwise powerful nations would be a one on one match for them.

*I consider early game approximately pre-level 4 research.

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

Dear lord Quantum, that is quite impressive, and at first glance looks very well thought out, THANK YOU!

If a few more of the oldbies can do lists like this, we'll be looking at a good base for the chart. Everyone else contributes a few here and there to flesh it out, there will be a powerful reference for new arrivals to the game and the forums.

And yes, before anyone says it, I know I am setting a bad example by not posting, but I started to get my thoughts together, and I realized that I've only gotten to the true "late game" a few times, out of literally hundreds of starts. Unfortunately I either find out too late that I've failed to pull my strat together, or I am just doing too well and get bored of stomping on the AI, so I start a new one.....

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

Interesting thread. Keep up the good work!

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

I wonder why QM thinks niefelheim is 5-4-5.. I can see them starting very strong and getting less in the mid game.. but why 5 again in the end?

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

Well, as I was saying, late game rating is pretty purely theoretical. However, niefel's commanders contribute more to the late game than most nation's- mages resistant to artillery, free SC/thug chassis.

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

EDIT: ninja'd by quantum, and I guess his reasons wrong as well. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif


MA Ulm:
Early: 2
Middle: 2
Late: 3
Learning: 3
Use: 2

You'll need clever tactics to get to late game, and need Blood Stones to survive late middle/all of late. This drops ease of use, because blood hunting is boring.

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

EA Ermor: 3 4 3 2 3 (Solid yet unspectacular early game with legionaries, nice communion battlemagic potential in mid game. Low max levels in S prevent it from being the late game powerhouse other S nations can be. Mastering communions and lots of low-level not easy to boost paths make it quite tricky to learn. )
EA Sauromatia 4 4 4 3 3 (Just plain solid nation, with a large variety of strong options in all stages of the game. It might be worth a 2 in ease of learning simply due to the large number of options available, but in the end went with 3 as whatever option you choose is bound to be at least decent. )
EA Helheim: 5 3 3 4 4 (Obvious early game power. They do have a good number of mid/late game options available (magma eruption, good A/D magic, powerful(flying) stealthy raiders, but a lot of it is capital only, lowering their rating a bit. )
EA Yomi: 1 4 3 2 2 (Easily the most difficult expansion of all nations I played so far. Mid game with recruitable Dai Oni and strong battlemagic is very solid. Mastering early expansion, figuring the best uses for the quite crappy military, and the many uses of Dai Oni make them quite hard to learn. )
EA Oceania: 5 1 2 3 3 (Amazing early game potential, but getting out of the water is an unbelievable pain in the ***. Their only saving grace past early game is easy clam-access. )

MA Ulm: 2 4 2 4 4 (Your troops are decent enough for expansion, but you have a number of vulnerablilities in early wars. Hordes of smiths spamming magma eruption behind a wall of steel make mid-game their day of glory. Late game their lack of magic diversity haunts them. The limited number of magic paths make them quite easy to use and script. )
MA Abysia: 3 4 3 2 2 (Solid and fire immune if expensive troops and fire evocations make for a decent enough early and mid game. Late game they can leverage the power of blood, but expensive & capital only bloodhunters and lack of other tricks limits them. Crippling capital dependance, old age issues, blood magic, and path boosting difficulties make this nation hard to play.
MA C'tis: 2 4 3 2 2 (Recruitable everywhere marshmasters with skellespam and poison tricks make for a very powerful mid game. Late game marshmasters remain top-class mages, and shaman/couatls allow communions and astral tricks. The miasma makes it difficult to diversify their magic though (bringing their lategame rating down a notch) and also explains the low learning/ease of use ratings. )
MA Jotunheim: 4 4 3 4 3 (Easily massable sacreds for a potentially strong early game, cheap researchers, thugs and body ethereal in mid game. Somehow, despite having astral, death and blood magic I feel they slowly peter out towards late game. )
MA R'lyeh: 3 3 5 2 3 (Nothing extraordinary about the early stages of their game, but nigh on unstopable as soon as you get your Starspawn & cheap communion slaves going. Learing how to get out of the water with chaffy troops and communions make them not the easiest nation to learn. )

LA Pangaea: 4 3 3 4 4 (Two very different but equally nice varieties of sacreds and minotaurs make early game a breeze. Mid game your Pans can buff your very solid military to greater hights. High hp mages and troops and high MR are great assets for late game, but you lack magical diversity. )
LA Utgard: 4 4 4 2 3 (A very solid nation all around. Good sacreds, strong thugs, amazing cheap mages, strong communions, very decent S/D magic, and good blood access.
LA Atlantis: 2 3 2 4 5 (Strong but resource heavy troops. Coupled with strong W/D mages and cold resistant troops they make for a decent mid game. Late game the mages high hp and high death magic are useful, but appalling lack of other options leave them rather weak. That same lack of options and obvious strengths make them easy to use though. )
LA R'lyeh: 4 4 5 2 1 (I agree with QM about giving LA R'lyeh a 6 for endgame strength. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Masses of freespawn chaff make for good expansion, and proper use of illithids and mages make early/mid game solid enough. Late game is ridiculously powerful, combining MA's magical power with virtually limitless chaff hordes - who suddenly become a lot more fearsome when massively buffed by your communions. Freespawn requiring two kinds of leadership, madness and large communions makes playing them a micromanagement nightmare. )

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

A 4 for MA Ulm in MP? I would think they're one of the hardest to learn to use effectively and require quite a lot of micro, with loads of forging, necessary troop buffs etc.

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

Nah, I don't feel that's the case. They don't need to forge more than other nations, they just do it a lot cheaper. Same thing with buffing troops. And you can give all (well, most) their smiths the same script and be effective. Nothing like the T'ien Chi hassle to optimize scripting for a gazillion different mages with 1000's of different possible spells to cast.

Incidentally Ulm was the first nation I played in MP. I used a rainbow pretender and got away with it. In the huge endgame battles against Calmons Ermor I first had to figure out what to do with the various indy/summoned mages, assign one smith to army of lead duty, and then just script 37x [summon earthpower, magma eruption x4] http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif That was the easy part.

Re: Dominions Nations Evaluations ;)
 

Strange to give a better note for Arco's midgame than early or late. Especially a 5.

Arco is clearly weaker between the moment when elephants become obsolete (because ennemies use MR spells, thugs etc) and when the level 8-9 extremely powerful astral spells are researched (and diversification to death or other thugs summons achieved).