Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Marverni needs to survive the early game, in midgame it is very strong, and can be quite good in late game too.

I don't quite understand why LA Ulm would be weak. They have practically all the tools MA Ulm has, plus vampires. Conventional troops and mage-priests spammin the darts will see it well into midgame, and then the blood-summons really start to make a difference.

Have you actually seen MA Ulm summon *any* Angels since we got CBM 1.6? The lack of the earthgem generators means the chances to see one is minimal (the earth-gems are needed to gazillions of other things too).

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

I would personally rank LA ulm as one of the strongest nations in the game.

LA Caelum I think is potentially awesome as well.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

yeah,LA Ulm is a pretty strong nation,imo.
In addition to those great rangers,2S1B everywhere mages,sacred priests researching+inquisitor bonus+ spamming iron blizzard and a good shot at blood,dont forget the ghoul guardians.Sure,they are cap only,but if you happen to have good resource provinces surrounding your cap+prod scale(an option with Ulm)+the resource bonus of ulm,you can easily build like 12+ ghoul guardians per turn.Guardians and Rangers backed by priests spamming tempering the will and iron blizzard are a very strong force until you make it deep into blood.

Also,i say that LA Ulm profits a lot from no gem gens.

Concercing EA Agartha i dont agree,too.
People fail to see,how big an advantage they got in the sea.And they are even able to build castles and PD there.
Depending on the map you play,this can be a huuge plus with them.
E.g. Agartha has no problem at all to smash R`leyh .All their troops got good to high MR+those Oracles make great Casters in the sea,backed up by cheap summonable Earth Elementals which trample those lobo guards.
For more,Umbrals make good Sc chassis if you GoR them and they come cheap,v cheap.Plus those magma childs become pretty nasty if backed up by some Armor increasing spells,which are easily castable by most of Ag`s mages.
Also the risen Oracle,which fits well into EA Agarthas strat,is a huge immortal SC if you take the right magic path`s...even after the cost nerf in CBM...since EA Ag imo fits v well for turmoil 3,Sloth 3,Heat 3,Luck 3 scales,which leave the points for the risen oracle.

I consider EA Agartha much stronger than MA Agartha,it plays a lot different bc of the water advantages and the relative environment,i.e. vs EA nations instead of MA nations.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Btw,saying that Machaka got a huge hit in CBM 1.6 ,makes things a bit too easy,dont you think?

Sure,they cant forge fever fetishes anymore,but other nations cant forge clams and/or blood stones anymore...

I actually think Machaka is stronger now bc of this.
Still not a top nation,but playable imo.
Just spam fire drakes with your fire random dragon mastered sorcerers and you got some good use for your fire/nature gems again.
And Hunter Spiders are cheaper now.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

LA Ulm is by no means strong. They are very weak early, and their troops are bad and overpriced. Lasting long enough to summon a vampire count is hard, much less lasting long enough to do anything with said vampire count. And their blood access is bad and expensive for their performance as blood hunters - you don't get the good blood summons, they're already all gone because you're competing with LA Abysia, LA Mictlan, etc... And have we mentioned the bad research? - you get to midgame after everyone else even in the research-poor LA, as a nation whose early game sucks. You think Marveni has a hard time surviving the early game? At least Marveni gets to start with a good mage and troops that don't fatigue out at the drop of a hat.

Agartha:
...
First of all, EA Rlyeh isn't even *that* strong, and EA Agartha still has no chance against them. Good MR doesn't help when your troops have the military power of tissue paper. Oh yeah, and invading Rlyeh with their guaranteed C3 dominion... let me know how that turns out for you. I'd take indie tritons over agarthan troops. No, not equal cash, equal numbers.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

Squirrelloid, I totally agree with your list, at least until 9.

It's actually quite sad that CBM didn't see fit to address Agartha and Machaka. Some small touches could make a big difference in making them interesting and competitive.

like for example, give all Machaka sorcerers/es +1 E/D/F pick. They are supposed to me a mage centric nation right?- That one additional pick can make the difference between lame and decent.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

I wasn't totally happy with LA Atlantis on that list, since its so much better than everything else there. But if I had to pick a 10th... LA Atlantis at least has a shot at winning a game without riding the coattails of other nations.

Being reminded how much MA Ulm sucks helped a lot. (ie, amend list so MA Ulm is #6, and adjust accordingly)

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

He wants EA land nations, so talk of Machaka and MA/LA Ulm doesn't really help.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

my balance mod had fixes for abysia, agartha and oceania. It was intended to fix machaka as well, just haven't gotten that far.

Re: Nations under CBM 1.6
 

For some reason I read that as 'land nations' without the EA restriction - has the OP changed since last night?

Err... there aren't 10 or even really 8 'weak' EA land nations.

Agartha, Abysia, TNN, ... ???

I suppose if you believe the haters out there Marveni and Ermor probably get added to the list, but they're pretty strong. And if they're on the list, EA Ulm certainly should be. And where do you go from there? Vanheim? Yomi? C'Tis? We're into pretty good nations before we hit 4, much less 8.

Now, if you permit water nations, well, all three of them qualify as weak imo.

(Running a weak nations game as all ages makes a lot more sense because the weak nations are fairly well distributed.)