Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

There's no one change - you have to get down in the readme files. But in general, many spells had gem costs and research levels dropped, archers had stats cut and bows impaired, and cavalry and infantry are cheaper (especially cavalry).

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

personally, i'd love to play a non-cbm game, since this is my first outing. but if it's a deal breaker, i'll certainly play either way

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

Ahhh. I guess it's just a difference in wording. Its these types of changes I mean when I was refer to minor balance tweaks. Sure it changes some of the relative effectiveness of units and spells, but there its not really even on the same level as stuff like gem gens and hammers.

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

I rather think it achieves a different balance, not necesarily a better one. And it splits the playerbase.

If the mod had stopped at a dozen changes moving from one system to another would be more manageable, but I can understand how there's been some kind of a snowball effect.

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

At least what I understand from my limited perspective is that Llamabeast is hoping to reach some kind of stability with it eventually. The big thing that hampered that were the major changes in the last few iterations.

Overall, I'm pretty much in agreement that its a much better balance. Read any of the strategies guides that are not CBM focused. Basically everything comes down to forge a boat load of gem gens, forge a bunch of hammers, get GoH or chalice, summon Tarts, win.

I think the bigger problem is not that there's a balance mod out there, but that these issues, which were pretty obviously issues, were not just addressed in the vanilla version of the game.

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

Does CBM do away with all gems and hammers? Or does it merely streamline it?
Gathering gems and forging hammers is a big gameplay feature in the game IMO, and every nation is able to do so, so where lies the problem?

If gems are dropped, doent this make the game a much more standard wargame with some magic added for kicks instead of the cool wargame where you have to build your strategy around magic and gems?

I might be totally ignorant here, because I have not yet played any CBM, but if the above is true I dont find them to be 'little gameplay tweaks'.
Could someone elaborate please?
Besides, I dont think the devs where ignorant as well. Game design takes a lot of forethought and I would like to experience the real game first before I could agree or disagree that it needs balancing.
In my many years of gaming I have learned that 'balancing' is something very personal for many players. Most are stuck playing a certain way and scream fire and hell when their tactic gets nerfed in a patch eventhough it might actually improbe balance. They will scream it has become unbalanced, however, because they are unable to win anymore. Instead of adapting.

Edit: double post

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

All gemgens are artefacts in cbm, dwarfen hammers too.

Vanilla has one big advantage: the wiki lists the vanilla stats.

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

The problem is that when every nation does that they have to manually equipt/ forge hammer every turn and forge gem generating items a turn then you would have to either manually(because you would have some commanders carrying some gems in them) remove every gem that has been generated this turn by the gem generators or use collect all button and having to assing gems to your battle mages/commanders again.

Also late game the game doesnt boil down to who was the most active/conquered most, its about who played it safe and forged 1000000 calms. Also Tartarians would be the only SC you'd ever see(ecept for the occasional Seraph) making even elemenatl royalties obsolete. That gave armies more of a support role. Why have an army when you can steamroll someone in 1 turn teleporting/cloud trapezing 100 tartarians everywhere.

The problem is that if you were nation without earth, you'd have to make a pretender with earth to be somewhat competitive.

Also late game people were able to use the spell 'wish' like 2-3 times a turn which cries for an unfun game.

Also sometimes a nation could just try and stay out of harm's way, turtle for a whole game. get insane ammount of calms and then just claim the victory, while others who fought hard to gain territories and conquered other 2-3 nations just loose because their gem income was connected to the magic sites not the items their commanders wear.

All in all I really like how CBM plays making armies a bit more important(late game) than just vanity items. And also adds a diversity now people actually have to think with what to counter certain armies rather than the standard "equipt tartarian with fire brand and vine shield" and drop 3 of them on top of an army and you win.
It also made some items that were never used useful, so now you have a choice of what to use with its drawbacks and good sides.

Re: Back again after absence, polling interest for a MA (learning) game
 

Also the advantage that Korwin states is half an advantage since the wiki shows plain stats and not the columative stats with the added gear for some soldiers.:)